[William May]

Originally Posted by WonderMomma ↗

We're both speculating. The only difference is I'm doing it after the fact instead of confidently predicting outcomes that hadn't occurred. 🔮

I'm not saying a taser definitely would've worked, which is why I used the word "maybe". I'm just not convinced it was hopeless before they even tried it.

1:23-1:34 - 11 seconds the suspect spends getting the ax.
1:34-1:40 - 6 seconds that the suspect has the ax, in hand, at his side before closing the door.
1:51-2:04 - 13 seconds between the time the suspect opens the garage to the time he starts to raise the ax.

There was plenty of time to make the attempt. The second he went for the ax would've been the moment to find out.

If it works, great. Saved themselves some paperwork. If it doesn't, then they're right back where they ended up anyway. 😅

My only point in my comments is that we need STUN GUNS that will STUN INSTANTLY. The current ones they use, which I compare to "Bean Guns" NEVER seem to work. It appears in one out of 10 cases, that the guy actually stiffens up and falls down. The others it is like they never even got hit. I want WHOEVER they stun, to INSTANLY collapse and fall to the ground. Even if they shit their pants, that's OK. If they could couple it with overwhelming pain and cramps, that would last for 3-4 hours, THAT would be excellent, too!

[William May]

Originally Posted by Mecrupulent ↗

Your proofless accusations about wildlife veterinarians are not only scandalous, they are also very dumb.

You really think someone who has a means of putting ANY MAMMAL to sleep immediately, preventing them from remembering and leaving them powerless against sexual abuse, would waste that on LIONS when there is perfectly good antelope ass all around ?

You clearly know nothing about the rules of the jungle, yo.

I never said anything bad about animal veterinarians! I am sure that MOST of these "Compassionate Animal Doctors" probably never even completed a high school biology class successfully, and the way they snicker is pretty good evidence to me of what's coming after the OFFICIAL cameras stop rolling. That's when they roll their own video of teaching the "King of the Jungle" what it is like to be a Queen!

[Caf002]

I call it FAFO!

[lion]

What a dumpass got lit up

[Eat Shit And Die]

Originally Posted by docfr8 ↗

He got "Stockton" Slapped

[WayneMan]

Originally Posted by WonderMomma ↗

We're both speculating. The only difference is I'm doing it after the fact instead of confidently predicting outcomes that hadn't occurred. 🔮

I'm not saying a taser definitely would've worked, which is why I used the word "maybe". I'm just not convinced it was hopeless before they even tried it.

1:23-1:34 - 11 seconds the suspect spends getting the ax.
1:34-1:40 - 6 seconds that the suspect has the ax, in hand, at his side before closing the door.
1:51-2:04 - 13 seconds between the time the suspect opens the garage to the time he starts to raise the ax.

There was plenty of time to make the attempt. The second he went for the ax would've been the moment to find out.

If it works, great. Saved themselves some paperwork. If it doesn't, then they're right back where they ended up anyway. 😅

Yes, Mama - we ARE all speculating. And if stun guns were a little more than the “joy buzzer” toys I had when a child, I’d have more confidence in them. But the success rate in disabling out of control armed, loony tunes, is a bit sketchy (or so it seems.) That said, an officer has about one second to make a decision that may save or cost him his life.
I know you know this. It’s a decision I bet neither of us would want to make. Sure, the cop could have waited a bit longer and tried the stun. And if they worked better, I’d be more in your corner on this one. But until they do, it’s Cher’s “bang bang” for me..

[tbone79]

Settle down, Paco…..:2gunsfir ing_v1:

[WonderMomma]

Originally Posted by WayneMan ↗

Yes, Mama - we ARE all speculating. And if stun guns were a little more than the “joy buzzer” toys I had when a child, I’d have more confidence in them. But the success rate in disabling out of control armed, loony tunes, is a bit sketchy (or so it seems.) That said, an officer has about one second to make a decision that may save or cost him his life.
I know you know this. It’s a decision I bet neither of us would want to make. Sure, the cop could have waited a bit longer and tried the stun. And if they worked better, I’d be more in your corner on this one. But until they do, it’s Cher’s “bang bang” for me..

Fair enough.

I don't have nearly as much confidence in tasers as I do firearms either. That said, I think calling them glorified joy buzzers undersells them a bit. They can absolutely incapacitate people under the right circumstances. We've even seen them kill people.

Where we differ is that I absolutely do not see this as a one second decision. Not until 2:03 when he raised the ax. Prior to that, there was roughly 30 seconds where they could have at least attempted the taser.

If the taser fails, then they're faced with that one second decision the moment he raises the ax, and at that point I think the shooting was justified.

Not to say it isn't justified now. I just think they should have tried the taser first, that's all. 😅

But ultimately, I agree. It's easy to ACQB these things unless you're the one standing there making the decision.

[Mecrupulent]

Originally Posted by WonderMomma ↗

Where we differ is that I absolutely do not see this as a one second decision. Not until 2:03 when he raised the ax. Prior to that, there was roughly 30 seconds where they could have at least attempted the taser.

Thing is, tasing him before he was really posing a threat would be considered overkill too

Just playing the devil's advocate here, I would lean more towards less lethal force too... But I'm not there on the field.

I think it's a really complicated matter (which doesn't add anything to the debate).

[111Nos]

Never bring an axe to a gun fight.