no messin about here ....

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by auxie, Nov 15, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. So when do all the illegals arriving here get the same treatment?
  2. what a terrible thing to say george :D :D
  3. Maybe we could just brandish a few Tasers at those considering coming here, purely as a deterrent of course :wink:
  4. That's the problem with tasers. Yes, they're a better alternative than shooting with a real gun in some circumstances, but I can't help but feel their very non-lethality means they'll be reached for long before the second-from-last resort just because the bearer is fed up talking to the suspect.

    There's less incentive IMO to think through the act befoer using the weapon.
  5. Interesting article on this subject yesterday on Radio 4, we seem to have it under control in the UK were every use has to be recorded and justified unlike the US or Canada. people seem to forget the alternative as well, I suspect that they're a better alternative than shooting with a real gun in all circumstances really.
  6. Cept maybe if the person is too far away? Or has his hand on some sort of button?
  7. Twice FFS!!

    Can anyone explain why he got the second tasering because that seems to be what did for him.
  8. flashback
    illegal imigrant
    bet the Canadians dont have the massive public uproar and payout we are now faced with
  9. Because he was an illegal? :wink:
  10. I don't understand why those four big Cannuk rozzers didn't just jump him? Health & Safety?

    Ah, that explains it. A scary stapler...


  11. There's always going to be circumstances where it's necessary to kill the subject rather than take the risk that stunning them will work. I'm not arguing that tasering isn't generally preferable to shooting, just that talking is generally far preferable to either.

    Non-lethal weapons are far more likely to get used than lethal ones, to my mind, because the consequences to the user are far less. My concern is that their use here seems to have been driven by frustration rather than anything genuine risk.
  12. Wow! Just think of the logistics involved. You'd have to set up an 'Imigration Deterrent Force' (Deterrent being the operative word :wink: ) to travel around the entire world and members being armed with Tasers and expense accounts.

    Can I volunteer to be a Imigration Deterent Officer ANM?
  13. Because in 99% of cases four cops manhandling a violent suspect onto the ground and securing him is far more likely to hurt the suspect than tazering him. As for the other 1%, well sh#t happens.
  14. I just saw this thread, otherwise I would have responded earlier. The fact that the man was an immigrant is immaterial here. It could have been you, furious after the airlines lose your luggage for the tenth time. He came to see his mother, who lives in Canada. He obviously had mental problems and was agitated, but was not a danger to anyone; in fact many people, including women, went to him to calm him down. The police of course lied initially, saying that he was threatening, etc. In fact, they walked straight up to him and electrocuted him.

    I hope they'll one day ban t*sers. The fact that they're not lethal and provoke intense pain without leaving any trace should be an argument in favour of a ban.

    Now since the video has surfaced, there'll be an inquest, which will last at least one year and of course, no one will be blamed.