As sometimes outside the US, this entire thread is absolutely insane regarding the normalisation and justification for violence in general and tasers specifically
I just read every comment on this post and you might be a bit mistaken about how much "normalization and justification for violence" is actually going on here. Everyone, aside from one person (Guydht), is condemning this abuse of force. Everyone.
Just because that one person was very vocal about their opinion doesn't mean that there was a plethora is of commenters agreeing with him.
I mean, just wanted to get a debate going man. Me having a different opinion got me on the legit death list of some people here.
Also I don't really know how Lammy's upvote system works, but I think me only getting -3 "points"(?) means that at least some people also think that wasn't that much of an abuse of power.
So interesting thing about tazers, they only paralyze muscle that is in between the propes during the tazer cycle. That's why the little probes spread out the further they get from the tazer. See how close those wires are? That means he is extremely close and there is no immobilization happening it's just causing pain. The range is far too close to be effective even if the use were justified.
The man did in fact need to be stopped, but "shouldn't be deadly" is still potentially deadly. The dude might've had a heart condition, could've dropped dead right on the spot. Not worth risking for a baseball game, IMO.
I agree, but I'm pretty sure that tasing under normal and proper use shouldn't kill healthy people (a person running storming a sports game is 100% healthy). Like, if he had stayed tasing him for like 20 seconds then I'd get the outrage, but removing the taser once he's incapacitated really shouldn't have major consequences.
And it's definitely a valid option in the case of a large field like a game stadium, where there's lots of room for the person to run away rapidly. Once he gets a few meters away from security, he has lots of room to sprint away, and catching him would be really hard.
Idk, I just think it's really really hard to guard a game once someone broke through security gates.
So, like the athlete supposedly in danger would be able to do? Kind of puts a damper on the whole someone was in danger theory you keep trying to push.
This is the same mentality that got a teen shot because he rang the wrong doorbell after getting the address wrong or the man shot for using a driveway to turn around. The world isn't as dangerous as you've made it in your mind.
When a common tool for detaining people is likely to kill you, you have it coming if you just run into the field during a match. It’s like walking out in front of a moving vehicle. The penalty isn’t death, and no one is trying to kill you. It’s likely to happen on accident though.
It's a bit more like stepping on the road in front of a vehicle that isn't moving, and then hitting the gas pedal and claiming "shouldn't have stepped on the road!". It's not wrong, but choosing this method to deal with it is simply not necessary.
If a child steals something, is keeping them at gunpoint a proportionate response? Sure, kid shouldn't steal and just holding someone at gunpoint won't kill them, but it's also an unnecessary risk.
If they're running at you after illegally jumping through security trying to prevent him from getting close to you - I sure hope you'd call the police! That's dangerous behaviour, and is scary.
Ah yes, because a stadium with thousands of people is exactly as manageable as your backyard.
Also, saying "tase or shoot people" is ridiculous. Don't put those in the same category.
One is meant to neutralize, the other to kill.
Also also, I like how you disregard completely the point about how they're running - probably sprinting even. Which is again, much less manageable than your (honestly unreleated) example of "people that walk past my no traspassing signs".
Seriously, put yourself in the situation for just a second and think again how chill you would've been.
These guys were at a baseball game right? Those ball players have gloves, bats, balls etc that could all be used for self defense. They are also athletes who are probably in good shape. This was not a threat to their lives or anyone else's.
Stop letting the fear of possibilities be an excuse to hurt other human beings.
I think the person that keeps arguing that this was justified is one of the "the pain is the point" people. They just want to have an excuse to hurt someone.
Tasers aren't non deadly, they're less deadly. Because they can still kill in some circumstances. What exactly needs to be protected at the possible cost of a life here?
The career of an athlete on the other team of that idiot's favorite team?
I can 100% see a crazed fan hitting a player of an opposing team. Security is necessary, and fans barging onto fields should be handled as quickly as possible.
First, again, tasers aren't always deadly. In the vast majority of cases, they aren't. I agree we should move towards solutions with 0% fatality, or change tasers to be more towards 0%, but I'm no taser expert.
Secondly, I don't just mean the athletes career. What I meant by "their career" is their body. Crazy people can hurt the athletes, badly. I'd much rather have one drunk fan being tased than a world athlete being handicapped. And I don't think that's so fucked up.
It's a baseball game. A random fan going after an extremely fit athlete, who has an entire team (and the other team) with fucking bats if they were really necessary is not in any danger. Literally none.
Not to mention 99% of people running into the field is doing it for the thrill of running into the field in front of an audience.
The issue is that the use of force is not proportionate. Tasers can and do prove fatal in many cases, and pitch invaders can be dealt with using far less risky methods e.g..
In UK policing there is (supposed to be) a focus on ensuring proportionate use of force where it is necessary, and officers can face significant prison sentences if judged to have gone beyond that and have caused harm as a result.
I remember when a member of the National Front (ie Nazis) stormed a public presentation I was doing and tried to start a fist fight while getting in my face.
Security escorted him out.
The man was angry, attempting to do a violence, likely dangerous. We de-escalated the situation and everyone walked away unscathed - as horrible as that was, the crucial part is everyone walked away without violence
And that was without a professional, highly paid, planned-for security detail in a public arena.
How is the security team not briefed on how to prevent engaging in violence when confronting streakers? Amateur hour imo. I feel like that should be the first item on the docket at the first planning meeting.
Second, I don't think we're talking the same scale here. A sport game has several thousands of fans, lots of them wanting to storm the field. It's pretty much a completely different job guarding that and a presentation with (presumably) way less people and way less room for people to storm and overwhelm the security.
I'm not a security expert, so I might be wrong, but that just seems to me a whole different scale which is harder to implement.
Someone comes running for the POTUS, it's a security risk with national security consequences.
What is the likelihood of a streaker at a game actually being a terrorist with murderous intent? Not "is this a non-zero chance of it ever happening?" but "how likely is it it will actually happen"
Well, there's maybe 5-10 of examples in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Iraq, Maurtiana - but the only western examples are the Boston bombing (11 years ago), the Atlanta Olympics bombing (28 years ago) and the Black September hostages (52 years ago) - and a few IRA bomb threats in the uk in the 80s.
None of these were pitch streakers and this pitch streaker didn't observe any behaviors of the previous MOs. In fact, if they were a bomber, tasing them is probably a bad idea.
I dunno, maybe I'm talking out of my ass here, but I think "fan runs onto pitch could KILL EVERYONE" is a massive over reaction
Right but at what point do you say "we can't hold sports events in public any more?"
Absolutely the safest way to play is to... not. And sports players are likely more at risk from the sport itself than any audience.
Secondly all live performance - including sport - is subject to influence by its audience. As much as they're not supposed to, even the most professional team would be affected by their own fans being half empty and actively booing them than being full and being cheered on.
Out-of-hand reactions will always happen. It is up to the organizers to plan and react accordingly. I can't believe "electrocute the audience" is truly the best course of action.
Edit to say: A cop with a taser would not have helped Monica Celes as due to the nature of tennis, the crowd are close enough to the players to make instant response almost impossible.
I agree with most of what you say, but as you said, it's up to the organizers to make sure nothing goes horribly bad. And I just think that in the case of sports in a stadium, there needs to be 0 tolerance towards people breaking on-field. I agree it's never completely safe, and most of the time the sport itself is way more dangerous than the crowd, but the security team has one job, and in the case presented here they did everything they could, and that's the way it should be. 0 tolerance, since it can go downhill very fast.
Police don't know people's medical history or current health conditions, there's always the very real possibility of it stopping your heart and it happens more than you think.
I'm sorry, but people with heart conditions wouldn't barge in on a sport event like that through security. And if they did, they're a new kind of stupid. Police shouldn't be less effective at their job in order to take extra measures towards dangerous people with disabilities. Security for the majority comes before the security of the minority (which I 100% agree should be considered, but I'm not taser expert. I don't know how to make them less deadly, but they 100% should be). Especially when the minority is the one breaking the law.
Professional and amateur sports events around the world have dealt with streakers running on the field forever without violence. Its not like they are wielding a hammer obvious out to attack someone. Or a taser if you will.
Police should be trained to de-eskalate nonviolent situations without using violence and in other countries they are. I know, the US police force is not and that is a shame on them, but it doesn't justify to shoot or electrocute someone in the back.
What clown world do you live in, where a guy with a cap is a thread so big that it's ok to use a sometimes lethal "non lethal" weapon to stop him. And for fucking what? Whats the damage he is doing? Oh no, he's disturbing grown ass men playing their silly ball game. Better risk his life and wellbeing.
*Editing to say I didn't notice the sub, and I don't mean to suggest the OP pic was subpar. I just got excited and wanted to share the other images too.
You think there's more people in that stadium than there are cops?
Edit. I looked up numbers. Cincinnati has 1,053 sworn officers. If that is the Great American Ballpark, it seats 44k.
Seems the crowd outnumbers the cops.
Not quite. Cincinnati is not an island. There are multiple other police districts around it, and even more districts around those. State troopers love shutting shit down. There is the national guard. There is also the American military. None of them are going to side with a few violent crowd members.
It should escalate until people are in open warfare against the police and national guard for their lack of responsibility, racism, and countless human rights violations.
It’s not got anything to do with sweat. (Actually, that might make it less effective, but I doubt it.)
Tasers get fatal when the person has a heart condition or similar issue. Basically causes your muscles to clench and relax at high frequency rendering you unable to use them.
Sometimes hearts get dysrhythmia, where they stop contracting in a useful/normal fashion (that lub-dub beat.)
It’s the current passing through/near the heart that causes it.
Sorry for my off-topic comment/question but I have been curious about this for a while and never got around to asking.
I see you're on a Mastodon instance but are commenting on a Lemmy post. How can you see Lemmy from your instance? Maybe I need to play with the web interface more, but I usually use my mobile device/apps to access Mastodon (Tusky app) and Lemmy (Boost app). Maybe my apps don't support seeing Toots from Boost, and seeing Lemmy posts from Tusky.
Is it only possible via a web browser and if so, how? I'm not too familiar with the web interface.
Thanks in advance for any advice you might have on this off-topic!
Edit: I just thought about a possibility... you might be using your Mastodon login in Lemmy (does it allow that?) so when you use lemmy it looks like your browsing from Mastodon but you're really in Lemmy with a Mastodon account. Is that how it works?
@irreticent I'm only on Mastodon/in the fediverse via browser so I can't comment on app options, sorry.
In my Home feed & Live feed, I see posts from all over and can reply, boost, and/or bookmark w/ only the one login. I can find & follow folks from other instances via basic search, with @ or a name if I know it.
Mastodon dot social has very active moderation. I'm sure posts & instances exist that I will never know about. Hope this helps!
Your comment assumes that there is a reasoning mind inside that uniform, instead of mindless knee-jerk brute force.
And that mindlessness also goes for whoever decides to pull these "I might get tased for this" pranks or dares, just to be a blip on local television for a second or two.
I've seen a photo of the one being tased doing a flip in front of this officer. I'm assuming no shoes because it's easier to do stuff like that without them?
Accidental Renaissance
Newest