# No Charges To Be Filed In Connection With Dziekanski's Death: RCMP



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

TheStar.com | Canada | No RCMP Taser charges, CTV says.

_*Vancouver*–The Mounties involved in Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski's death at Vancouver's airport last year will not face any criminal charges, CTV reported yesterday.

The CTV report, which did not indicate a source, stated the Crown concluded there was not enough evidence to warrant charges.

The criminal justice branch of the B.C. Attorney General's Ministry has arranged a news conference this morning to announce the decision._


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

The raping of this man's legal rights and humanity just never ends, does it?


----------



## Mississauga (Oct 27, 2001)

As far as I know, the only arguable points of this case are whether or not the officers in question intended to kill this man. Clearly, a taser is not designed to do so and therefore the case is a wash. Regarding tasers, I'm not in favour. It strikes me odds of surviving a gunshot to the leg appear almost better than taser hits.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

There was no reason to even use the taser. I mean there were four officers there to handle one guy. Gimme a break. The could have cuffed him and held him until they got a translator to find out what was agitating him.


----------



## Mississauga (Oct 27, 2001)

SINC said:


> There was no reason to even use the taser. I mean there were four officers there to handle one guy. Gimme a break. The could have cuffed him and held him until they got a translator to find out what was agitating him.


Until we have proof of procedural rules of engagement by the RCMP, we cannot be sure these officers made any mistakes.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

What shock and surprise at this "decision".

Man, the justice system in this country dishes out more acts of injustice in any given year than there exists Windoze viruses in total...


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Those bastards are guilty as sin. 

There should be damn riots in the street over this.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Adrian. said:


> Those bastards are guilty as sin.
> 
> There should be damn riots in the street over this.


Why, so more can people can be killed by tasers?


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

screature said:


> Why, so more can people can be killed by tasers?


What's the alternative? Get killed by beasts in uniforms when you kick a fuss over something?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Not rioting in the streets. Taking an isolated incident and rioting over it would accomplish nothing other than more injuries and possible deaths.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Mississauga said:


> Until we have proof of procedural rules of engagement by the RCMP, we cannot be sure these officers made any mistakes.


Watch the video. Those dummies tasered him five times after negotiating with him for just 24 seconds from arrival to first taser shot.

Yeah, no mistakes all right.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Mississauga said:


> As far as I know, the only arguable points of this case are whether or not the officers in question intended to kill this man.


No, there are plenty of arguable points.

I agree that the officers should not be charged with murder, because you're right, they didn't intend to kill the fellow. But NO charges?? Nothing at all? That's crazy.

But YOU go out and taze someone and if they die, YOU try explaining to the cops that you should be released free of ANY charges simply because you didn't to kill that person.

Yeah, good luck with that.

The bottom line is that this guy was abused disgracefully because he couldn't speak English and was frustrated after hours of being lost and helpless (and concerned for his mother). What's THAT say about Canada?


----------



## Mississauga (Oct 27, 2001)

Like I said;

"Until we have proof of procedural rules of engagement by the RCMP, we cannot be sure these officers made any mistakes."

Which part of my statement is misunderstood? I'll clarify, if necessary.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Mississauga said:


> As far as I know, the only arguable points of this case are whether or not the officers in question intended to kill this man. Clearly, a taser is not designed to do so and therefore the case is a wash. Regarding tasers, I'm not in favour. It strikes me odds of surviving a gunshot to the leg appear almost better than taser hits.


Still it does seem that manslaughter charges might have been in order. Maybe there would not be a conviction but it might make some other mountie with God Syndrome think twice before using a taser to prove he is in control.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

No one has addressed the real root of the problem. I mean, the Police going gung-ho on the immigrant is one thing - and they guy did freak out - but what about the ten hour wait in the Airport in the first place? If the dude hadn't been forced to wait in a glass cubicle, without access to the washroom and without food, or anyone even asking why he was there for so long - the RCMP wouldn't have had to Taserize him in the the first place.

Sounds like passing the blame on - I blame whatever official made the decision that this dude would need to wait for more than ten hours. As for the whole translator thing, that is one steaming pile of bogosity - this is Canada, and it is crammed with not only Poles, but any other number of Slavic speakers that could have atleast tried to communicate. Now, if it was downtown Moosonee - that is one thing - but this was in a mainstream metro area - tons of people could have explained the situation.

It is entirely unacceptable that anyone be kept in a glass cubicle for hours on end - because even the most filthy criminal scum have the basic right to representation and the presumption of innocent.

In my opinion, whoever decided that the dude could wait it out for a half a day is entirely responsible for the incident, and should serve hard time for malfeasance and crimes against humanity.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Mississauga said:


> Like I said;
> 
> "Until we have proof of procedural rules of engagement by the RCMP, we cannot be sure these officers made any mistakes."
> 
> Which part of my statement is misunderstood? I'll clarify, if necessary.


So let's clarify what you the law considers as "Procedural Rules of Engagement" then. 

I am no lawyer but I would assume these would be such things as:

-reason to believe that the man was a danger to others and himself
-unable to restrain the man

and so on.

Maybe you should review the footage: YouTube - Polish Man Tasered to Death by RCMP at Vancouver Airport

There were 5 cops, the guy was unarmed, he did not speak English so he could not have been expected to understand the cops' directions and he certainly could not have been using foul language against them that they could understand.

Explain yourself. This is clear cut police brutality. 

Far too many police are bullies in uniform with absolutely insufficient integrity to carry such authority. Police should require the same amount of education as lawyers or judges. A couple years at community college does not suffice. Far too much of this we are seeing today. 

These filthy animals will get off because tasers are not considered lethal weapons. They are categorised under pepper spray...


----------



## Mississauga (Oct 27, 2001)

EvanPitts said:


> No one has addressed the real root of the problem. I mean, the Police going gung-ho on the immigrant is one thing - and they guy did freak out - but what about the ten hour wait in the Airport in the first place? If the dude hadn't been forced to wait in a glass cubicle, without access to the washroom and without food, or anyone even asking why he was there for so long - the RCMP wouldn't have had to Taserize him in the the first place.
> 
> Sounds like passing the blame on - I blame whatever official made the decision that this dude would need to wait for more than ten hours.


*NOW* we're getting somewhere! One must thoroughly investigate ALL the details of the incident, including the many hours prior.

I propose something caused this poor victim to "go postal" and a passing of the torch of sorts occurred, placing him in harms way, due to his erratic behaviour.

My guess is the fault is a 50/50 issue - bad airport admin practices and the victim's own paranoid outbursts.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

Adrian. said:


> Police should require the same amount of education as lawyers or judges. A couple years at community college does not suffice. Far too much of this we are seeing today.


Right, because every single person with 4-6+ years of university education are the smartest, flawless people out there.  An officers' ability to do their job properly is irrelevant to their lack of a post-secondary educational background.

You either have integrity, or you don't - you don't obtain integrity with a university degree. Most programs in university are irrelevant to the duties performed by a street police officer; what an officer needs to know is taught at a police academy which all recruits are required to attend.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Lars said:


> Right, because every single person with 4-6+ years of university education are the smartest, flawless people out there.  An officers' ability to do their job properly is irrelevant to their lack of a post-secondary educational background.
> 
> You either have integrity, or you don't - you don't obtain integrity with a university degree. *Most programs in university are irrelevant to the duties performed by a street police officer; what an officer needs to know is taught at a police academy which all recruits are required to attend.*


I disagree. I do not propose that people with University degrees of any sort are the most 'integral' members of society by any extent. However, University is where one can study legal philosophy, moralism and ethics. All of which, I find are critical to the application and operation of the law within all of its echelons. 

I believe that Policing as a profession should be more _professionalised_ and require a deeper and broader training beyond simply what the law is and how to enforce it.

"An officers' ability to do their job properly is irrelevant to their lack of a post-secondary educational background."

If they were exposed to such argumentation and thought they would, perhaps, and of course we cannot be deterministic here, question or at least re-evaluate how they might engage and carry out the process of the law differently. It gives them more tools to interpret the law and its application. There are many particulars of legal philosophy and philosophy in general that one would agree with so profoundly, but yet would never or rarely have ever conjured.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> All of the witnesses said they never felt threatened by him. He looked lost, scared, frustrated and confused. Those that approached him said they could not communicate with him because of the language barrier.
> 
> He was probably dehydrated and needed water and something to eat. Plus jetlag and disorientation, plus most likely sleep deprivation. I used to work in airports and people were often very confused and nervous, especially if they were in a new place for the first time and could not speak or read the language.
> 
> Poor judgement and lack of professionalism on the part of the police. Not that the investigation did much better. Pathetic incompetence, cover up, and corruption.


Master,

You sound like you have had a most interesting life. Perhaps you should write a book or memoirs some day of your experiences. From your writings here on ehMac you seem to be quite the story teller and use very creative language. Perhaps a blog of some sort. I would read it without a doubt. 

Good night.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

SINC said:


> There was no reason to even use the taser. I mean there were four officers there to handle one guy. Gimme a break. The could have cuffed him and held him until they got a translator to find out what was agitating him.


BS --- why should they risk their personal safety?


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

Mississauga said:


> *NOW* we're getting somewhere! One must thoroughly investigate ALL the details of the incident, including the many hours prior.
> 
> I propose something caused this poor victim to "go postal" and a passing of the torch of sorts occurred, placing him in harms way, due to his erratic behaviour.
> 
> My guess is the fault is a 50/50 issue - bad airport admin practices and the victim's own paranoid outbursts.


The man was irrational and crazy for a long while before the RC's even got there -- he wouldn't calm down for the security. 

I don't see the place to put blame on the police. The man was irrational, irritated and walking away from the police when they tasered him. It was unfortunate and sad -- but police brutality? I don't see it.


----------



## Mississauga (Oct 27, 2001)

Thanks, Gazoo. I was sure I had read something to that effect some time ago.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Gazoo said:


> The man was irrational and crazy for a long while before the RC's even got there -- he wouldn't calm down for the security.
> 
> I don't see the place to put blame on the police. The man was irrational, irritated and walking away from the police when they tasered him. It was unfortunate and sad -- but police brutality? I don't see it.


He walked away and was therefore no threat, even a red neck would have sufficient grey matter to reach that conclusion. The additional taser blasts were completely unwarranted. Manslaughter at a minimum.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> He walked away and was therefore no threat, even a red neck would have sufficient grey matter to reach that conclusion. The additional taser blasts were completely unwarranted. Manslaughter at a minimum.


It's not a matter of threat it's a matter of containment. They just couldn't let him wander the airport in his agitated state. As to the taser usage. I would imagine policy is to use it until the suspect surrenders -- he didn't surrender -- they continued to use it.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

He was in a sealed room with one door. They could have stood at the door and not let him leave until they brought a translator, some food and water for the guy. 

Why did 4 cops need to ambush the man? 

Manslaughter.

Missisauga, you are not looking at this objectively at all. 

Tell me, are police not trained to take people down and restrain them without using weapons? I am sure that four RCMP (so more trained at this than regular police) would be able to take him down without anyone getting injured.

Police brutality. Final. On point. Cops should be shot with a taser before they are given one. Or better yet, four shots at the same time and then have someone put a knee on your neck.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

Adrian. said:


> Tell me, are police not trained to take people down and restrain them without using weapons? I am sure that four RCMP (so more trained at this than regular police) would be able to take him down without anyone getting injured.
> 
> .


Why should they risk their personal safety from injury from this irrational man when they have the Taser as a tool? It's sad that he died -- but **** happens.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Gazoo said:


> BS --- why should they risk their personal safety?


Uh, maybe because they are paid to?

My father was a cop for 30 years long before they ever had tasers. They were trained to take down a person without harming him, just like the RCMP train them today. Four or five of them and one guy? Had they not been trigger happy, they could have easily subdued him, no BS about it.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

But why should they? The taser is tool to keep them from personal injury. If a minute number of suspects are hurt in the process -- so be it. I'm sure batons and physical police take downs have killed their fair share in the past.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Gazoo said:


> But why should they? The taser is tool to keep them from personal injury. If a minute number of suspects are hurt in the process -- so be it. I'm sure batons and physical police take downs have killed their fair share in the past.


What's with your fixation on personal injury? You sign up to be a cop, you expect you're gonna break a fingernail from time to time. But get real, four or was it five against one? What's the worst that could happen to that many cops? A broken finger at best and that beats the hell out of killing the guy.

Tasers are a weapon of death in far too many cases of late and should be banned. Too many cops are too trigger happy with the darn things.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Actually it is 100 times more likely that a Canadian will be Tasered by a cop with God Syndrome than die in a terrorist attack. I'll take my chances with the scum, just save me from those protectors.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

SINC said:


> What's with your fixation on personal injury? You sign up to be a cop, you expect you're gonna break a fingernail from time to time. But get real, four or was it five against one? What's the worst that could happen to that many cops? A broken finger at best and that beats the hell out of killing the guy.
> 
> Tasers are a weapon of death in far too many cases of late and should be banned. Too many cops are too trigger happy with the darn things.


Perhaps you should be a cop then brave guy? The police get paid little enough to put themselves in harms way all the time. The stats on Taser use show them to be pretty safe. The Taser company puts forward that they have been used on over 100,000 cops in training with no deaths.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> Actually it is 100 times more likely that a Canadian will be Tasered by a cop with God Syndrome than die in a terrorist attack. I'll take my chances with the scum, just save me from those protectors.


Why.... do you break the law a lot?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Gazoo said:


> Perhaps you should be a cop then brave guy? The police get paid little enough to put themselves in harms way all the time. The stats on Taser use show them to be pretty safe. The Taser company puts forward that they have been used on over 100,000 cops in training with no deaths.


So, wise guy, perhaps you could explain why it is that thousands of them have been recalled for testing due to putting out more voltage than they were designed to, and as a result have killed far too many people lately.

One thing I do know though is that any group of cops should be trained to subdue one man without harming him, instead of using a far too often lethal weapon.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

SINC said:


> So, wise guy, perhaps you could explain why it is that thousands of them have been recalled for testing due to putting out more voltage than they were designed to, and as a result have killed far too many people lately.
> 
> One thing I do know though is that any group of cops should be trained to subdue one man without harming him, instead of using a far too often lethal weapon.


No proof of this yet. Taser is saying the CBC sponsored testing was fundamentally flawed. 

Taser International disputes CBC/Radio-Canada testing as 'flawed'

Who cares if the suspect is hurt occasionally? -- I have a really simple solution too -- don't commit crimes, don't resist arrest and you don't get hurt


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Gazoo said:


> No proof of this yet. Taser is saying the CBC sponsored testing was fundamentally flawed.
> 
> Taser International disputes CBC/Radio-Canada testing as 'flawed'
> 
> Who cares if the suspect is hurt occasionally? -- I have a really simple solution too -- don't commit crimes, don't resist arrest and you don't get hurt


Oh, I see, you believe the manufacturer? Of course they would call the testing flawed. The testing I refer to is being done by the government of Alberta:

Alberta to check whether older Tasers are operating properly

And your simple solution doesn't apply. The man wasn't committing a crime, he was mentally unbalanced at the time.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

^^^

No I just don't believe every sensationalist news story I read -- The CBC has their own slant too. The Alberta testing is not done yet -- therefore no conclusions. 

The man resisted arrest.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

No one knows if he was resisting arrest as they could not understand him. Maybe he was asking for medical help. Did you even consider that? He makes no threatening move towards the officers in the video. He is backing away from them when they taser him. Why taser a retreating unarmed man in a confined space?


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Gazoo said:


> Why.... do you break the law a lot?


Nope and neither was the guy who died or the disoriented 75 year old heart attack patient. If the cops did not have tasers neither of those gentlemen would have been assaulted as neither situation called for deadly force.

That my friend is the entire point of the thread. Failing to worship a cop who claims to be God is not and should not be crime. It certainly should not be a capital offense.

Over the past few years I have lost several people that were dear to me. Devastating when it's unavoidable. Unforgivable if it is unnecessary. I fully appreciate the collateral damage from those so called minor problems. 

I will go even further and say that calling the death of an innocent victim of police brutality "minor", should be punishable by a minimum of five taser blasts preferably with those old perfectly safe (CBC tests may be inaccurate) tasers.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Gazoo said:


> But why should they? The taser is tool to keep them from personal injury. If a minute number of suspects are hurt in the process -- so be it. I'm sure batons and physical police take downs have killed their fair share in the past.


Really?

It's okay to kill a few people per year -- at least some of them innocent of any wrongdoing at all -- in order to make sure no policeman ever gets a black eye or a cracked rib, ever?

Really?

Premier Putin, it's an honour to have you on our humble forum, but has anyone explained to you the concepts of justice in a democracy?


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Gazoo said:


> No proof of this yet. Taser is saying the CBC sponsored testing was fundamentally flawed.
> 
> Taser International disputes CBC/Radio-Canada testing as 'flawed'
> 
> Who cares if the suspect is hurt occasionally? -- I have a really simple solution too -- don't commit crimes, don't resist arrest and you don't get hurt


So don't question authority ever? We should just let these power tripping monkeys shoot anyone they want and assume they have done no wrong?

That contradicts the founding principles of our legal system my friend. Read more before you spew your garbage.

Tell me what crime that man did? Was it a violent crime, a sexual crime or perhaps vandalism. What crime did he commit? 

Resisting arrest on what grounds? What was he being arrested for? What was the precedent of criminal activity that the police decided to use such force against him?

You are stuck in a corner and now you have dug yourself a hole. 

You are dead wrong buddy. SINC has you dead wrong.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Yep, I'm a law-and-order type but this stinks.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

Adrian. said:


> So don't question authority ever? We should just let these power tripping monkeys shoot anyone they want and assume they have done no wrong?
> 
> That contradicts the founding principles of our legal system my friend. Read more before you spew your garbage.
> 
> ...


Throwing chairs and computers around in an airport is a crime -- which is why he was being arrested. The fact of the matter is the inquiry found them within the bounds of proper conduct. It's sad that he died but it's not the fault of the cops involved. They used the taser according to proper procedure. If the taser use policy is *proven* flawed then it should be changed.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

chas_m said:


> Really?
> 
> It's okay to kill a few people per year -- at least some of them innocent of any wrongdoing at all -- in order to make sure no policeman ever gets a black eye or a cracked rib, ever?



Let me reiterate -- don't resist arrest and you won't be tasered.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> Failing to worship a cop who claims to be God is not and should not be crime. It certainly should not be a capital offense.


That statement pretty much voids any possible validity in the rest of your argument.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

SINC said:


> No one knows if he was resisting arrest as they could not understand him. Maybe he was asking for medical help. Did you even consider that? He makes no threatening move towards the officers in the video. He is backing away from them when they taser him. Why taser a retreating unarmed man in a confined space?


Backing away from them is resisting.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Gazoo said:


> Backing away from them is resisting.


Sorry I completely missed the ironic intent of your earlier posts. Still just to be really mean and because some people are dumb enough to really think that way I will take this post at face value.beejacon

Only a cop with God Syndrome would call backing away from a threatening cop (in a confined space) resisting. Anyone else would be able to figure out the guy was terrified and tasering him was unlikely to allay that fear. Completely idiotic as he clearly did not pose any threat to the well being of the officers.

It is well documented that Tasers can be deadly, using them in a situation where deadly force is not warranted is at the very least assault with a deadly weapon. In this case Manslaughter would be the only appropriate charge.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Gazoo said:


> Throwing chairs and computers around in an airport is a crime -- which is why he was being arrested. The fact of the matter is the inquiry found them within the bounds of proper conduct. It's sad that he died but it's not the fault of the cops involved. They used the taser according to proper procedure. If the taser use policy is *proven* flawed then it should be changed.


Let me explain to you a little portion of legal philosophy that has informed all English Common law systems in the 20th century. Gustav Radbruch, a German Professor in the early 20th century, following WWII developed what is now understood as the Radbruchian Formula. This model has been developed into the Law that does not provide protection to soldiers who have committed crimes against humanity, even if they were orders. This formula is used to gauge the necessity for the application of _retrospectiv_e Law 

This model was used to try Nazi soldiers during the Nuremberg rounds and later tribunals for they had followed the Positive Law of the Nazi Regime, and therefore had not broken any Law at the time of application. However, since the crimes were such a blatant violation of humanity, legal accountability was required.

What Radbruch's model effectively outlines is a spectrum of activity in relation with Positive Law, that is with what the legal code states. Certainly the Law must be enforced as it is stated in code, but if the Law or the _application_ of the Law exceeds a certain threshold (this threshold is characterised by equality, justice, due process of law and so on) of non conformity to these principles the law ceases to affect its Legal authority and no longer qualifies as Law, insofar as applicators of the Law (eg. Policemen, Judges and so on) are not to be accountable for non application. If the application of the Law is carried out, and this Law violates such principles so blatantly then the applicator can be held accountable for such _unjust_ application of an _unjust_ Law.

Gazoo, indeed the _Positive Law_ may provide protection for these Police officers who have, in consensus of this forum, unjustly applied the Law. However, Positive Law is not the end all and be all of Legal Adjudication. There is precedent in the Canadian Legal experience to provide foundation for the retrospective process of Law. The Radbruchian formula has been exercised in Canada, and perhaps not tomorrow, but someday I am sure these violators of human dignity and Legal process will be held accountable for these actions. 

Guilty as sin.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

Comparing them to the Nazis is simply a straw man.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Gazoo said:


> Comparing them to the Nazis is simply a straw man.


I was not comparing them to the Nazis at all. I was contextualising the development of the Legal Model. Read more carefully my friend.

Perhaps addressing my argument instead of pulling out logical fallacies from the clouds would add some integrity to your conviction. 

No straw man here, but try again.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

Ummm........ you did bring up the Nazi war crimes as an example. 

I am not going to argue esoteric philosophical thought with you over this incident. 

Besides the appropriate use of Tasers is being investigated -- we will see whether they are deemed dangerous or not.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Gazoo said:


> Ummm........ you did bring up the Nazi war crimes as an example.
> 
> I am not going to argue esoteric philosophical thought with you over this incident.
> 
> Besides the appropriate use of Tasers is being investigated -- we will see whether they are deemed dangerous or not.


I mentioned the Nazi war crimes as contextualisation of the application of this retrospective model. I drew no qualitative analogies between the two. Only methodological analogies - or in simpler terms, how the retrospective model was applied and for what purpose.

So now you avoid my entire argument.

You need to learn how to argue better. You have made a complete fool of yourself here. 

Those cops are pigs for what they have done. They mauled a man to death. The use of tasers is irrelevant to their behaviour. If they attacked him to death with knight sticks would it have been more tolerable? I think not.

The point is, there were four of them, one of him, he was confused, stressed and there was no communication. The situation was not out of the control. The man was contained and he had not hurt anyone or attempted to previously during the situation.

You have shown to be unable to argue on many levels here. Perhaps you would like to engage us in some other form of argument apart from "they followed procedure." This argument that Mississauga and You have continuously repeated was responded to and you brushed it off.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

Adrian. said:


> You need to learn how to argue better. You have made a complete fool of yourself here.
> 
> Those cops are pigs for what they have done. They mauled a man to death. The use of tasers is irrelevant to their behaviour. If they attacked him to death with knight sticks would it have been more tolerable? I think not.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the insults -- maybe your big words and debating skills are just so impressive I couldn't possibly argue against them effectively. 

Besides..... you kind of created your own ethico-legal argument with me here --- attacked me --- and then called yourself the winner


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> He made a fool of himself in record time.


Wow... nice.... so people in this forum who hold differing viewpoints are called fools or are then "ignored"


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Gazoo is nuts, makes no logical sense, and has no compassion or ability to reason sanely.
> 
> Gazoo, coming soon to an ignore button near you!


More insults. Nice. I have compassion for the man that died -- I have even stated that it was sad.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Adrian. said:


> =There is precedent in the Canadian Legal experience to provide foundation for the retrospective process of Law. The Radbruchian formula has been exercised in Canada, and perhaps not tomorrow, but someday I am sure these violators of human dignity and Legal process will be held accountable for these actions.


I think you are dreaming technicolor. These officers will never be held accountable for their actions. At most there will be a review of the use of tasers and there will be a rewriting of the "handbook" for their use. Perhaps even a moratorium on their use until such time as they can be deemed to be actually "safe".

Look, we can second guess the intent of the officers in this tragedy until we are blue in the face, it isn't going to change anything. A ruling has been made and I think it was reasonable. Did these officers over react? Perhaps. Did they intend to do him harm? I highly doubt it. Do they have "God syndrome" as some here are want to call it? Who knows. I can say with all certainty that no one here KNOWS that. It is all based on a piece of video footage (which is an extract from a very long drawn out situation) and personal bias.

Most here are ready to *demonize* the officers and ascribe to them guilt without knowing all the facts, only those that are available through the media and the court of public opinion.

I personally think this mans death was a tragedy that has much deeper roots than was played out on that fateful day and to vilify those officers is to actually only seek out a scape goat and serve the "somebody's got to pay" mentality that so often accompanies such tragedies.

In fact if you are going to go after somebody go after TASER International who is supposed to be making a NON-LETHAL peace keeping device which keeps killing people. Oh but that would be difficult and expensive because they have deep pockets.

The situation with taser use is very similar to that of front line troops being the scape goat for the real perpetrators of war crimes. Those at the top who direct their subordinates and provide them with the means of destruction.

Do not forget that the officers are also victims in this twisted plot, they have to live the rest of their lives knowing that they killed this man and they have been vilified for doing so when they had no such intent and were carrying out their jobs and using a tool that was provided to them to purportedly keep themselves and the public safe.

It is all too easy to dehumanize the officers and call them beasts and animals, when in fact they are more than likely people just like you or I who are trying to do their jobs, pay the mortgage, put food on the table and in their particular instance make it home alive without having to do harm to anyone else in the process.


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

screature said:


> Most here are ready to *demonize* the officers and ascribe to them guilt without knowing all the facts, only those that are available through the media and the court of public opinion.
> 
> I personal think this mans death was a tragedy that has much deeper roots than was played out on that fateful day and to vilify those officers is to actually only seek out a scape goat and serve the "somebody's got to pay" mentality that so often accompanies such tragedies.
> 
> ...


Thank god -- a voice of reason. Those are some great points -- the officers involved have to live with this too . They were not trying to kill this man -- just end the situation in a procedurally correct manner with an "approved" tool. They are being scapegoated in this thread without a doubt. The taser as an appropriate weapon is being investigated and time will tell.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Gazoo said:


> Thank god -- a voice of reason. Those are some great points -- the officers involved have to live with this too . They were not trying to kill this man -- just end the situation in a procedurally correct manner with an "approved" tool. They are being scapegoated in this thread without a doubt. The taser as an appropriate weapon is being investigated and time will tell.


Nope. They should get manslaughter. Forget the damn taser. There was no reason to use it. You are scape goating the taser now.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Adrian. said:


> Nope. They should get manslaughter. Forget the damn taser. There was no reason to use it. You are scape goating the taser now.


"Forget the damn taser?" Ridiculous comment. This situation is ALL about the taser. You have revealed your true colours. You are so hell bent to have somebody pay that are willing to rule out the most salient facts just to get a conviction. I hope you never get called up for jury duty. 

Based on previous comments made by you in this thread; "rioting in the streets", this form of "justice" would seem to be more suited to your disposition.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Mississauga (Oct 27, 2001)

Gazoo said:


> More insults. Nice.


Don't sweat it. Often times these forums become a cranky boys club. Laughing it off works for me.

Cheers!


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Mississauga (Oct 27, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


> You might have fared better in this thread:
> 
> http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else-eh/72064-let-s-argue.html


heh heh - I was returning to post a similar reply!


----------



## Gazoo (Dec 6, 2007)

Thanks guys

Funneeeeee thread


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Mississauga said:


> Don't sweat it. Often times these forums become a cranky boys club. Laughing it off works for me.
> 
> Cheers!


Oh this is nothing. I get really bad once we start talking about the Conservative party (with the big C). 

Screature,

The taser is looked at by Gazoo as the prime fault here. I disagree. But I am too tired to tell you why, I have to go to work tomorrow.

Good night everyone.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Actually I too will welcome Gazoo to our ranks. Always nice when a Mountie has your back.beejacon


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Seems obvious some Mounties have no idea when it is appropriate to use a taser. The following story is a an instance where the use of a Taser was entirely warranted. 

edmontonsun.com - Canada - Man in critical condition after Taser used in violent confrontation in N.L.

SANDRINGHAM, N.L. — RCMP say they were forced to use a stun gun on an axe-wielding man during a violent confrontation at a residence in a small community in central Newfoundland. Police said the 29-year-old was listed in critical condition Sunday in hospital in Gander, N.L.


RCMP spokesman Sgt. Wayne Newell said in an interview the two responding officers were forced to use a Taser on the man after he struck the front of their vehicle with an axe on Friday. Newell said under the circumstances, the officers essentially had to choose between lethal force or the Taser. “Our members had to act with just a moment’s notice with the threat that was imposed on them and they deployed the conductive energy weapon (Taser) in order to ensure their own safety.”


Newell said members from the Glovertown, N.L., detachment were called to a residence in Sandringham, N.L., where a man was reportedly wielding a knife and behaving violently. He said while officers were making their way to the scene, the suspect called RCMP dispatch to report he had a shotgun and an axe and intended to cause harm.


When police arrived, Newell said the man became immediately violent and attacked the vehicle.


He said the officers backed away from the man and at that point, a family member intervened and tried to take the axe from his hands. “That person backed off to a certain degree and the members had to deploy the conductive energy weapon in order to safely bring the person under control,” said Newell.

Newell said the man fell to the ground after being hit and was quickly handcuffed. He was reportedly conscious and “continued to be violent” when he was placed in the back of the vehicle.


Newell said an ambulance arrived soon after and the man was taken to hospital.
He said the man was conscious and still aggressive at the time and it’s too early to tell whether his current medical condition is related to being hit with the stun gun.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

eMacMan,

I agree 100% with the use of a taser in this situation. The man was armed, he was out of control, he had already attacked the police and was not responsive to verbal commands. The police shocked him once, handcuffed him and put him in the back of the car.

That is fine.

Too many times, however, two or three or more police fire their stun guns on one person and he or she dies. And as we saw with the airport man in Vancouver, they use them in completely unwarranted situations. 

This was warranted however.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

This would appear to be one of those very rare occasions where the taser's use was justified, but every single day that goes by some trigger happy cop uses one inappropriately.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

SINC said:


> This would appear to be one of those very rare occasions where the taser's use was justified, but every single day that goes by some trigger happy cop uses one inappropriately.


You've never been to Hamilton, have you? The cops here are certainly not trigger happy - in fact, they should be a little more liberal when it comes to shooting criminals... beejacon


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

SINC said:


> This would appear to be one of those very rare occasions where the taser's use was justified, but every single day that goes by some trigger happy cop uses one inappropriately.


That trigger happy bit is being a shade on the overly generous side. The last stat I read is that 70% of Taser deployments are not documented at all and the Mounties are extremely reluctant to divulge any info on the 30% that are properly documented. These two things combined, very clearly point to the fact, that even the cops know their Taser use is far more abusive than required. The very fact that they have written rules to cover their hides when Tasers are used inappropriately is yet another indicator.

Personal opinion only: In the big cities our Police forces seem to be deliberately trying to create an atmosphere where the average citizen thinks of cops as "Thugs with Badges" rather than as those that "Serve and Protect".

The above description definitely does not apply to the Mounties stationed in our smaller communities and for that and for them I am extremely grateful. 

That said when driving through Longview, AB do not look at the road. Keep those eyeballs glued to the speedometer and yeah the school zone is that long and it is 30kph.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

*The Investigation Begins...*



> A public inquiry has begun in Canada into the case of a man who died on an airport floor after police officers used a Taser electric stun gun on him.
> Robert Dziekanski, a Polish immigrant who did not speak English, was confronted by four policemen at Vancouver airport in 2007.
> A bystander filmed the officers repeatedly stunning him with a Taser.
> The police were heavily criticised when the recording emerged but no charges were brought.
> ...


BBC NEWS | Americas | Canada investigates Taser death


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Canadian officer sent to jail in electroshock gun death case - seattlepi.com


> *Canadian officer sent to jail in electroshock gun death case*
> 
> 
> VANCOUVER, British Columbia (AP) — A former Canadian law enforcement officer who was in charge when police used an electroshock weapon on a Polish immigrant, causing his death, was sentenced Friday to a two-year jail term for perjury during a public inquiry into the incident.
> Former corporal Benjamin Robinson was found guilty of perjury in March, with a court ruling that he colluded with four fellow officers to make up testimony during an inquiry into Robert Dziekanski's death in 2007. The British Columbia Supreme Court ruled Friday to send Robinson to prison for two years.


----------

