I wish I could see a video where someone grab a policeman leg and tase it back...does anyone know if it has ever happen?
I wish I could see a video where someone grab a policeman leg and tase it back...does anyone know if it has ever happen?
Tasers do not work quite like that. You would have to make a connection between the darts. Like a line of ppl holding hands and one on each end is holding a dart.
So I guess my answer is that this has never happened...doesn't matter, I just think it would be fun to see it![]()
I'm sure somewhere it's happened. If a cops own gun has been turned against him I would imagine a taser could have. Whether or not its been caught on tape is a different matter......
I saw a guy get Tasered in Dewey Beach by the police this past weekend, and while he was being tassed he asked the police why they were doing it like nothing was going on.
Pretty boss move in my opinion
in australia before a cop can carry a taser he has to be shot with it so he understands the full effect of this. Is this the same in usa?
What taser do american police use? In aus every taser has a camera attached to it so the police review board can look at every shooting.
In America we need un approval before we can tase.Originally Posted by Euroholic
I use the x26C for home defense. It has hooked darts that extend 15 feet and as Lunk indicated, BOTH darts must hit the perpetrator to complete the circuit and administer the "lightning".
No, I am not in law enforcement, its a first line home defense option before more lethal options would be considered. I personally would NOT want to be shot with a taser. It looks painful as all hell.
Why do you have less than lethal options for home defense? Castle doctrine, assume that anyone entering your house without permission is there to cause you grievous bodily injury or to kill you, and dispatch them with extreme prejudice. I doubt the intruder is carrying less than lethal weapons with him, or that you'd be afforded such a courtesy.
~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~
"It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel
I have used a tazer on a victim.. I mean friend before. They seem to work pretty well.
~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~
"It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel
double post
^^^^^^^^^^^^bahahahahaahahahah
The Castle Doc. is not law, it's a set of principles. One must still justify use of deadly force and be able to prove fear for life. Use of non-lethal force is justifiable in cases where a home invasion has occurred but one cannot articulate a reasonable fear for ones life.
Lmfao!Originally Posted by Fcastle357
I have been tazed several times. They are a very effective tool. I have read studies that claim 1/5 ppl on average have the ability to kill another human being even when faced with a deadly force situation. The majority of ppl choose flight over fight. The Tazer is an effective form of protection for those ppl who question or are willing to admit that they may not be that 1/5
I bet I could dodge a taser. Bet anything. I'll go out and do it right now. Fuk it.
~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~
"It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel
I triple dog dare ya!Originally Posted by austinite
Oh no! Quite the opposite. I have 15 firearms. My preference for a first line of defense would be a less lethal option such as the taser. I'd rather subdue, incapacitate, and bound a perpetrator before using a more lethal option. Perhaps it's just an occupational preference for me to avoid lethal force. I have a good security system, however, if that didn't deter an intruder, I'd much rather take him/her down with a taser and restrain them than being responsible for ending someone's life. Statistically, only 20% of people can pull the trigger ("fight") at the critical moment. 80% of people will actually flee "(flight response") as a first response.Originally Posted by thegodfather
Yes, I have numerous lethal choices but I hope never to have to use any of them. If pushed into a corner where my life or someone in my family was threatened, I could use lethal force. It's not my first option but it is available.....and make no mistake, if that loud-ass alarm in my house didn't send an intruder running, I'm coming at him/her with a taser AND loaded firearm to defend myself/family.![]()
Lol.....with all the "strap" I have, they won't let back in that country now!!! LolOriginally Posted by austinite
Lol.....I would ask in what context, but I'm not so sure that question should be asked! LolOriginally Posted by DSM4Life
Agreed! If I can subdue instead of expire a life, that would be my preference, however, I will protect my loved ones with my life if necessary.Originally Posted by Lunk1
~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~
"It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel
lol touche
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)