It depends on the circumstances. I saw in the news that the majority of tazered people do not have weapons. After seeing numerous people tazered on the news, I feel kind of sick to see what happens. However, there was a case here where an officer shot and killed a man who had just stabbed his wife and was waving the knife wildly around (almost like he wanted to be shot), but not directly at the police though. I believe he was mentally unbalanced and I thought that to be shot dead was not necessary. Perhaps a tazer would have done well in this case.
But, then I'm not a police officer and I have never trained with tazer use, so I'm no authority.
I definitely think things went wrong in the Vancouver airport case. (I'm bad with names.)
There should be a thorough review and training with regard to the usage of the tazer gun.

Why not use rubber bullets? Paint balls (they hurt enough!)?

I don't like messing with electricity.

I once saw a special about a company that developed sticky goo guns that would stop criminals by sticking them in place. Makes me giggle but at least no one dies.

kwind

I'd agree with the rubber bullets, kwind :)

I also saw a special about "alternative weapons", and they had a net launcher that would work well to subdue people. it consisted of a large net with weights around the edges that was shot from a rifle-looking device. Seemed to work pretty well in the demonstrations.

Basically, if you've ever accidentally touched a live wire in your house, you'd have to agree that it's cruel to zap people even if only to subdue them. I have also heard stories of people who were unaffected by tazers. I'd like to see someone who's unaffected by a giant weighted net or a big ball of goo.

The goo may stick them in place, but wouldn't they still be able to fire guns, or strike out with knives or other types of weapons?

Our police force is facing increasing amounts of danger every year from criminals who just don't care what they do to others. I say give the police what they need to defend themselves & others.

Let me also say that I do not watch or follow the news, so even though I have heard about the Vancouver airport incident, I am fuzzy on the details (like I don't know any) & have not watched the tape.

You can supposedly shoot the goo at their weapon, it gums it up instantly. It wouldn't work in every situation, but it would work in many.

Kwind

Does anyone know anything about tranq guns? I was under the impression they were used in Britain, because of the anti-gun laws there.

Then again, what if someone has an allergic reaction? Siighh...

Well, given that most of the tasered people are threatening violence, I feel little sympathy for them...
As painful as they are, they're far less painful than shooting someone.

And they're still the second best way to subdue a person, after a firearm.

I retired after serving the public in Emergency Services for 32 years, many nights along side RCMP officers serving and protecting. I never want to see a person unnecessarily hurt or worse but there are many circumstances where people are violent and pose a real threat to law enforcement personnel, and others serving the public or trying to help them. I have worked in Hospital Emergency rooms where druggies are lashing out with superhuman violence, or helped at Emergency scenes where threats of immenent death are real. The police need a weapon that can be used to conteract violence and deadly force, and protect us(the public). Any weapon comes with inherent risk.
That said, I feel that there are serious problems with Police protocol in the use of such force. I am told that some police forces in Canada have a standard protocol of calling for an Ambulance whenever tazer use is OK'd, and this action may have prevented to tragic death in YVR. Clearly the Officers using such force need to follow a protocol that examines and weighs the Danger in using a Tazer against the expected outcome. A system of review of the uses of the tazer would help establish such a protocol. I have worked alongside many fine Police Officers in my years of service. Most of them are the same as you and me, with the same fears and insecurities and quest for happiness that we all have. Most of them only want us to make it home safely and to have a good life. Most of them would be horrified at the unnecessary death of any member of the public, the public that they have signed on to protect.
I also believe that oversight of our nations police forces must come under the regular scrutiny of Civilian authority. This would include the examination of use of deadly Force in the Line of Duty. Deadly Force in all its forms.

Rubber bullets are shot from a shotgun as a crowd control weapon. Shotguns are carried in some cars but police do not carry them. Tasers are about the same size as the police officer's gun, and there is a limit to how much 'stuff' they can carry. There must be a clear policy set as to when to use the Taser, and thorough training is necessary--not all police forces do this, especially in the US, where standards vary by county. Tasers could be used as an alternative to deadly force, as an alternative to use of a baton or physical force (which risks the safety or life of the police officer). You can also see videos where it is used to force compliance or as punishment.

In the YVR video the Taser may have been accidentally discharged. After the first 5-second jolt, another jolt is given. The question of whether the member intentionally discharged their weapon is unlikely to come up in the RCMP review. It does not appear that the officers checked to see if the subject was breathing or required any aid after the handcuffs were applied. More than just the use of the Taser should be at question in this incident.

the irrationality behind tazers is the that law enforcers are taking it upon themselves to define citizens as psychotic ( I have been psychotic and nobody would have known this was going on for me, if I hadn't told them) and then hitting them with enough zap to kill anyone with a heartbeat over 80.

think of something else.

We still have to be able to deal with people who are completely irrational and exhibiting extreme violence. There needs to be a method of stopping violent people without killing them. The era of drug induced phsychosis and other factors is here. There are people on the streets that in another time would spend their lives in confinement whether physically or chemically. These people are not always but can be a danger to other members of society and we (as Society) must face up to our responsibilities to be able to restrain them or otherwise prevent harm to others.
Their was a suggestion of using rubber bullets or Tanquilizers, both of which have at least as bad a track record as tazers. For the moment, tazers, properly trained for and used, seem to be an answer. The keey is training and proper resonse, which may include an OK from higher authority in the case of police, and should also include an automatic response from medical personnel to the scene of a tazers use.
Accountability for the use of extreme force by police must also be part of this solution. The Police work for us and must answer to us.

exfireguy said:
Their was a suggestion of using rubber bullets or Tanquilizers, both of which have at least as bad a track record as tazers.

I don't know anything about tranqs - I was hoping someone could explain a little mroe about them. What kind of bad track record do they have?

I think people need to see tasers as a possibly lethal weapon, and treat them as such.

I think they over use them. If the RCMP are going to get tasers, they need to take a course on when and when not to use the taser. that's just a kids POV, I'm not sure if that makes sense, but...