Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Tech Star

Tourist tasered by police, died

23 posts in this topic

A MAN who died after police stunned him with a Taser in central Sydney may have been from South America.

Police have conceded he may not have been involved in any crime, even though he was identified as a suspect following a report of a robbery at a convenience store in King St early yesterday morning.

Officers confronted him in Pitt St about 5.30am (AEDT) and tried to arrest him.

Capsicum spray and a Taser were used when he resisted but he soon stopped breathing and could not be revived.

Investigators believe he may be from South America, a NSW Police media release issued tonight said.

Acting Assistant Commissioner Mark Walton said police were merely responding to reports of a robbery and the details of what happened remain unclear.

"It's unclear as to the involvement of this man or the extent of that actual incident. Whether it is a robbery or not is unclear at this time," Mr Walton said.

"The report of a robbery is ongoing and I cannot ... even confirm that it was an actual robbery."

Mr Walton also said he could not say whether the man was armed or whether he was under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Nor could he give any details about the Taser incident.

"We don't know what's caused this man's death. That will be a matter for the investigation and coroner," he said.

The State Crime Command Homicide Squad has launched a critical incident investigation.

NSW Council for Civil Liberties president Cameron Murphy said there should be an immediate moratorium on the use of Tasers by police.

"This incident raises serious concerns about the way in which they're used," he said.

"What's a particular concern in this case is ... they used both capsicum spray and a Taser on this individual.

"There are serious questions whether that may have led to the person's death."

NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell declined to comment on the incident until he had been fully briefed, but said the government supported the use of Tasers.

"We've always supported the use of Tasers as a non-lethal alternative," he said.

"Tasers versus guns is a clear choice."

Police are yet to inform the man's family of his death.

In a bid for public information, police have described the dead man as being in his mid-20s to mid-30s, of medium build, 178cm tall, with brown eyes and brown shoulder-length curly hair.

He was wearing Diesel Industrie blue denim jeans and a white Gap brand short sleeve shirt.

Tasers were introduced into the NSW police force in 2009.

In October 2010, a man died after being tasered by police during a domestic dispute in western Sydney and there have been deaths from the use of Tasers in other states.

NSW Greens MP David Shoebridge said the use of Tasers in NSW had multiplied from 126 in 2008 to almost 1200 in 2010

News Source: Courier News

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tasers are suppose to be a "non-lethal" method used to stop people, but every third or fourth story that you read it seems as if these things are directly the cause of people dying!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tasers are suppose to be a "non-lethal" method used to stop people, but every third or fourth story that you read it seems as if these things are directly the cause of people dying!

Over-reporting. National Institute of Justice studies via Wake Forest University show 99.75% of those shocked suffered no injury or mild injuries (mild effects lasting more than a few minutes, bruises from falls etc.)

Those dying are usually from a head injury while falling (a thread last week), a pre-existing heart condition, or the use of drugs like cocaine, meth etc. that put the heart in an unstable rhythm. All unpredictable, all rare on an incident per 100,000 basis. All made worse by the hundreds of thousands of idiots who put the cops in the position of either shooting them or using REDUCED-lethality devices.

NO SUCH THING as non-lethal in this - sorry.

OTOH batons, police dogs, pepper spray (via allergy, asthma or direct inhalation into the lungs - ouch,) rubber/plastic bullets etc. injure or kill far more people at much higher rates - up to 80% of uses injure at the least - depending on the method - and police dogs injure at a rate of over 90%.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tasers are suppose to be a "non-lethal" method used to stop people, but every third or fourth story that you read it seems as if these things are directly the cause of people dying!

+_2acc5a8841f8752904d37f90a8014829.png

A taser being used without incident doesn't make for very interesting news, so of course they only report on the accidents/deaths.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no issue with the use of tazers.

As DocM quite rightly states, there are no perfectly safe ways to disable a person.

My objection is purely the conditions required for their use. I think that the use of tazers should have the same command oversight as the use of a firearm. Police are discharging a weapon, whether highly lethal or otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no issue with the use of tazers.

As DocM quite rightly states, there are no perfectly safe ways to disable a person.

My objection is purely the conditions required for their use. I think that the use of tazers should have the same command oversight as the use of a firearm. Police are discharging a weapon, whether highly lethal or otherwise.

As a police officer in the UK, taser is the preferred, the least "dangerous" bit of kit we have, its either a strike with a metal batton, or a spray with CS,

Taser will disable someone who is posing a threat to themselves/someone/the officer, and allow them to be promptly arrested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Virtually all US PD's have rules of engagement for tasers, just as they do for firearms or other weapons.

The basic rule is if the perp is fleeing, resisting arrest, or could injure the cop, a third party or the person could injure themselves then you can use the taser to restrain them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, and all of that I agree with >.<

I just want more oversight. Police ought not be able to discharge/use weapons without oversight.

I think the police do a great job under trying conditions. I just think this is an area that needs a bit of a look in >.<

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, and all of that I agree with >.<

I just want more oversight. Police ought not be able to discharge/use weapons without oversight.

I think the police do a great job under trying conditions. I just think this is an area that needs a bit of a look in >.<

They cant, at least in the UK... well they can and caant.

Police officers have the power to discharge their taser under the correct circumstances, however the use of it is always reviewed afterwards, such as it is with a firearms incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Virtually all US PD's have rules of engagement for tasers, just as they do for firearms or other weapons.

The basic rule is if the perp is fleeing or could injure the cop, a third party or the person could injure themselves then you can use the taser to restrain them.

Same in Australia. There are guidelines defining the use of the taser, the issue is that once the taser is discharged, there is no investigation into whether it was the correct decision. I'm not suggesting we hang cops that get it wrong, but it shouldn't just be ignored.

The issue is some police use tasers just to make a point. That's wrong :\

They cant, at least in the UK... well they can and caant.

Police officers have the power to discharge their taser under the correct circumstances, however the use of it is always reviewed afterwards, such as it is with a firearms incident.

Once again, the brits getting it right >.<

Now just to get that in Australia :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, and all of that I agree with >.<

I just want more oversight. Police ought not be able to discharge/use weapons without oversight.

Incidents are reviewed by the PD's Internal Affairs Dept. (or the Incident (or Shooting) Review Board) and the Prosecutor, who can in many jurisdictions can call a Citizens Grand Jury to avoid any accusations of favoritism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same in Australia. There are guidelines defining the use of the taser, the issue is that once the taser is discharged, there is no investigation into whether it was the correct decision. I'm not suggesting we hang cops that get it wrong, but it shouldn't just be ignored.

The issue is some police use tasers just to make a point. That's wrong :\

Once again, the brits getting it right >.<

Now just to get that in Australia :)

I would say we get a lot of things WRONG over here..

routinely arming officers for example..

look at the riots we had!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My objection is purely the conditions required for their use. I think that the use of tazers should have the same command oversight as the use of a firearm. Police are discharging a weapon, whether highly lethal or otherwise.

^With this I fully agree.

To the other mob above: I was merely making an observation. That the first two people to respond, after I did, were who they were, does not surprise me at all! As per the quote below, that was my reference! And please don't give me that bull**** that "guns don't kill people its people" crap, the use of something like this causes unnecessary deaths, end of story!

"We've always supported the use of Tasers as a non-lethal alternative," he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I do not like is they are using it more and more for really no reason other than just scared of the job they took...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So wanting to get home to your family in one piece from a very dangerous job is a negative?

You are seriously messed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why they need to use tazers. Just sit on the guy. If he died by being zapped he obviously wasn't in the best of health to begin with and I don't see why it was necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why they need to use tazers. Just sit on the guy. If he died by being zapped he obviously wasn't in the best of health to begin with and I don't see why it was necessary.

you've never seen someone on meth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or worse, PCP. They'll break their own arms trying go break restraint and keep on fighting. Hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about tranq darts? Don't seem to see those used anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about tranq darts? Don't seem to see those used anywhere.

because you can't use them. Russia tried gassing a building. 150+ died.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about tranq darts? Don't seem to see those used anywhere.

Same problem - unintended deaths.

Tranquilizer guns use valium family, antipsychotic or opiates, and a "safe" dose is so many milligrans per kilogramof body mass....

"Pardon me Mr. whacked-out crazy person. Would you mind stepping on this scale so I can determine a tranq dose to shoot you with? Thank you - have a nice day!"

....and if you get the dose wrong it's either ineffective, they overdose or they go into a respiratory arrest. .

This is what happened in the Moscow theater hostage crisis - the Russian Spetsnaz special forces used Fentanyl gas, an opiate, during the rescue and 128 of the 129 civilians that died did so from the tranq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like was mentioned on the first page, there is no safe ways to disable a person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^With this I fully agree.

To the other mob above: I was merely making an observation. That the first two people to respond, after I did, were who they were, does not surprise me at all! As per the quote below, that was my reference! And please don't give me that bull**** that "guns don't kill people its people" crap, the use of something like this causes unnecessary deaths, end of story!

I have a reputation for being pro-guns now? Or just for being a ****?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.