Blind Man with White Stick Tasered by Police

Blind Man with White Stick Tasered by Police

122 posts
17 Oct 2012
photoclassic
Photographer
photoclassic
Sarge

Of course it was an assumption (i make no excuses for that), just like you are assuming that he is untrained in combat. He is partially sighted from having a stroke, and this has also effected his walking. Does that mean in his past life he could not have been involved in any combat? I dont know his past life, the same as everone else on these boards. As i said, i am trying to put a different persective on it.


I still think that is a massive over-assumption.  Unless he has trained very frequently and very recently, which is highly unlikely as he has had two strokes and is virtually blind, his automatic reaction to the aggressive shouting he heard approaching from behind will be to hunch the shoulders, pull the forearms in against the torso and pull the head down towards the chest.  This is why even people who have had moderate levels of martial arts training fall victim to muggings and assaults.  Unless your reactions are finely tuned through frequent and very recent training, all you will do for a couple of seconds when confronted with a sudden, unexpected threat is freeze.  This reaction is involuntary and can only be overcome by serious training.  Once the initial reaction time is over and the person has had time to think, it is highly unlikely that a frail, blind man would consider "lashing out with his stick" as opposed to pleading for mercy from his "attackers".

The main problem is "boys and their toys" syndrome.  Give a footballer a ball and he will happily kick around all day but what he really wants to do is get a chance to play for real in a football match; give a soldier a gun and he will happily shoot targets and take part in exercises all day but what he really wants to do is get a chance to go to a real war and shoot for real; give a young copper a tazer and he'll happily carry it in it's holster and walk the beat all day but what he really wants is a chance to be a hero and use the taser on a bad guy for real.  All of a sudden he gets a call that there's some nutter running about with a sword in the town and its like being picked for the team or going on a real mission; only in this case the pitch doesn't just have footballers on it and the battlefield doesn't just have red and blue on it.  Judgement gets clouded by expectation.  In Gulf War One the Americans killed more British servicemen than the Iraqis in so-called "friendly fire" - that was the classic example of "boys and their toys" syndrome but it happens in any organisation where there are attractive toys for the boys to play with but inadequate training and management systems in place.  The more attractive the chance to use the toys for real, the greater the impact on judgement.
Posted 22 Oct 2012
Sarge
Photographer
Sarge
Cant argue with that.
If they are a taser virgin (most are because not many are deployed) then some may be itching to "give it to 'em".
But there are still a lot who hope to NEVER use it and will always use their mouth first, before going 'hands on' (or taser on in this case).

By the way, it is ALWAYS armed response that get deployed to these incidents and NEVER the beat bobby (who carries the taser).
The ONLY time a beat bobby will get involved is if they happen to come upon it (either accidently or 'intentionally').
A taser is a great tool, but it is VERY easy to miss, and when faced with a samurai sword you dont have much room for error.
So it would be interesting to know how the officer happened to be there. Did he come across it, did he self deploy (which he shouldnt) or was he ARV?

Posted 22 Oct 2012
Edited by Sarge 22 Oct 2012
photoclassic

I still think that is a massive over-assumption.  Unless he has trained very frequently and very recently, which is highly unlikely as he has had two strokes and is virtually blind, his automatic reaction to the aggressive shouting he heard approaching from behind will be to hunch the shoulders, pull the forearms in against the torso and pull the head down towards the chest.  This is why even people who have had moderate levels of martial arts training fall victim to muggings and assaults.  Unless your reactions are finely tuned through frequent and very recent training, all you will do for a couple of seconds when confronted with a sudden, unexpected threat is freeze.  This reaction is involuntary and can only be overcome by serious training.  Once the initial reaction time is over and the person has had time to think, it is highly unlikely that a frail, blind man would consider "lashing out with his stick" as opposed to pleading for mercy from his "attackers".

The main problem is "boys and their toys" syndrome.  Give a footballer a ball and he will happily kick around all day but what he really wants to do is get a chance to play for real in a football match; give a soldier a gun and he will happily shoot targets and take part in exercises all day but what he really wants to do is get a chance to go to a real war and shoot for real; give a young copper a tazer and he'll happily carry it in it's holster and walk the beat all day but what he really wants is a chance to be a hero and use the taser on a bad guy for real.  All of a sudden he gets a call that there's some nutter running about with a sword in the town and its like being picked for the team or going on a real mission; only in this case the pitch doesn't just have footballers on it and the battlefield doesn't just have red and blue on it.  Judgement gets clouded by expectation.  In Gulf War One the Americans killed more British servicemen than the Iraqis in so-called "friendly fire" - that was the classic example of "boys and their toys" syndrome but it happens in any organisation where there are attractive toys for the boys to play with but inadequate training and management systems in place.  The more attractive the chance to use the toys for real, the greater the impact on judgement.


And today's guest psychiatrist is............
 
.....thank you Doctor smiley
Posted 22 Oct 2012
couchpotato
Photographer
couchpotato

"The officer involved has yet to be suspended from carrying a Taser despite the fact that the officer involved would need to be investigated for both disciplinary proceedings and criminal assault on Mr Farmer. 


http://uk.news.yahoo.com/blind-man-sues-police-over-taser-133517444.html 

Posted 22 Oct 2012
photoclassic
Photographer
photoclassic
Guess it'll all come out in the wash
Posted 22 Oct 2012
Sarge
Photographer
Sarge
couchpotato
"The officer involved has yet to be suspended from carrying a Taser despite the fact that the officer involved would need to be investigated for both disciplinary proceedings and criminal assault on Mr Farmer.  http://uk.news.yahoo.com/blind-man-sues-police-over-taser-133517444.html 
Ah, i missed that bit. The press wrote it so it must be true. Makes you think that there is more to the story than what has been reported though doesnt it.
Posted 23 Oct 2012
Edited by Sarge 23 Oct 2012
photoclassic
Bit too much of a jump in the assumption there I think.  Anyone untrained in combat who fears they are about to be attacked and is not in a position to run will freeze like a rabbit in the headlights.
Admittedly I used to box and was under the influence of alcohol, but when I was jumped walking home from a bar I did the complete opposite of freeze - I went into autopilot and kicked seven bells out of this guy with a high heel in one hand and cheesy chips in the other (and its a running joke that I saved my bacon, but also my cheesy chips and my high heels...) Different people have different instinctive reactions based on their upbringing and what prior exposure they've had (if any) to a situation. Nowadays if I am confronted one on one with someone I waste no time in trading blows if I feel under threat. Call me a thug all you want, but that's what how I instinctively react.
Posted 23 Oct 2012
AbiHillModel

Admittedly I used to box and was under the influence of alcohol, but when I was jumped walking home from a bar I did the complete opposite of freeze - I went into autopilot and kicked seven bells out of this guy with a high heel in one hand and cheesy chips in the other (and its a running joke that I saved my bacon, but also my cheesy chips and my high heels...) Different people have different instinctive reactions based on their upbringing and what prior exposure they've had (if any) to a situation. Nowadays if I am confronted one on one with someone I waste no time in trading blows if I feel under threat. Call me a thug all you want, but that's what how I instinctively react.


You're a THUG smiley

I can just see the Front Page of the Chronical, the Journal and the Northern Echo, oh not forgetting the New York Times

The face of Simply B admits she's a thug!
Posted 23 Oct 2012
alexcrawford
Photographer
alexcrawford
really, a blind man getting tasered indeed! the ONLY reasoning behind the tasering a blind man with a white stick would be that the officer doing the tasering was a mentally-retarded idiot, blind himself, or simply out to cause trouble, unless his trigger finger "slipped" i'm very pro guns, i love sport shooting (at inert targets), and my ideal gun/weapon is a 357magnum or glock 9mm, i love shooting handguns, but the more i hear about the kind of mistakes(?) being made on the street the more i think how woefully inadequate training is the cause of mishaps. the gun itself is just a piece of metal. the person in charge of it is the danger. this applies to less-lethal solutions as much as it does to anything else. gas grenade launchers to atomic weapons, they are all totally safe - its the person the presses the button that's not. my vote goes to a far stricter regime of armed officer selection, and then a lot more training, both physical, psychological and practical. shooting a weapon is a last resort end-of-the line action (even a less-lethal), surely?
Posted 23 Oct 2012
Sarge
Photographer
Sarge
The police in the UK get called to hundreds of firearms jobs EVERY day.
Its inevitable that they will get it wrong at some time or another, as they are human. That doesnt make it OK and acceptable though.
Its the same with the armed forces. There are plenty of stories of these getting it wrong too and not just in the battle field either.
Admittingly there are those who shouldnt use a pen never mind a gun (that goes for police and armed forces).

All due respect but shooting inert targets can not be compared to going to a job where you may actually be killed. There are a lot of things going through your mind, there is a lot of adrenalin and you become tunnel visioned. In fact you absolutely crap yourself with fear too.

Posted 23 Oct 2012
alexcrawford
Photographer
alexcrawford
pompeytog
(snip) ....can tell stories of shooting an enemy two or three times and they are still certainly capable of firing back at you.
this is especially the case when the 'enemy' is high on pcp etc. you can pop them once twice three times, and they will still be coming at you until you manage to sever an artery or cause massive trauma. they experience little to no pain and will simply come at you until one of the conditions above is fulfilled. very scary. its possible to stop someone with a .22 round, but you have to be a very very good marksman to engage and stop someone with such a small round where pure accuracy is needed - something difficult to achieve when you have a nutter firing a fully auto tactical machine gun or a tec or even an ak or uzi. very scary. very difficult to stop them. stress and fear can even cause all your shots to miss the target.
Posted 23 Oct 2012
Ah the world of the video game, at one time I could only watch John Wayne win WW2 for the Americans, now I can BE him

Im brill with a plastic gun, and NEVER get afraid

Posted 23 Oct 2012
Sarge
Photographer
Sarge
alexcrawford
this is especially the case when the 'enemy' is high on pcp etc. you can pop them once twice three times, and they will still be coming at you until you manage to sever an artery or cause massive trauma. they experience little to no pain and will simply come at you until one of the conditions above is fulfilled. very scary. its possible to stop someone with a .22 round, but you have to be a very very good marksman to engage and stop someone with such a small round where pure accuracy is needed - something difficult to achieve when you have a nutter firing a fully auto tactical machine gun or a tec or even an ak or uzi. very scary. very difficult to stop them. stress and fear can even cause all your shots to miss the target.
Thats why (in the right hands) the taser is the best option. If someone is high on certain drugs, hit them with a baton and they will keep coming. CS or pepper spray them and they will keep coming. Shoot them with a gun (providing you only wing them) they keep coming. Taser them and they WILL stop (for as long as the button is pressed) as it causes an involuntary movement on the muscles.
Posted 23 Oct 2012
Bob
Photographer
Bob
clearview_photography

at one time I could only watch John Wayne win WW2 for the Americans, now I can BE him

Why on Earth would you want to be a bow-legged, constipated John Wayne when you could be a hungover Robert Mitchum with an open bottle of Redeye just out of shot? Weird!
Bob
Posted 23 Oct 2012
Edited by Bob 23 Oct 2012
Bob

Why on Earth would you want to be a bow-legged, constipated John Wayne when you could be a hungover Robert Mitchum with an open bottle of Redeye just out of shot? Weird!
Bob


Because I AM bow-legged and constipated, but on the other hand Im also a drunk

Play it again Sam, oops now Im Woody Allen
Posted 23 Oct 2012
To reply to this thread you must be a member. Click here to join