Supreme Court to consider D.C. Handgun Ban

[Jiro]

I doubt UK need taser gun, however society in UK is much different from USA.

UK has lower murder rate than USA then need to be armed is pointless.

they use batons so why trouble yourself to beat them up? Just taze them, bro!

 

[Foxrac]

they use batons so why trouble yourself to beat them up? Just taze them, bro!

To be remember, taser gun can be deadly weapon to some people who is sensitive to electric, or people with medical condition like metal parts in bodies, pacemaker, internal CI and any parts that sensitive to electric.

Majority of British officers (82%) voted to be unarmed.

 

[Jiro]

To be remember, taser gun can be deadly weapon to some people who is sensitive to electric, or people with medical condition like metal parts in bodies, pacemaker, internal CI and any parts that sensitive to electric.

Majority of British officers (82%) voted to be unarmed.

what are the chance that people with CI, pacemaker, etc. would pose a danger to public? I'm talking about hooligans, soccer riots, drunk people, etc. I'm sure UK's policy on use of taser would be more specific and stricter than USA. Maybe reduce the voltage for UK version

 

[web730]

they use batons so why trouble yourself to beat them up? Just taze them, bro!

It would excite terrorists, kidnappers, and the likes even more - jeez! :roll: lol

(I meant those who think UK police don't need guns either, also)

 

[Tousi]

I do not know for a fact but it seems reasonable to me that certain departments within the UK law enforcement DO have guns for specific situations.

 

[Jiro]

I do not know for a fact but it seems reasonable to me that certain departments within the UK law enforcement DO have guns for specific situations.

yes of course. we have a special police force called S.W.A.T. All countries have same.

 

[DeafPenPal]

I do.


I know many people who do own guns.


Why don't we get rid of all the useless old amendments, like free speech, right to assemble, free press, etc.

The Amendments on the Constitution law which prevent government from too much tyrant. If we let that happen, we would not be free to do what we wanted. Our state could becomes communism. Communist could control our way of living, taking away our freedom, and etc...

 

[Jiro]

The Amendments on the Constitution law which prevent government from too much tyrant. If we let that happen, we would not be free to do what we wanted. Our state could becomes communism. Communist could control our way of living, taking away our freedom, and etc...

you mean socialism...

 

[DeafPenPal]

I do not have gun but I favor not lifting the ban on the gun. Gun is for one's own good protection and self-defense. In addition, gun should be made security lock feature somewhere where you can lock on the trigger when not in use. A handgun is good for protection and self-defense. Other automatically gun and high profile weapon like shot gun should not be use by civilized people. When the state and federal government need our help to fight against terrorists invade the state, then it's up to the government to give the citizen's right to automatically and high profile weapon to fight against terrorists to protect their freedom from exile.

 

[Jiro]

what's high-profile weapons? You mean assault rifles? not many people can afford it anyway... you have any idea how much it costs and the bullets too??? nobody can afford it. high cost is more effective than ban.

 

[DeafPenPal]

what's high-profile weapons? You mean assault rifles? not many people can afford it anyway... you have any idea how much it costs and the bullets too??? nobody can afford it. high cost is more effective than ban.

Right not many people can afford it but think of those who can afford it and use it for no reason, use it on revenge, robbing bank, and etc... I don't know about any guns but I think shot gun and other high profile gun should not be used by civilized people. Peace!

 

[Jiro]

Right not many people can afford it but think of those who can afford it and use it for no reason, use it on revenge, robbing bank, and etc... I don't know about any guns but I think shot gun and other high profile gun should not be used by civilized people. Peace!

lol.... very very unlikely. so unlikely that it hardly makes a blip on the radar. I don't think "civilized people" are that stupid to use it on silly stuff. Don't let the few bad apples ruin it all for us. Should we ban chef knife or katana sword because of stabbing crimes?

Most gun crimes are caused by some cheap or stolen handguns..... not shotgun or "high profile" gun - though there's no such a word as "high profile" gun... I think you mean assault rifle but please clarify.

 

[Foxrac]

what are the chance that people with CI, pacemaker, etc. would pose a danger to public? I'm talking about hooligans, soccer riots, drunk people, etc. I'm sure UK's policy on use of taser would be more specific and stricter than USA. Maybe reduce the voltage for UK version

Well, I was means about people with CI, pacemaker or medical related that who don't listen to police then end up to taze them.

 

[Jiro]

Well, I was means about people with CI, pacemaker or medical related that who don't listen to police then end up to taze them.

In order to get tazed - you have to pose a danger to police officer. If you're resisting arrest with violence and difficulty... you deserve to get tazed (regardless of your medical status). Sorry buddy but I ain't letting you hurt me. They bite, scratch, eye-gouge, etc I could be infected with AIDS or whatever. so why should I get hurt? Which one do you prefer? a good baton-beating or a quick taser (no bruise, no broken bone, nothing)?

Taser is safe for both parties and if I'm pointing it at you - you better comply. They always give PLENTY PLENTY PLENTY AMPLE AMPLE AMOUNT of warning before they use it. It's nobody's fault except the troublemaker. If they're concerned for their well-being from taser - THEN OBEY THE OFFICER AND STFU

Don't assume that police are very trigger-happy to use taser. Don't forget that for every single time the police officer takes his gun/taser out (EVEN FOR 2 seconds or never shot it), he needs to file several reports/documents for it. He will be reviewed on it by his supervisor - something that officer does not want.

I wouldn't worry about a person with pacemaker or medical related to resist that much. They're too weak to resist anyway.

 

[jillio]

what are the chance that people with CI, pacemaker, etc. would pose a danger to public? I'm talking about hooligans, soccer riots, drunk people, etc. I'm sure UK's policy on use of taser would be more specific and stricter than USA. Maybe reduce the voltage for UK version

They could be mistaken as posing a threat. A person with a CI might not hear orders to stop, be seen as uncompliant, and be tased. A person with a pacemaker also takes several medications, as a rule. They could have a cross reaction to mediction as be perceived as being drunk and uncooperative and tased. It is not an unknown situation.

And people with pacemakers are not too weak to resist.

 

[Foxrac]

They could be mistaken as posing a threat. A person with a CI might not hear orders to stop, be seen as uncompliant, and be tased. A person with a pacemaker also takes several medications, as a rule. They could have a cross reaction to mediction as be perceived as being drunk and uncooperative and tased. It is not an unknown situation.

And people with pacemakers are not too weak to resist.

Just show medical bracket then police wouldn't able to taze them or victim can sue on police, if die then victim's family can sue on them.

For me, I don't have medical bracket.

 

[Reba]

...And people with pacemakers are not too weak to resist.

That's right.

 

[Jiro]

They could be mistaken as posing a threat. A person with a CI might not hear orders to stop, be seen as uncompliant, and be tased. A person with a pacemaker also takes several medications, as a rule. They could have a cross reaction to mediction as be perceived as being drunk and uncooperative and tased. It is not an unknown situation.

yes yes shit happens. still better than baton or being mauled by police dog or getting shot.

And people with pacemakers are not too weak to resist.

yea.... and then get heart attack a moment later.

 

[jillio]

yes yes shit happens. still better than baton or being mauled by police dog or getting shot.


yea.... and then get heart attack a moment later.

That's why they have a pacemaker. To regulate the heartbeat. Under stress, the pacemaker will regulate the heartbeat so that the stress on the rest of the body does not cause undue stress on the cardiac system and lead to a heart attack. Likewise, many pacemakers are equipped with a defibrillator that will shock the individual in the same way the paddles do.

 

[Jiro]

That's why they have a pacemaker. To regulate the heartbeat. Under stress, the pacemaker will regulate the heartbeat so that the stress on the rest of the body does not cause undue stress on the cardiac system and lead to a heart attack. Likewise, many pacemakers are equipped with a defibrillator that will shock the individual in the same way the paddles do.

You certainly would not get back to normal immediately after receiving shock from pacemaker. Under stress.... I'm sure that does not include resisting against cops.

So are you saying.... with pacemaker - you'd be able to play sports like football? or soccer?