Comments:Utah taser incident triggers debate and death threats

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

I think that the police officer was being judge and jury. If a person doesn't sign, cannot the video and any other evidence be used instead? If there is a high speed car chase that is getting out of hand and would result in other people's injury, then the chase is called off. Why not here, under the circumstances, instead of resorting to a taser?

Where can we find additional information as to the aftermath? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.117.247.12 (talk) 07:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

It is police state minded officer John Gardner, who was not seeing Mr. Massey as a real person. It is only right that the actions of all officers who do not see us as real people feel the very real power of the people. They need to be reminded often who they work for and it is obvious if the police escalate an incident then posting these escalations after the proper chain of command has been tried must be left open. Technology must not favor only the police but must be used to favor the victim always. I hope this officer and others like him learn that we will not tolerate this new police state which is being used on the American people to condition us for the martial law which the government plans to use to impose the NEW WORLD ORDER tyranny government. The powers that be that are encouraging this behavior in police officers don't understand yet, that there is not enough of them to kill the the last nation who is under the rules of freedom under our inspired US Constitution. Police officers need to start waking up to the oath which they took to protect and defend the US Constitution from all enemies both foreign and domestic and I would venture to say that there are more domestic than foreign. Police officers need to understand that their powers are derived from the people "us" if they do not keep their oaths then we have every right to remove enemies of the Us Constitution by any and all means no options removed. This means "police state minded officers" if they violate our rights and refuse to keep their oaths of office. They can not just say it is my job. If you can not function under the constraints of the US Constitution then you are in the wrong job. Not all laws are Constitutional and it is up to every person to understand this Constitution or risk loosing your freedoms. And this means you too police officers. If you feel that it is your job to be mindless goons then don't complain when some one who is mindful of his rights rightfully take you out some day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.219.130.23 (talk) 20:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

It is police state minded officer John Gardner, who was not seeing Mr. Massey as a real person. It is only right that the actions of all officers who do not see us as real people feel the very real power of the people. They need to be reminded often who they work for and it is obvious if the police escalate an incident then posting these escalations after the proper chain of command has been tried must be left open. Technology must not favor only the police but must be used to favor the victim always. I hope this officer and others like him learn that we will not tolerate this new police state which is being used on the American people to condition us for the martial law which the government plans to use to impose the NEW WORLD ORDER tyranny government. The powers that be that are encouraging this behavior in police officers don't understand yet, that there is not enough of them to kill the the last nation who is under the rules of freedom of our inspired US Constitution. Police officers need to start waking up to the oath which they took to protect and defend the US Constitution from all enemies both foreign and domestic and I would venture to say that there are more domestic than foreign. Police officers need to understand that their powers are derived from "the people" "us" if they do not keep their oaths of office, then we have every right to remove enemies of the US Constitution by any and all means no options removed. Yes you are to work by a higher standard. This means "you" "police state minded officers" if you violate our rights and refuse to keep your oaths of office. You can not just say, "it is my job to violate your rights". If you can not function under the constraints and high standards of the US Constitution then you are in the wrong job. Not all laws are Constitutional and it is up to every person to understand this Constitution or risk loosing your freedoms. And this means you too police officers. If you feel that it is your job to be mindless goons then don't complain when some one who is mindful of his rights rightfully takes you out some day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.219.130.23 (talk) 20:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

editing suggestion re: "Utah taser incident triggers debate and death threats"[edit]

In the article appears: "He orders Massey, who is still pointing at the sign, to stop and then draws his taser at Massey." In my Youtube viewings, that sentence is debatable at best.

If an officer says "Put your hands behind your back, you're under arrest." to a person 2km away (out of earshot), there's BEEN no "order". In the video I saw, the detained person was SPEAKING and LOOKING AWAY from the officer for the officer's first "order". Reasonably that order-sounding WAS NOT HEARD prior weapon draw from holster. Maybe for the Utah Highway Patrol there's no such duty. I would think there should be.

I didn't hear "taser" or "tase" in the video. From the detained person's point of view in the video, the drawn weapon (out of holster) might have appeared a firearm. Most taser included arrest videos I've seen include such as "...I'll tase...". Perhaps Utah arrest varies.

In any event, there was a $40,000 settlement not in this article http://www.kxmc.com/News/217709.asp in part, in some opinions, based on ANOTHER dimension (post-tasering protocol failure).

For those and other reasons, the wikinews.org article doesn't properly stand as I've read it today circa 1120am EDT, May 25, 2008. I suggest it be removed or edited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eastontario (talkcontribs) 15:21, 25 May 2008 (UTC)