[Chad]

Originally Posted by EasyEJL

You certainly do when you think there is more of a chance of an innocent being hurt by doing nothing than by taking the shot.

ummmmm........ no. not even then. a stun gun isn`t a sniper rifle. if that retard hit the baby with it im 99% sure the baby would have died.

and who said the man was trying to hurt his baby?!
no one! he just wanted to leave! they prob only wanted to keep them there to make sure he paid his bill.

if a gunman has a hostage right in front of him the cops 9 times out of 10 will NOT fire.

[EasyEJL]

Originally Posted by Chad

ummmmm........ no. not even then. a stun gun isn`t a sniper rifle. if that retard hit the baby with it im 99% sure the baby would have died.

and who said the man was trying to hurt his baby?!
no one! he just wanted to leave! they prob only wanted to keep them there to make sure he paid his bill.

if a gunman has a hostage right in front of him the cops 9 times out of 10 will NOT fire.

Right, call the security guard a retard, but whatever the wifebeater does is perfectly fine. Do you know the condition of the baby? anything else detailed about this for that matter? no, you read some stuff on some other board written by more people who weren't there. Its all about the situation. If a gunman has a hostage and the cops are confident they will hit the gunman they will take the shot.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by EasyEJL

Right, call the security guard a retard, but whatever the wifebeater does is perfectly fine. Do you know the condition of the baby? anything else detailed about this for that matter? no, you read some stuff on some other board written by more people who weren't there. Its all about the situation. If a gunman has a hostage and the cops are confident they will hit the gunman they will take the shot.

do you know he beats his wife? no. you`re just saying that cause the words "domestic violence" came up.

and you really think that the gaurd made the right call? really?

[EasyEJL]

Originally Posted by Chad

do you know he beats his wife? no. you`re just saying that cause the words "domestic violence" came up.

and you really think that the gaurd made the right call? really?

No I do not know that he beat his wife, but the state wouldn't have the right to take custody of the child and the paper wouldn't report it otherwise. Without physically hitting someone, you can't call it domestic violence it would only be "loud yelling"

And yes I do think the guard believed he did the right thing as far as he was concerned based on what knoweledge he had at the time. I don't have the same knowledge, I don't know what the guy was saying, I don't know if he was up for the last 48 hours or reeked of vodka. The guard had that sort of information though, as he was there.

As a sort of example in florida, in order to pick up your newborn from the hospital, you have to go outside with one of the nurses aides or other hospital staff and show them that you have an infant car seat in the car, and its properly installed. Without that, they will NOT release the child into your care. If when they said that to me I started ranting and raving and grabbed the infant and started running around trying to find a way out, i'd expect to get tasered. Of course, i'd never do that.

[DefTek]

In the video it appears the agitated person holding an infant turned his back to the security personnel on the scene and was subsequently tased. I personally think a dry stun and blanket of the man/baby at the same time would have been a "better" choice but then again had the father acted rationally then "NO" choice would have had to been made.

When dealing with public safety it is the "suspect" who dictates the course of action. As the suspect escelates the situation, law enforcement must do so as well but not on a 1 to 1 ratio. If you put your hands up - I pepper spray and pull out a stick. You pull out pepper spray or a stick - I pull out a gun. Simple as that. (if you're a big guy and use your baby as a shield then it really escelates) At no time is there an expectation or requirement for law enforcement to retreat or submit (for once the supreme court got it right.) In this situation it was a total **** sandwitch and everyone had to take a bite. Had the father complied to the request of the law enforcement presence then NONE of this would have occured. (period)

just my $.02

[zbtboy]

If he would have acted like a mature adult none of this would have happened. End of story.

[jomi822]

Originally Posted by DefTek

In the video it appears the agitated person holding an infant turned his back to the security personnel on the scene and was subsequently tased. I personally think a dry stun and blanket of the man/baby at the same time would have been a "better" choice but then again had the father acted rationally then "NO" choice would have had to been made.

When dealing with public safety it is the "suspect" who dictates the course of action. As the suspect escelates the situation, law enforcement must do so as well but not on a 1 to 1 ratio. If you put your hands up - I pepper spray and pull out a stick. You pull out pepper spray or a stick - I pull out a gun. Simple as that. (if you're a big guy and use your baby as a shield then it really escelates) At no time is there an expectation or requirement for law enforcement to retreat or submit (for once the supreme court got it right.) In this situation it was a total **** sandwitch and everyone had to take a bite. Had the father complied to the request of the law enforcement presence then NONE of this would have occured. (period)

just my $.02

i kind of resent that approach, and its the reason why police feel like they have a target placed on their back every time they step out of the house.

do what i say, no matter what, or well shoot you and/or use overwhelming force no matter what the circumstances. its a tough-guy approach, and it will turn a lot of people off to cooperating with the police. Police arent the only type-A personality individuals walking around out there.

being a tough guy is fine, but sometimes the rules have to be broken so a a 4 day old baby doesnt end up flying through the air and landing on its head.

[EasyEJL]

Originally Posted by jomi822

i kind of resent that approach, and its the reason why police feel like they have a target placed on their back every time they step out of the house.

do what i say, no matter what, or well shoot you and/or use overwhelming force no matter what the circumstances. its a tough-guy approach, and it will turn a lot of people off to cooperating with the police. Police arent the only type-A personality individuals walking around out there.

being a tough guy is fine, but sometimes the rules have to be broken so a a 4 day old baby doesnt end up flying through the air and landing on its head.

So its better to let criminals do what they want, so nobody gets hurt other than their victims?

[jomi822]

Originally Posted by EasyEJL

So its better to let criminals do what they want, so nobody gets hurt other than their victims?

this man wasnt a criminal from what i can tell. you are assuming a lot about the individual involved. If you watch the video it appears he has the permission of the mother as well, so he was not kidnapping.

what i am saying is that escalating the situation was probably the worst thing to do. the man was trying to remove HIS baby from a hospital where he believed doctors were MISTREATING both his baby and his wife. That is a very legitimate reason to want to leave. perhaps the man had no other option. he wanted to have the baby and mother removed from the hospital...the doctors said "no". what do you do at that point.

perhaps aiding the man in leaving the hospital is EXACTLY what needed to be done.

[Jayhawkk]

Everyone is assuming from one standpoint or another. We can what if this to death but without being there and knowing what the guard/officer knew, then we can't really make an educated guess on what should have happened. Your experience will probably lead you to defend one or the other but it doesn't matter at this point.

[DefTek]

Law enforcement officers HAVE to assume the worst. You cannot expect to live a long life and retire if you dont. And yes cops wear a target on them EVERY time they step from their house, go to the store with their wife and kids, get McDonald's, cut the grass in their front yard. There are dedicated criminal and malignant groups/people who will kill and harm you JUST because of what you do for a living.

When was the last time you heard of a plumber getting shot just because he was a plumber and was called to a house to fix a leaky faucet. I can tell you a story of a friend of mine who was sniped as he stepped from his patrol car... just because he was a cop. It has nothing to do with what TYPE personality you have - I know plenty non-type A's who wear a badge. It has everything to do with the nature of the beast and it is a dangerouse and violent creature that has no pitty, no remorse, and no concience.

This guy was wrong. When has anyone ever been right telling the cops to screw off (verbaly or by action) and something good came of it? This is not Communist Russia - we in the community do value our rights and the rights of others but when the police arrive they are there to stop whatever is happening so that the situation can be resolved.

Should he have tased the guy holding the baby? Dont know, was'nt there. Sounds bad that he did but sometime things and events sound bad when you're not there. Like I said before "It's a big s**t sandwitch and they all had to take a bite..

PS: And if people think US cops are bad - try seeing how some of the other "western" nations do law enforcement - big sticks and heavy hands...


Officer Down Memorial Page The two incidents on August 15th, 2007 are just two recent examples of how deadly the beast really is.

And the list goes on...

Sorry to get off subject a bit and bring the mood down - but people who dont face evil everyday dont think it exists in the manner or capacity that it does.