Police Taser 7500 London police carry them

No you didn't answer MY question.

So try again.

🙄

Yeah!

Because the police stabbed 12,783 people last year.

Oh no, sorry, those attacks were carried out by ordinary, law abiding members of the public.

IMO there is enough evidence that the police are too quick to abuse their current powers. Giving them the ability to injure, maim or even kill inncoent members of teh public is not the right move

It absolutely would if we were prepared to spend the money to have more officers. Had there been an officer on that street, who was properly armed and trained. That murdering lunatic would have been stopped BEFORE he killed that child and injured all those other people.

So all Nurser shouldn't be trusted because one of them was Lucy Letby?

All nursery workers should be vilified because one of them was Vanessa George.

All female teachers should be viewed as child predators because half a dozen have been jailed for child abuse in just the last six months.

The logic of using the behaviour of one person to reflect the behaviour of a whole group is not just flawed, its divisive.

The "Police" are not one person.

Uk has higher rate of violent crimes than several European countries where (almost) all police carry firearms.

Tasers are just more deadly than you're assuming. To take UK in 2022, 11 people died after police used force against them, and in three of those cases tasers were used. Any deaths from police are concerning, but 27% of lethal use of police force with a supposedly "non-lethal" weapon is especially questionable.

In the States, where tasers have been deployed much more widely, despite the company's clains, over a 1000 people have died after contact with a taser.

Last year a man won thousands in damages in the UK after being shot in the back with a taser. He broke his hand. Serious injuries on falling are common with tasers. A 95 year old woman fell over and cracked her skull open and died after the police tasered her in Australia. These sorts of incidents would become more common here in the UK if all the cops were armed with these things.

@mossylog
it was in response to a 13yr old being tasered.
And I ask the same question about another of your points -

• how many 'wrong people' have been tasered?
• how many have died from hitting their head on the ground?

@Hereyoume I answered this in my follow up post above. Tasers are appropriate to use against spree killers, but the OP's question was whether more police should have them and the answer is no.

@VestibuleVirgin Take a moment to think about:

1. Not every person knows they have a heart condition
2. Not every person subjected to police tasering is guilty of a crime
3. A taser can miss and hit the wrong person
4. A person can die from tasering when they don't have a pre-existing condition-- for one thing, they can just hit their head when thrashing on the ground

I'd m in fact, I'd go as far as to say your child be at more risk from the police than a criminal if they were all armed

Having armed police won't stop your child getting hurt if somebody goes on a rampage

I’m agnostic about arming the police generally but aghast at some of the comments here. Two officers have been injured and others bravely stopped a man wielding a sword with only tasers, they could have waited for a firearms unit but chose to protect the public. How is it appropriate to make comments about how untrustworthy the police are? We need people to do this difficult job and we need their safety to be taken seriously that doesn’t necessarily mean everyone should be armed but we shouldn’t just say they shouldn’t have tasers because they can’t be trusted.

I would rather my 13 year old was tasered than seriously injured or kill someone or be killed or seriously injured themselves.

There are very tight restrictions on using tasers anyway & even more so on children.

I think you are deliberately misunderstanding me. I didn't say their response to this particular incident was poor or untrustworthy but let's face it they haven't had the greatest press in the last few years. I don't think arming police indiscriminately will help that. Only 2 days ago a MET policeman was found guilty of the rape of a child, 5 years before that he had been suspected of a different rape but not charged. You want him to have had a tazer!?

So, what should the Police have used to subdue a murdering lunatic armed with a sword, who had already killed a child, just about chopped a hand of an officer and the arm off another one?

Perhaps those bad wittle officers should have just spoken in a loud voice, not too loud obviously, as it might have upset the poor little murdering lunatic. Or maybe those officers could have just stood in line and let the murdering lunatic kill them, one by one, until he got tired and had to sit down.

So, Mossy. Please answer my question?

I'm sure we would all like to hear your answer.

Comments like this make me laugh.

So, what wasn't trustworthy about their response to this murdering spree?

Grow up.

one could argue that those who have a medical condition that may result in death from being tasered are fucking stupid if they commit crimes knowing the potential for tasering

oh please. Be realistic; what per centage of 13 year olds are tasered from the whole set of people tasered?

Tranquiliser darts need to stay in to work. No use when the target can just reach down and pull it out.

I think knee jerk reactions to terrible events are always a poor idea. The police are not particularly trustworthy so I wouldn't want to indiscriminately arm them further.... maybe they need to carry tranquilliser darts!

Batons can kill too

Aren’t most police armed?
Countries who don’t arm police
Bhutan, Botswana, China, Cook Islands, Fiji, Iceland, Ireland, Kiribati, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Norway, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, the United Kingdom (except for Northern Ireland), the U.S. Virgin Islands and Vanuatu.

and you don’t think uk police should even have tasers………

By making sure all police have weapons on them, this will only help increase the violent crime rate.

There'll be fewer police perhaps, because some will refuse to be armed, some won't pass the necessary psych tests, some won't pass the training, and (as is the case of armed police now) if they shoot the gun, they're off for a lengthy period of time.

Why would you want this???

More people with weapons means MORE PEOPLE HURT AND DEAD.

No they should not. All arming the police does, is mean that there will be more deaths of innocent people, and criminals will up the ante. We only have to look at the US. I don't want the police armed any more than absolutely necessary.