Mission Statement - De-Spinning the Pro-Taser Propaganda

Yeah right, 'Excited Delirium' my ass...


The primary purpose of this blog is to provide an outlet for my observations and analysis about tasers, taser "associated" deaths, and the behaviour exhibited by the management, employees and minions of Taser International. In general, everything is linked back to external sources, often via previous posts on the same topic, so that readers can fact-check to their heart's content. This blog was started in late-2007 when Canadians were enraged by the taser death of Robert Dziekanski and four others in a short three month period. The cocky attitude exhibited by the Taser International spokespuppet, and his preposterous proposal that Mr. Dziekanski coincidentally died of "excited delirium" at the time of his taser-death, led me to choose the blog name I did and provides my motivation. I have zero financial ties to this issue.

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Stoopid article of the month

Well, if you want to see just how ill-informed people can be, review the following article found on the Alberni Valley News. [LINK] [B.C. natch...]

This mindless drivel, written by some group called Rural Crime Watch, offers the helpful suggestion that if you just obey the police then you won't get tasered.

Oh thanks for that. A Police State are we? I guess I didn't get the memo about the switch from a society based on the Rule of Law to the one based on the Rule of Lawmen.

What about those incidents (outside BC) where people in diabetic comas, or fast asleep, were tasered because they weren't obeying the police instructions? Should they be tasered because they didn't obey?

What about the delirious old man in his hospital bed (in Kamloops, B.C.)?

What about the man that didn't understand the English language, just Polish (at Vancouver Airport, in B.C.)? How was he supposed to obey when he didn't understand English? What about the police in that deadly incident already having decided (reportedly) to use the taser even before they had arrived on the scene?

Follow the news? Duh. Stoopid stoopid stoopid.

How about we try this?

How about the police stop handing out on-the-spot extra-judicial electrocution as punishment, or to induce compliance? Even the courts cannot order electrocution as punishment. And using severe pain to induce compliance is a crystal clear violation of the Criminal Code of Canada s.269.1.

In the article, an example is given of the police using a taser to force (verb) a women to exit her car. In my opinion, such an action is a crystal clear violation of s.269.1 wherein severe pain is meted out to induce compliance. Read it and try to explain why torture would be allowed to force (verb) compliance? Lawful 'force' is a noun. I challenge anyone to provide me an example where the laws of Canada refer to lawful force as a verb.

The article is a clear indictment of the taser policies and training in place in B.C. (and elsewhere).

The person (or people) that wrote that article should not be allowed anywhere near law enforcement. They haven't got a clue about the basics of common law, nor the laws of Canada.

No comments: