I believe that leaving when you have been given the instruction to stay is considered resisting arrest?
No that other guy didn't deserve to die. But he wasn't lying to an office or trying to get away.
This guy was daring the ranger to tase him, giving false info and trying to leave instead of dealing with the issue he caused.
I know there is a giant 'I hate the pigs/cops' but seriously I don't get this refusal to hold anyone responsible for their actions. If I got pulled over and made a run for it because it's just a cop I would expect to get tased if something happened to me because of being tased it would have been my fault for being stupid enough to run.
I don't hate all cops. I realize they're individuals too. I hate those who are pathological with their power and there are a lot of them. I just got stopped by a cop because I was going a little over the speed limit in order to get up an icey hill. He was perfectly polite about it, let me explain why I was going over and gave me a warning. I didn't feel anger or hate toward him at all. But these cops who shoot peoples' dogs unnecessarily or shoot people for minor crimes make me sick.
If you think I, for one refuse to hold anyone responsible, re-read my posts. I have stated several times that I thought he should have some kind of consequence...some kind of charge or fine. It has been well established through out this thread that he was a jerk, rebellious, disrespectful etc. And the way he acted was wrong. There's no argument with that. What the difference is, which we could go round and round with so this is the last I'll repeat my take on it, being a non-violent criminal, a non-dangerous situation did not justify the use of a
dangerous weapon. Getting tased with a potentially deadly weapon is way out of proportion to not following instructions. He could have been followed, tracked down, hand cuffed if back-up had been called....then punished, but punished
humanely without the use of excessive force or brutality. We have laws about police brutality and the use of excessive force on citizens. This was
not an emergency and did not require a stun gun to gain control. We don't live in some primitive society or culture and it shouldn't include shooting people with one or another kind of weapon for misdemeanor type offenses. In fact, I dare say most aboriginal type societies wouldn't do that.
I exactly see that Renee. She doesn't have the power that a big, strong man does. Being in this position of park ranger is not as powerful as being a police officer. She likely feels powerless and to give her that sense of power over this stronger man who dared defy her, she depended on this stun gun. I am afraid to think what might have transpired had she had a pistol. There are people in all kinds of law enforcement who develop a phenomenon called pathological power. I don't know if that's the case here. That may have just been a gut reaction for her...her first thought, out of anger, like you say. Had she used more intelligence and rationality, she would have called for back-up, followed him to his car, noted his license plate and followed up with an
appropriate punishment. Escalating more of a confrontation than there already was, risked peoples' lives. What if he had had a gun? And pulled it after he came to? She should have called for back-up and eased into the situation differently. There was no life threatening or other type of harmful situation to anyone at that point. It was not an emergency.
"In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves." ~Buddha
Such a good quote. I think she was striving for herself...to give herself a feeling of power over this big man who
dared to walk his dog without a leash, who had the "audacity" to give a fake name and who disregarded her instructions. She showed him who had the upper hand.