Cops Tase Father Trying To Save His 3-Year-Old Son From House Fire
- Thread starter eznutz
- Start date
and probably saved his life doing so and kept the wife and other son from going through the rest of their life without a husband and father. You never let anyone enter or re-enter a burning building, period, except on TV. The fire was so hot, firefighters in bunker suits couldn't effect rescue.
Did you actually read the article.Absolutely indefensible behaviour by police. What else is new. They all think they have the right to assault someone at will.
One can wonder what else is untrue or exaggerated in the families recollection, as family members said the father was taken to jail, when he was actually taken to the hospital and then released, not jail. They did save his life.
It's quite possible the father broke free from initial attempts at restraining him and the taser was a last resort at a distance before he entered a sure death, giving the family two deaths to morn and not just one.
The firefighter, arriving 5 minutes after the 911 call went out, couldn't safely enter the house, what makes you think the father should have been allowed to surely die. Had the police done so the family might be all over them for not stopping him. It was a no win situation.
You have to be able to grab him to apply cuffs. There was no indication in the report that the police were ever close enough to do so.Whatever happened to restraining, hand cuffing?
Are cops so lazy now a days that they shoot/taser first in order not to break a sweat?
Did you actually read the article.
One can wonder what else is untrue or exaggerated in the families recollection, as family members said the father was taken to jail, when he was actually taken to the hospital and then released, not jail. They did save his life.
It's quite possible the father broke free from initial attempts at restraining him and the taser was a last resort at a distance before he entered a sure death, giving the family two deaths to morn and not just one.
The firefighter, arriving 5 minutes after the 911 call went out, couldn't safely enter the house, what makes you think the father should have been allowed to surely die. Had the police done so the family might be all over them for not stopping him. It was a no win situation.
You really need to step back from the keyboard sometimes. There is no need to respond to almost every thread regarding firefighters or police officers. In doing so, your message has become diluted, so your message is no longer taken seriously.You have to be able to grab him to apply cuffs. There was no indication in the report that the police were ever close enough to do so.
Choose your battles.
In this case, however, the only issue seems to be that police used a taser.Choose your battles.
Perhaps this was because there weren't that many police, perhaps it was because the father has a linebacker football physique and the police officer does not - the article does not say.
If five police officers who looked like they must have all been defensive players on their university football team had tackled this man to prevent him from committing suicide by entering a totally involved house that even the fire department could not enter, would there be any thread here on TERB?
As opposed to those members who do a search using the words taser and police then going off on the topic with out thinking about the circumstances around the report, without thinking it out. Much like those who scour anti religion and ant muslim sites for almost anything that sniffs as creditable to start a new thread.You really need to step back from the keyboard sometimes. There is no need to respond to almost every thread regarding firefighters or police officers. In doing so, your message has become diluted, so your message is no longer taken seriously.
Choose your battles.
There are way too many members who post shite about first responders and it should not be left unchallenged. considering the fact that I stay out of at least half the threads started, it not unrealistic to have me post in the ones i have strong feelings about.
Exactly what did I post that was wrong or weak?
Hey only 35,420 of yours posts were weak or wrong- accentuate the positiveAs opposed to those members who do a search using the words taser and police then going off on the topic with out thinking about the circumstances around the report, without thinking it out. Much like those who scour anti religion and ant muslim sites for almost anything that sniffs as creditable to start a new thread.
There are way too many members who post shite about first responders and it should not be left unchallenged.
Exactly what did I post that was wrong or weak?
Sure.Hey only 35,420 of yours posts were weak or wrong- accentuate the positive
Which seems to me to be a big issue. A father trying to run into the house wasn't likely to do any serious harm to anyone and it is not a crime to risk you life in order to save you child.In this case, however, the only issue seems to be that police used a taser.
They appear to have had exactly zero legal grounds for the use of force.
Yes he might have died in the fire, but if it were my three year old I would have tried to, and I think it is my right to try.
As the firemen didn't arrive until later it is possible that when he made the attempt it was still possible to save the child.
You talk to any Toronto firefighter, and they'll tell you the police did the right thing. There is no way anyone should attempt to enter a burning building without turnout gear. There are so many synthetic materials in a modern house it's a deathtrap. Firefighters discover Fathers just like the one in the article dead inside the front door from breathing in all the volatile organic compounds released during a fire.Which seems to me to be a big issue. A father trying to run into the house wasn't likely to do any serious harm to anyone and it is not a crime to risk you life in order to save you child.
They appear to have had exactly zero legal grounds for the use of force.
Yes he might have died in the fire, but if it were my three year old I would have tried to, and I think it is my right to try.
As the firemen didn't arrive until later it is possible that when he made the attempt it was still possible to save the child.
The police cannot let someone commit suicide in their presence and have legal grounds to use force on someone who may cause harm to themselves or others.
While I sympathize greatly with the feelings of the father and you. In this instance you are wrong.*Which seems to me to be a big issue. A father trying to run into the house wasn't likely to do any serious harm to anyone and it is not a crime to risk you life in order to save you child.
They appear to have had exactly zero legal grounds for the use of force.
Yes he might have died in the fire, but if it were my three year old I would have tried to, and I think it is my right to try.
*Perhaps in Canada the law is now different, but in the U.K. and the U.S.A., yes the police can restrainin you from running into a fully involved building without any protective gear in an obviously suicidally futile attempt to save a life.
Ask a Toronto firefighter if running into a burning house without turnout gear is suicidal and get back to me.That's a ridiculous stretch. The man wasn't trying to commit suicide. Should they tase people about to attempt bizarre stunts? Should they tase people who drink too much? Those people COULD die, too. That's a loooooong way from someone trying to commit suicide.
Silly.
If I, as an adult have the right to refuse medical treatment (thereby potentially endangering my life), then I also have the right to jump into a raging river to try to save my child, and by extension I also have a right to run into a burning building to try to save my child.While I sympathize greatly with the feelings of the father and you. In this instance you are wrong.
Not to mention, the fire department wasn't even there yet to advise on the situation.
What's next? I get tasered and handcuffed when I refuse my doctor's advice to get a colonoscopy? After all, I AM putting my life at risk, no?
I'll leave it to whomever is the on call at the morning arraignment session to explain it to you.Prove it.
It is suicidal, whether the person realizes it or not. You also seem to be missing the part about the police having the legal authority to use force to stop a person from harming himself or others.You're equating "very very risky" with "intending to kill themselves".
Nope. Get back to me.
If the police didn't stop the father and he died, the family would be suing the police for not stopping the father. The police did the right thing and did it legally.
Fuck, then I am in BIG trouble... cuz I drink wayyyyy more booze than I should.It is suicidal, whether the person realizes it or not. You also seem to be missing the part about the police having the legal authority to use force to stop a person from harming himself or others.
If the police didn't stop the father and he died. The family would be suing the police for not stopping the father. The police did the right thing and did it legally.
Can't find LA, but this is from Florida. They're all similar.Nope. You may THINK the person is LIKELY to die, but that's not the same. Also, show me where police have the legal authority A PRIORI to use for(c)e (sic) to stop a person from harming himself.
Get back to me.
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
If they find you in public, they pick you up and haul you off to jail for you to dry out. If you are in danger of dying, they take you to the hospital. You're arrested for causing a disturbance. Usually they don't charge you criminally, maybe a ticket.Fuck, then I am in BIG trouble... cuz I drink wayyyyy more booze than I should.
