Tasers, also known as "Chattel Prodders." Should Police Have Them? Are You For or Against?

Chattel can mean slave or property.If you really think about it and if you have studied the sovereign citizen movement you will see that a "citizen" is a legal definition of sorts. A citizen is basically a slave to the gov't. They can take your house, your kids, put you in jail, etc. regardless of innocence (if they really wanted to), and you're responsible for paying off the national debt, etc. very deep confusing subject. I have read that the US GOV'T (allcaps) takes out a loan from the FED using the projected labor of its citizenry or "chattel" as collateral. if you are a citizen you will pay taxes. If i took out a loan from you and said I'd pay you back because I have 10 people who are going to work and pay taxes to me for most of their lives, you would probably feel comfortable about giving me a loan. I'm sure the GOV"T INC. has other assets as collateral, but its citizenry or chattel is one of them.

It was used here in a paragraph I found, maybe it will help the meaning become clear and seen as relevant to our times.

" When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary
for one people to dissolve the political bands which have
connected them with another................" These are
the words that started a Revolution propelling several
English colonies into the nation known as "The United
States of America." This new nation was designed to
function under the law of Nature and Nature's God. The
people believed they would never again hear the words of
enslavement, ie; "under the sovereignty of the King."
Living under the sovereignty of the King made you the
King's CHATTEL. He owned you. You were his property.
You could own nothing, not even your children. The King
ruled by divine right. The framers of this new nation
claimed it was designed to be a government "of the
people, by the people, for the people. "Representatives
of this government were to be elected by the people,
not born to power. And so, in 1776 the great experiment
in freedom, known as "The United states of America" began.

All hail King Bush and the Fed which is tied to the bank of england started in the 1500's

We're talking about a cattle prodder right? I see a pharase I hadn't seen before and I check it out, can't find anything about a chattel prodder anywhere. Just making sure I'm not missing anything, or maybe it is just some new "cool kid" lingo...LOL

Have a great day all!

And oh yeah, I'm against them unless I'm pulling the trigger. :) The only reason I say that is because the powers that be have proven that they can't use them properly. If it was a choice of a gun or a taser you have to go with the taser, but you don't use a gun to "subdue" someone who is speaking out and "disturbing peace", and you shouldn't use a taser in that scenario either. JMHO

The taser itself isn't the problem, it's the unlawful use of the weapon by police that is wrong. If the taser was being used in an honest manner, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. I like what the poster said about legislation that punishes officers with jail time if they're found to have used the taser criminally. Although, our court system should already be doing this. We have legislation for criminal actions by police, but in some cases, the courts are looking over incidents, and siding blindly with police. I believe weather it's a night stick, taser, or firearm; if a police officer unjustifiably uses any instrument against another, then that officer should have charges pressed on him, and due process should take it's course. Those things aside; 1.) I remember before the taser was popular with police, they only had firearms, and it made things more "black & white". If it came to deadly force, the officer had to stake everything on weather it was justified to shoot or not. Therefore, creating a very cautious mentality where, if the officer didn't see justification, then he knew he may be facing murder or assault charges if he shot a suspect. The attitude now seems like... "Hell, I might as well just tase first and ask questions later, I mean, it isn’t gonna kill him, right?" 2.) Even though it's not the machine or instrument being used, it's the person using it, that decides right & wrong. I'm of the mind that, if the people of this country want to strip the police of their tasers, then so be it. Ultimately, the police exist on our authority as citizens. If we feel more comfortable without tasers, then the people's concerns trump the state's.

They WILL be used at traffic stops, at riots, to restrain 70 year old preachers just as they have been up to now.

I am sure the government can think up 101 new pieces of technology to 'restrain' us safely, yet hideous and demeaningly. Don't care.

Why not make us wear that collar or bracelet they want to be issued at airports, which zap us 'just in case'? Why not give us all a barcode so they 'can eliminate innocent people more quickly' from their 62000 investigations?

Why not let the government wiretap us, most FBI guys are good people for sure, and they really wouldn't do anything unfair or intrusive I believe.

I would personally prefer that a few psychos on PCP got shot than people everywhere getting tasered for all sorts of trivial non-offenses. And it's the principle anyway - the gummint has NO RIGHT to do that to someone's body. Period. That's not in their purview ever imo. It's torture.

I can't believe so many 'libertarians' here are defending this.

In a truly free society the police "protect and serve". In a tyrannical police state the police "enforce laws". Police used to just protect and serve with firearms and us citizens protected ourselves with firearms. Then the police were given clubs. Then the government required us citizens to obtain a permit to obtain guns in most areas of the country. Now the police have tasers. Why would a police officer need a club and or taser to protect themselves from a dangerous criminal when they already have a firearm on there hip and shotguns in there police cruisers? So the police need a gun, club, and taser to "protect and serve"? No they need all those weapons now to enforce the law. It is obvious to me we live in a police state and tasing people is just the beginning of true tyranny. The police should be allowed to carry firearms to protect themselves. Police should also be held accountable when abuse of power with all the weapons they now carry result in death. Of course in a police state the rules are different for those enforcing the laws. I encourage all citizens to carry firearms, clubs, and tasers to protect themselves from criminals and now the police. On another note there are materials that we can wear that would make tasers less effective. I say we shall outsmart the police er I mean the criminals.

Web Developer
www.writetoredress.com
Take Back Your Country!

...I was watching the show Cops one time and there was a police officer involved in a car chase of a stolen car. The people in the stolen car literally started shooting at the police cruiser behind them out the windows of their car. As the chase goes down an alley behind some industrial buildings, the stolen car slams on its brakes, and the police cruiser rear-ends the other car, with both coming to a stop several feet from each other. The occupants of the stolen car throw the doors open and jump out, and begin to run down the alley. Without missing a beat the police officer jumps out of his car and starts chasing the people down the alley.

I always imagine how much courage it must take to jump out of your car right next to the people who have just been shooting at you, then chase 2-3 people into an alley by yourself. The point is I'm glad there is someone out there doing things like this, and let's not forget they are sometimes putting their lives on the line in uncertain and stressful situations.

That said, yes there are some that abuse their power. Sometimes, horribly, this abuse is based on racism or uncontrolled aggression. And the 4th Amendment violations justified by the War on Drugs are abhorrent.

But I think the rampant hatred toward the police on this forum is misplaced, and think we would all be better served by trying to put ourselves in their shoes when considering these questions...

Tasers should only be used as a option when deadly force would be reasonable

The problem is police have already shown that they can not be trusted with tasers. When tasers were first being introduced (older people will remember this) the police informed us that they would only be used when deadly force was the only other option. Since then they have lowered the requirement for use of a taser to include loud college students and on random traffic stops when the officer is having a bad day.

Because of past promises from the police I do not think they can be trusted to use tasers responsibly and as such should not carry them.

I might eliminate all "war" on non-violent "crime", 90% of police, put remaining police under citizen oversite, and encourage (not require) every single adult to bear arms. I am guessing that within short order, the idiots and "bad guys" would take care of themselves, and the rest of us would be much safer and much more polite.

should always be used. The same rules should apply to their gun, nightstick, taser, etc.. I think the easiest and quickest way to deal with this issue is have the Cops to be required to cite the law that justifies their action and prove the state constitution, the American Constitution and the bill of rights don't contradict that law in the first place. This would allow the Cops to use anything (brass knuckles, numb chucks, etc. ) they feel they need to use to do their job but hold them under the same rules as the rest of us. I also feel the same holds true for the citizen protecting their rights. I think a cop that breaks my door down in the middle of the night gets equal treatment to the crook. You can't have it both ways, you either make it legal to use force under law or illegal but it applies to both sides. The cops want to tase me than I should be able to tase them. The law states only a judge and a jury can decide right or wrong! The cop or the citizen by the rule of law is incapable of deciding guilt or innocence, only the judge and jury can decide that. You should use whatever you can to protect the rights of people on either side of this argument but in the end it must be fair and under the rule of law.

After thought, you must be accountable for your actions so whoever didn't follow the law must pay regardless of their intentions or beliefs or job.

should be illegal. As an electrician for 19 years I can say that being shocked is very serious. When someone is being electrocuted it is "instinctual" for them to try to get off or away from that which is shocking them. It is the flight or fight response that kicks in. It is a startling and overwhelming feeling I know. So when I see these people being electrocuted I understand why they seem to continue to be unwilling to comply to the officers request. It is, I believe, at least most of the time, there flight response.
Now I can also testify to the potential damage to the body that can result from being electrocuted. Throughout might career as an electrician I have been shocked multiple times. Most were just quick little zaps, but I have been shocked quite seriously a couple of times and I can tell you now that my body has suffered because of it.
So coupled with the fact that officers can't recognize the flight response as instinctual and the fact they could be inflicting irreversible damage to some one by repeatably shocking them over and over I can say that without a doubt that tasers should be outlawed. They simply cannot be trusted with such a device. Nonlethal my but!!!

More and more police departments are reviewing any use of a taser...most of them have a data recorder that records time of use.

This was supposed to be a non lethal alternative to a firearm, and should only be used as such. They should never be used to combat anything other than would be a threat to the life of the officer.

The police must certainly never use these devices against someone demonstrating non-violent resistance. This is needless torture against one of the fundamental human rights we have.

Even in cases of physical threats against the police, they should resort to a taser only in cases that they would resort to a firearm...when they feel their life is in danger.

I've been shocked by the taser news stories and the dozens of abusive videos that I've seen over the past year or so. The inappropriate use by the police appears to be growing, perhaps because of the sinister Homeland Security money flowing to local PDs. I'm sorry to say that I no longer trust the police at all. I will not call them. I avoid confrontations and interactions with them. I don't feel like they even remember the protect and serve mandate.

I called a # in a news story thinking it would be the ozark police department to ask them a few questions and express my disapproval, it turned out to be the father of the boy who got tased. I talked to him for a bit.

He said that people have been calling the ozark police dept. and because of the pressure of the people calling, they are moving forward with an internal investigation and looking into reprindmanding measures.

If you get a chance and want to, google: ozark police department. It's in missouri. I think the captains name is Russeart, Tim(?)

The father was very upset that his boy was tased 19 times in such a state. Nothing would have happened to these grossly incompetent officers had people like you and I not called them and complained.

It goes to show that when we stand together on an issue, we have the power to illicit real change. Something a president can never do all by himself. We the people are the power of this country, our present neo-con "leadership" is counting on us not finding that out.

I'd rather be tased than shot. Of course I'd prefer neither, but tasers actually are useful tools, when used properly. If you've got a psycho on PCP coming at you, and you can tase rather than shoot him, that's a good thing. The problem is when they are abused. That's what needs to change. There should be severe punishments for assaulting peaceful people with tasers, even if it's a cop doing it -- especially if it's a cop.

----------
Liberty for Dummies