FightingArts Estore
Pressure Points
From a medical professional, straight facts on where and how to hit that can save your life.
Limber or not, anyone can add height and speed to their kicks with this method.
For yourself or as a gift, calligraphy is special, unique and lasting.
Karate Uniforms
Look your best. Max snap. low cost & superior crafted: “Peak Performance Gold” 16 oz uniforms.

Classic book translation. Hard to find. Not in stores.
Who's Online
0 registered (), 94 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Friedrich, Viccles, mikesblog, evhatfield, dastim
23054 Registered Users
Top Posters (30 Days)
Prizewriter 1
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
New Topics
Anyone here?
by roninofGa
04/17/16 04:47 AM
Recent Posts
Anyone here?
by Prizewriter
07/28/16 07:06 AM
Forum Stats
23054 Members
36 Forums
35653 Topics
432647 Posts

Max Online: 424 @ 09/24/13 10:38 PM
Page 3 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#109905 - 10/03/03 11:48 AM Re: Less than deadly force
mountainkarate Offline

Registered: 10/03/03
Posts: 2
Loc: Nederland, Colorado, USA
Here in Colorado deadly force would definately be authorized for an uncooperative subject with a gun. Certainly if you could deploy less lethal methods that are backed up with lethal then that would be the preferred choice. Obviously the totality of the circumstances define your actions.

#109906 - 10/03/03 12:31 PM Re: Less than deadly force
kman Offline

Registered: 05/15/03
Posts: 368
Loc: minnesota
Wadowoman,,there are basically two types of searches. One is called a "consent search" if the police have to ask for permission, then they have to abide by the subects refusal. The other is a search Subsequent to probable cause. This is the one that happens regardless of the subjects wishes and can happen with or without a written warrant depending on circumstances. If the subect interferes he gets arrested. Scince it's your story and you're in possession of the details you could tell us which it was. Originally it sounded as though they had asked and were refused, then insisted on searching anyway(Bad cop! No doughnut). As for him hating f___ing pigs? there's a thread around here where the name calling issue is under discussion.

#109907 - 10/04/03 07:20 AM Re: Less than deadly force

It was a request to search his car with consent and his prescence.

Since he refused consent and refused to answer questions, they arrested him on suspicion and obtained a warrant to search the car and the house.
as I said there was no need as he could prove he was miles away at the time. He was just being difficult for the sake of it.

#109908 - 11/27/03 12:17 PM Re: Less than deadly force
Cato Offline

Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 1636
Kman, I don't know where you get your info. but it seems to be at odds with that of the British Home Office standing committee on police use of weapons. They are quite clear that indepedent reasearch indicates that people with a heart defect can suffer heart failure from a tazer "shock". Their problem now is whether the risk is too great to allow tazers on general use. Clearly there are massive financial considerations for the company that produces them, so I suspect any claim they make will carry less weight than those made by other bodies, such as those commissioned by civil liberties groups. Unfortunately, in the UK the government (and most of the public) would rather a police officer were injured than a police force sued.

I would also say that the only way to know an alibi is "cast iron" is to be there with the subject at the time the offence was committed and so have first hand knowledge that s/he is telling the truth. Otherwise they just might be telling fibs. The only other way to find out is to test the alibi, and that obviously can't be done there and then. To then allow the subject to leave without carrying out a search once you have formulated suspicion enough to want to do so would be stupid. The very fact that the subject is unco-operative should heighten your suspicions, not make you believe him more!!! As I said, Very basic police work.

There is also no such thing as a search with consent in British law. Unless the requisite conditions are met with regard rules of evidence, reasonable grounds and an object for the search the police have no lawfull authority to carry it out, even if the subject invites them to do so. I would guess that in Sharon's example the officers had grounds to make a search and the subjects refusal to allow them to do so resulted in his arrest. His stupidity rather than theirs. Far from being "incompetent boobs" the officers acted as any decent police officer should have.


#109909 - 11/28/03 12:48 AM Re: Less than deadly force

Cato is absolutely right. All the guy had to do was let them in and show them his work time sheet. They could have checked it with his boss, he was miles away at the time of the incident. We want them to solve crimes quickly, but don't want to cooperate to help them do so.

It makes me laugh that people treat the police as the enemy....until they need help from them. And they seem to forget that the police don't make the laws (or necessarily agree with all of them) but they are paid to enforce them.

#109910 - 11/28/03 08:12 AM Re: Less than deadly force
kman Offline

Registered: 05/15/03
Posts: 368
Loc: minnesota
Cato,,I get my information from Minnesota state statues and U.S. caselaw. No surprise that things are differnt in another country but the underlying concept is really identical. Probable cause or reasonable suspicion. And yes in the U.S. police can and do ask for permission to search, even in a case where there isnt probable cause. It's really common in cases like vehicle stops. As for the "cast iron alibi" of course people lie. Deciding whether or not an alibi is any good is up to the person hearing it I would suppose. (my interpetation) so I keyed in on a seemingly inconguent phrase. If they had a warrant then all the alibis in the world don't mean a thing. That would mean that the subject was interfereing with a lawful search and had it coming. Re reading Wadow womans post It says "They asked for permission to search and he refused" In the U.S. that would be a request for a consent search that was refused. No legal grounds to proceed. They would have the option of maintaining surviellance and requesting a warrant.
As for the Tasers. I posted a lot on them in martial arts talk under topic of electric stun weapons. No need to rehash it all. On the surface it would seem that a minufactuers reseach would be self serving but thats not always the case. In truth Taser has a lot to gain by doing the best research possible and publishing it freely. And I would like to put some weight on the term "research" as opposed to "manufacturers claims" and testimonials etc. The Taser has taken the number spot in the U.S.(and probably the world) as an electronic restraint device. The sales and Law enforcement contracts are huge. Why jepordize that with false claims or shoddy research? Not to mention the criminal or civil liabilities associated with false claims. taking the high road is the proper choice for taser in this case. And yes we all know that there are disreputable and fly by night companies out there that have done such things. If your "civil liberties" groups are anything like ours then they too are a bunch of cop hating liberal fascists that like nothing better than to interfere with and make things difficult for the police. Now there's a group whos motives are suspect and whos claims I would take with a grain of salt. Over here that would be groups like ACLU and Southern poverty Law center. To get back on topic (the cardiac claim) taser's research involved cardiolists in a top flight medical facility and volunteer subjects with heart conditions. As opposed to a learned person holding forth with an opinion. You choose. Saying a Taser "might" have a certain effect is far cry from saying that it does. Two related bits.People with heart conditions can be pushed over the edge by simple things like emotional stress so a taser "could" contribute. And in any population of heart patients a certain number are going to kick off at given intervals so supposing one died while recieving or right after a taser shock doesnt establish cause and effect until it's been "proven". (scientific context)Sorry if this is a bit long. K-

#109911 - 11/29/03 10:27 AM Re: Less than deadly force
Cato Offline

Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 1636
Yep, I agree with all of that - especially the "might doesn't mean will" thrust of the tazer argument. Again though, I suspect the UK authorities are more circumspect in our use of force than our colleagues in the US and until "might" becomes "definately does not" I think there will always be pressure on the UK government to find a "safer" means of restraint. The rights and wrongs of that particular debate are a matter of personal opinion, and I can see both sides. I am also burdened with being a cynic, have been all my life, so I take the idea that Tazer Co. go around zapping willing volunteers from the coronary unit just to see if they die or not with a huge helping of salt. So, the question has to be how exactly do they do their research? I think the only ethical way is to do exactly what you say, have a load of learned people debate the issue. Clearly Tazer have a lot to lose and are not going to publish reasearch that jeapordizes their sales pitch. I would expect them to spread panegyric about their product.


#109912 - 11/29/03 09:14 PM Re: Less than deadly force
Jamoni Offline

Registered: 01/17/03
Posts: 1514
Loc: St. Louis, MO, USA
No search with consent seems to be a great policy. It would avoid a ton of entrapment lawsuits. If the law works as you describe, then the officers in wadowwomans case would only have asked for a search IF they had probable cause. Therefore resisting them was foolish, as they were going to search anyway.

#109913 - 12/31/03 04:20 PM Re: Less than deadly force
John Sharpe Offline

Registered: 12/30/03
Posts: 16

#109914 - 08/12/04 11:09 AM Re: Less than deadly force
c_maj7th Offline

Registered: 10/13/03
Posts: 127
Loc: Indiana
I don't know your situation or the resources available to you.Keep in mind I'm a civilian. But in my unprofessoinal opinion I would say follow along after the guy until your back up got there.Then you could gang up and "dogpile" the guy into submission.Better yet wait on the K-9 unit to get there.I would think he would cooperate when the dog got involved.

Page 3 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

Moderator:  Cord, Fletch1, MattJ, Reiki 

Action Ads
1.5 Million Plus Page Views
Only $89

Stun Guns
Variety of stun gun devices for your protection

Buy Pepper Spray
Worry about your family when you’re not around? Visit us today to protect everything you value.
Accurate information on the ancient martial traditions of the Japanese samurai

C2 Taser
Protect yourself and loved ones from CRIME with the latest C2 Taser citizen model. Very effective.



Unbreakable Unbrella

krav maga