no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics

Don’t Tase Me Bro! (Philadelphia Edition)

May 4th, 2010

My friend Peter posted a link on Facebook today out of Philadelphia. Last night at the Phillies game, a kid ran out on to the field between innings. The local law enforcement on the scene apprehended him using a taser.

A police officer used a Taser gun to apprehend a fan who ran onto the field during a Phillies game Monday night, and the team and the police are investigating whether it was an appropriate use of force. (photo credits: Matt Slocum, AP)

cop tasers kid at Phillies gameWhat the hell is there to “investigate”? Lazy cop uses a ‘substitute for lethal force’ to apprehend a prankster. He ought to lose his job, his pension, and be tarred and feathered in some public square.

Tasers used to be marketed as a non-lethal alternative to using lethal force in order to subdue a criminal suspect. Besides the obvious evidence (a trail of dead bodies, actually) which suggests tasers can be quite lethal under certain circumstances,

This story, Peter says, “Shows that when police are given the choice, a taser seems to be the first option because they don’t want to run. ‘Subdue’ implies the suspect is being violent, etc. One can hardly expect a 17-year old to not run, especially since he was ‘running’ on to the baseball field between innings…”

the aftermath...Precisely! That’s why I have a problem with tasers. They encourage sloppiness, viz., no cop anywhere would’ve drawn a firearm on the kid — much less fired a fucking bullet at him from behind. So, if lethal force was not an acceptable reaction to this scenario, then the prescribed ‘alternative’ to lethal force ought to be out of the question.

With the evidence of its lethality, and the fact that the taser seems to be the go-to weapon of choice for law enforcement officers (this incident and others like it are pretty clear and convincing evidence that tasers aren’t being used as substitute for lethal force), taser introduces a level of moral hazard that otherwise wouldn’t exist.

Fortunately, this kid lived. Others haven’t been so lucky.



  • Tony says on: May 4, 2010 at 1:19 pm


    I’m disgusted at the reaction of my fellow Phillies fans. I have yet to find one blog entry or tweet that isn’t something like “HAHAHAHA LULZ!!!!”

    • David Z says on: May 4, 2010 at 1:35 pm


      I recall similar comments to an article I blagged a few years back.. “LOL got what was coming stupid asshole” etc. If memory serves me right, I think the dude actually died as a result of being tasered over a f*cking crackpipe. And people were rejoicing.


  • Bill St. Clair says on: May 4, 2010 at 1:53 pm


    Yep. Criminal battery charges are in order for that cop. If convicted, that’s a felony, probably 3-5 years in jail, and no more guns or cop jobs for that loser. Not that I agree with felons being banned from gun ownership. Anybody who can’t be trusted with a gun can’t be trusted without a full-time supervisor. But he’s the one who swore to follow the law, so he should be subject to it.

    • David Z says on: May 4, 2010 at 2:36 pm


      well hopefully he’ll reap what he sowed… let’s just say that I’m not holding out hope, he will probably plea down to something like ‘impeding traffic’, do a few hours of community service, and *maybe* lose his gig…

      • Dan Z says on: May 5, 2010 at 9:25 am


        No chance this officer faces any discipline. There has already been a review of his actions and he acted “within departmental policy”. Apparently in many departments it is poilcy that if a suspect disobeys a command it is appropriate to use a taser. So him not stopping means they can use a less lethal, not non lethal device on him. Id personally rather get beat with a stick.

  • Dan Z says on: May 4, 2010 at 1:56 pm


    Tasers are meant to be used as a last resort before a firearm. That was the original intention and reason for deployment but now departments think that use should expand to subduing a fleeing suspect, using against a non cooperative suspect etc. The vast majority of the usage of the taser is unnecessary and usually stems from an officers inability to deescalate a situation as they are usually escalating it instead. I was reading an article today on ESPN and the majority of comments made me sick, all long the lines of he deserved it, its funny, officer did a great job, what if he stabbed someone etc. Oh and in the same article the Philadelphia PD already confirmed the officer acted within departmental policy. I would ask the other question of why a public employee is being used at a private stadium on tax payer dollars when the stadiums employ their own security staff as well who 99 times out of a 100 manage to stop these people without tasers.

    • Don says on: May 5, 2010 at 8:31 pm


      @Dan Z: Tasers are meant….

      Full system halt.


      A taser, like any other inanimate object, has no meaning nor intent.
      Intent is a human action.

      That human, would have acted similarly with any other inanimate object in his possession, whether a stick or a gun or anything in between.

      He is a genetically flawed specimen and needs to be DX’d immediately.
      Formal or casual direct exchange is warranted, obviously, and necessary.
      This human will flaw again if not addressed now.

  • Joe R. says on: May 4, 2010 at 2:09 pm


    Yeah, the conservatives seem to love it. Disgusting.

  • Dan Z says on: May 6, 2010 at 4:23 pm


    I think you misunderstand what I meant with that phrasing and perhaps I didnt phrase it right. What was meant to be said is the intention that a Taser was created for was as a last resort for a firearm. Im aware that the problem lay in the operators usage of the weapon, i was simply stating its original cause for invention.

  • Don says on: May 7, 2010 at 12:25 pm


    I think you misunderstood what you think I misunderstood.
    It’s easy to judge what is better than, when you are not on the receiving end.
    You see, the baseline has been moved.
    Before the taser, jackboots only shot people when they had no choice.
    Now, they quickly pull the other gun because some invisible hand says its less harmful than a real gun. Nevermind that it harmful in the first place, lets play word games say its *less* harmful. So with the next advance in technology they’ll move the baseline again. You can’t win if you play by their arbitrary rules. They make the rules fit their agenda and their agenda is control.

  • hatmandew says on: May 11, 2010 at 5:42 pm


    Also, I completely disagree with your friends article. I think that punk should have been tasered. He was “resisting arrest”. People have been shot for that! Might I add. In addition, the kid was interviewed and knew he shouldn’t have done that.

    All I know is I bet the next douche bag that decides to run on the field will think twice now before doing it!

    Good for the Phillie PD.

    • David Z says on: May 11, 2010 at 8:26 pm


      1. it’s not “my friends article”, it’s my article. As in mine, I wrote it, and that’s why it’s here, on my website.

      2. Do you think it’s OK to shoot people for a childish prank? Just because the kid admits he shouldn’t have done it doesn’t give you a free pass to beat the fuck out of him with a baton, shoot him with a bullet, or electrocute him, man! You sound like an absolutely charming individual.

    • Don says on: May 12, 2010 at 10:08 pm


      @hatmandew, the next thing you know it’ll be standard operating procedure to shoot posters that write *douche bag*.

      The US public education system is working mahvalously….

no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics