lt would be excellent if a big policeman were always available to go hands-on with a violent suspect. That’s not the case. lmagine the squeals from the right-on meedja if women were denied the opportunity of being beaten, stabb
ed or shot!
Well, I didn't want to say it, and I'm sure there are excellent WPCs who are good at certain things, but physically enforcing public order is not one of them, IMHO. Call the Thought Police, I've probably committed a Hate Crime against the Sisterhood. Sorry sweethearts, we luvs ya really!
Why should a police officer have to risk going hand-to-hand with a violent suspect? They deserve to go home uninjured at the end of a shift; not end up hospitalised or worse, because some drunk/drugged/testosterone-intoxicated slag decided he wanted to show his pals what a legend he is.
Mainly, because they are paid to take those risks, it's all part of the job. If they want to sit in a nice warm office in safety, there are other career paths to follow.
Now, that's not to say that they don't deserve to go home uninjured, because they obviously do. The law should be respected, and they are there to uphold the law.
I have, however, witnessed on more than one occasion, a taser being whipped out and someone hitting the ground with a hell of a thump, for what appeared to be no more than drunken belligerence. Now, I could be wrong, there could have been a clear and imminent threat to someone's safety, but to me it seemed like impatience with "local legends" being their usual twatty selves. Perhaps they could have just been shot? Policeman goes home safe, everybody happy?
I still believe that a Taser is worthy of far more respect than it is currently afforded, and that people, police included, don't appreciate how easy it is to be seriously injured when one is used. I'm not going to suggest that statistics for people injured by tasers can be manipulated, but I'm sure not many are injured by the device itself. It's hitting the pavement without being able to protect yourself that does the damage, ie. " a fall" whilst being arrested.
Finally, you seem to proceed from the assumption that no deaths or lasting injury to either party ever occurred during an empty hand/baton confrontation. You are wrong.
Ah no, I didn't assume that at all. We all know that people die in encounters with the police, and twatting someone with a big stick is obviously dangerous. (As is "restraining" someone by standing on their throat until they stop resisting). I am assuming you were a UK policeman, so I'm sure that you only drew your truncheon when shit got serious, and you and your colleagues probably did it all together, once a point of public (dis)order had been reached. I'm sure the mood changed right then, and everyone around was aware that playtime was over, heads would be bopped, and very few people who weren't actively looking for trouble got in the way (save for the odd newspaper seller). Those who did get a bop knew it, expected it, and could always defiantly curl up in a ball, squeal and then brag later to their mates how they fought the evil pigs.
I would humbly submit that there is more chance of serious injury from falling onto the pavement having been incapacitated by a taser than from playing the fool at a riot, erm, public protest. I think the term "non-lethal" has been taken to mean "not dangerous" by many people, when the dangers are plain to see. Some people DO need bringing under control, and not necessarily in a nice non-violent way that mollycoddles them. The scope for serious damage after a taser deployment seems to be unjustifiably broad.
Finally, I didn't realise there was that thread you linked to until I was way into this reply, so apologise to all for the thread de-rail.
