Jump to content



Photo
missouri stepfather handcuffed judgment call taser city jail

  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#31 farmeunit

farmeunit

    The other white meat.

  • 2,762 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 03
  • Location: Branson, MO USA

Posted 08 November 2013 - 02:47

Why did they tase him twice after being in handcuffs is what I want to know?  How can you not physically detain someone in handcuffs. 




#32 +astropheed

astropheed

    Neowinian

  • 1,331 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 11
  • Location: Sydney, AU
  • OS: W7, SLES(D)11, VMware, NW6, XP, Mint, Ubuntu11 and sometimes Redhat
  • Phone: Note 3

Posted 08 November 2013 - 03:08

Why did they tase him twice after being in handcuffs is what I want to know?  How can you not physically detain someone in handcuffs. 

 

Have you ever tried to detain someone working on pure adrenaline? Good luck.



#33 MorganX

MorganX

    MegaZilla™

  • 3,541 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 04
  • Location: Midwest USA
  • OS: Digita Storm Bolt, Windows 8.1 x64 Pro w/Media Center Pack, Server 2k12 - Core i7 3770K/16GB DDR3/OCZ Vector 256GB/Gigabyte GTX 760
  • Phone: HTC One 64GB

Posted 08 November 2013 - 03:09

In honesty, what you are saying is all based on what ifs and a litigious society covering one's own butt. So what if he was horribly mutilated, he MAY have saved a child/person's life.

 

Say he was burned and hurt and lived, when what is worth more, a life he saved, or could have saved, or insurance, donations, and the family paying for medical expenses and such? Honestly, ask yourself what life is worth to YOU.

 

Honestly, it all comes back to money. Sued=money. Health care=money. This is a SICK world that this is even a debate.

 

 

It comes to liability, responsibility, and duty. And money is associated with those things. It is unrealistic to pretend these things don't exist. Firemen save lives and it's all funded by ... money. To keep saving lives they can't act irresponsibly or in a libelous manner.

 

You look at the big picture as to all the things that may affect a particular decision or guideline. Firefighters are trained and tend to execute that training in situations like these.

 

The whole situation is a what if. And those trained are best suited to answer that question and they did. The hypotheticals are to point out that there are ramifications that will affect the entire society and the fire depts. ability to save lives and be decisive if you were to let anarchy and emotion rule firefights. How many more people would die in fires if that became the modus operandi?

 

You don't let someone charge to their death no matter how emotional or passionate they are. You have a responsibility to them, your employers, and the rest of the citizens that you may have to save tomorrow.

 

It's just a sad story. People die in fires and no one is happy about it. There have been situations I'm sure, when citizens have helped out firefighters, this one, was too dangerous for trained firefighters to go into. They could not save the child from the fire, they could, and did save the father from the fire. They did their job.

 

Finally, it's easier to blow these questions off and call society pathetic, than to answer them. If we can't answer them here, how tough do you think these things are in the heat of fire trying to save lives while risking your own and the people around you?



#34 Skin

Skin

    Neowinian

  • 1,054 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 07

Posted 08 November 2013 - 03:18

It comes to liability, responsibility, and duty. And money is associated with those things. It is unrealistic to pretend these things don't exist. Firemen save lives and it's all funded by ... money. To keep saving lives they can't act irresponsibly or in a libelous manner.

 

You look at the big picture as to all the things that may affect a particular decision or guideline. Firefighters are trained and tend to execute that training in situations like these.

 

The whole situation is a what if. And those trained are best suited to answer that question and they did. The hypotheticals are to point out that there are ramifications that will affect the entire society and the fire depts. ability to save lives and be decisive if you were to let anarchy and emotion rule firefights.

 

You don't let someone charge to their death no matter how emotional or passionate they are. You have a responsibility to them, your employers, and the rest of the citizens that you may have to save tomorrow.

 

It's just a sad story. People die in fires and no one is happy about it. There have been situations I'm sure, when citizens have helped out firefighters, this one, was too dangerous for trained firefighters to go into. They could not save the child from the fire, they could, and did save the father from the fire. They did their job.

 

I feel that this is a rather modern (read pussified) notion, and seriously, how dare someone impose their will on another trying to do the right thing. The father had a vested interest, where the others didn't have the same level. Period. #### the extra nonsense and liability crap, this was a child that was dying a painful and horrible death.

 

I say screw anyone that wouldn't have fought till they bleed and even died to save their child - stepfather or not. If that was your child, you'd be OK with the outcome?



#35 Darrian

Darrian

    The Apathetic

  • 2,427 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 01

Posted 08 November 2013 - 03:24

I hope this guy sues the **** out of the guy who tased him and possibly the city as well.  Yeah, he may have died or been seriously injured in an attempt to rescue the kid, but it's his life and his choice to do so.  I cannot even imagine how he must have felt as these *******s rendered him incapable while he watched his kid burn in a fire.



#36 MorganX

MorganX

    MegaZilla™

  • 3,541 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 04
  • Location: Midwest USA
  • OS: Digita Storm Bolt, Windows 8.1 x64 Pro w/Media Center Pack, Server 2k12 - Core i7 3770K/16GB DDR3/OCZ Vector 256GB/Gigabyte GTX 760
  • Phone: HTC One 64GB

Posted 08 November 2013 - 03:30

I feel that this is a rather modern (read pussified) notion, and seriously, how dare someone impose their will on another trying to do the right thing. The father had a vested interest, where the others didn't have the same level. Period. **** the extra nonsense and liability crap, this was a child that was dying a painful and horrible death.

 

I say screw anyone that wouldn't have fought till they bleed and even died to save their child - stepfather or not. If that was your child, you'd be OK with the outcome?

 

Who would be satisfied that their child died in a fire. Would I have charged into a fire, unequipped, that firemen could not longer go into with equipment, I have a responsibility to the rest of my family to not commit suicide in hysteria. Just as firemen have a responsibility to not allow hysterical people commit suicide.

 

The only issue here is that I believe if there was any chance to save the kid, something firemen spend their lives doing, they would have continue to try. That's really the only reason they were there. To save lives and put out the fire.

 

I actually think acting so hysterical in handcuffs, in that situation, that you have to be tazed is pussified. I would be heartbroken but I would like to think I would break down in the moment and become a danger myself.



#37 Skin

Skin

    Neowinian

  • 1,054 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 07

Posted 08 November 2013 - 03:35

Who would be satisfied that their child died in a fire. Would I have charged into a fire, unequipped, that firemen could not longer go into with equipment, I have a responsibility to the rest of my family to not commit suicide in hysteria. Just as firemen have a responsibility to not allow hysterical people commit suicide.

 

The only issue here is that I believe if there was any chance to save the kid, something firemen spend their lives doing, they would have continue to try. That's really the only reason they were there. To save lives and put out the fire.

 

I actually think acting so hysterical in handcuffs, in that situation, that you have to be tazed is pussified. I would be heartbroken but I would like to think I would break down in the moment and become a danger myself.

 

Then you made your choice. As others would make different ones. Why should they be stopped, other than for money like you started off with?

 

That said, another person has no right to dictate what others can do with their life. Honestly, you harp on responsibility and training and equipment, but your choice smacks of a cop out. The fact that you think a person wanting to do all they could (while being restrained while their child dies horribly) is pussified speaks oddly and is kind of twisted and sick, but again, that's your choice, and other folks would have other ones.



#38 MorganX

MorganX

    MegaZilla™

  • 3,541 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 04
  • Location: Midwest USA
  • OS: Digita Storm Bolt, Windows 8.1 x64 Pro w/Media Center Pack, Server 2k12 - Core i7 3770K/16GB DDR3/OCZ Vector 256GB/Gigabyte GTX 760
  • Phone: HTC One 64GB

Posted 08 November 2013 - 03:47

Then you made your choice. As others would make different ones. Why should they be stopped, other than for money like you started off with?

 

That said, another person has no right to dictate what others can do with their life. Honestly, you harp on responsibility and training and equipment, but your choice smacks of a cop out. The fact that you think a person wanting to do all they could (while being restrained while their child dies horribly) is pussified speaks oddly and is kind of twisted and sick, but again, that's your choice, and other folks would have other ones.

 

We're basically back to where we started. As individuals, in an ideal situation, we'd all choose to be the hero. The father that charges into a burning building when the firemen say they can't and miraculously save our son.

 

In reality though, we have no responsibility to anyone except ourselves and those we choose. Firefighters have a responsibility to many, including us, and hysterical fathers and fire scenes.

 

Our society has decided that public safety, will save its citizens. We pay taxes to employ people to do just that.

 

It's just a very sad story.

 

PS: I would be interested in hearing what the stepfather thinks of it all after he recovers from hysteria.



#39 BillyJack

BillyJack

    Neowinian

  • 750 posts
  • Joined: 20-December 05
  • Location: Florida, United States

Posted 08 November 2013 - 03:47

Even if they saved the guys life they should have let him make his own decision. Police are there to uphold the law not create there own law. What law says you cannot run into a fire. I understand police protect people and stop them from hurting themselves but in this case he was not trying to hurt himself. So now we are saying that the fireman and police are smarter than us and make decisions for us. Typical of our current government. They are trying to regulate everything and know better. I guess there is no more free will.



#40 MorganX

MorganX

    MegaZilla™

  • 3,541 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 04
  • Location: Midwest USA
  • OS: Digita Storm Bolt, Windows 8.1 x64 Pro w/Media Center Pack, Server 2k12 - Core i7 3770K/16GB DDR3/OCZ Vector 256GB/Gigabyte GTX 760
  • Phone: HTC One 64GB

Posted 08 November 2013 - 04:32

Even if they saved the guys life they should have let him make his own decision. Police are there to uphold the law not create there own law. What law says you cannot run into a fire. I understand police protect people and stop them from hurting themselves but in this case he was not trying to hurt himself. So now we are saying that the fireman and police are smarter than us and make decisions for us. Typical of our current government. They are trying to regulate everything and know better. I guess there is no more free will.

 

Most Police take an oath to uphold the law and protect and serve. And it has been that way for the current government, and all administrations preceding it to my knowledge.

 

Edit: Funny thing is the laws that they swear to uphold may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, some explicitly include localized laws, some mention the State, others the US, but I've never seen one that does not swear to protect and serve.



#41 BillyJack

BillyJack

    Neowinian

  • 750 posts
  • Joined: 20-December 05
  • Location: Florida, United States

Posted 08 November 2013 - 05:15

Most Police take an oath to uphold the law and protect and serve. And it has been that way for the current government, and all administrations preceding it to my knowledge.

 

Edit: Funny thing is the laws that they swear to uphold may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, some explicitly include localized laws, some mention the State, others the US, but I've never seen one that does not swear to protect and serve.

 

I know they protect and serve but do they have rules that say no matter what protect the person and do not allow them to save there child. Funny thing is that there is a movie like that. In iRobot Will Smith is a cop and wanted to save a child but the robot saved him because he had a better chance. That father might have problems for the rest of his life because of losing his child. He may end up committing suicide. It all does not matter. Mr. Policeman knows better and his judgment is the best. That would be funny if later on we learned that the fireman who made the decision that it was not save is a volunteer fireman and has less than one hour of on the job experience.



#42 zhangm

zhangm

    Just bitter.

  • 9,598 posts
  • Joined: 21-August 02

Posted 08 November 2013 - 05:30

A fireman wearing PPE was unable to enter the residence. This man, equipped with pajamas and a shirt, would not have survived. If we poll the duties that each party evoked, then the man was morally justified in risking his life to save his son. Likewise, the firefighters were equally right to stop a man from entering what they judged to be a lethal situation. The actions taken by both groups were justified. The guys with the taser just happened to have won.

#43 FloatingFatMan

FloatingFatMan

    Resident Fat Dude

  • 14,320 posts
  • Joined: 23-August 04
  • Location: UK

Posted 08 November 2013 - 06:57

The only even slightly good outcome here is that at least the father knows he tried. :(  A thoroughly horrible situation where there are only losers, but at least he knows he tried all he could.



#44 Ph1b3r0pt1c

Ph1b3r0pt1c

    Neowinian

  • 401 posts
  • Joined: 10-September 12
  • Location: Sebree, Kentucky
  • OS: Debian, Windows 7, Server 2012

Posted 08 November 2013 - 13:53

The only even slightly good outcome here is that at least the father knows he tried. :( A thoroughly horrible situation where there are only losers, but at least he knows he tried all he could.


This, sadly. I hope he doesnt end up killing himself over the loss of the child. He very well may have saved the kid also, but no one will ever know thanks to the police state we have created for ourselves.

#45 MorganX

MorganX

    MegaZilla™

  • 3,541 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 04
  • Location: Midwest USA
  • OS: Digita Storm Bolt, Windows 8.1 x64 Pro w/Media Center Pack, Server 2k12 - Core i7 3770K/16GB DDR3/OCZ Vector 256GB/Gigabyte GTX 760
  • Phone: HTC One 64GB

Posted 08 November 2013 - 14:12

This, sadly. I hope he doesnt end up killing himself over the loss of the child. He very well may have saved the kid also, but no one will ever know thanks to the police state we have created for ourselves.

 

If this were a police state paranoid anti-government conspiracy theories would not be allowed to be posted openly online. And they wouldn't have handcuffed him, then tazed him, twice. They would have shot him once and carted him off.





Click here to login or here to register to remove this ad, it's free!