Can I sell You A Fire Extinguisher To Go With That Taser ?

[Skeptical Greg]

Tasered Homeless Man Catches on Fire

The department's policy warns against using Tasers when flammable chemicals may be present. Bailey says officers acted appropriately.

So, the policy warns - but doing it anyway is appropriate ....


" Hmmmm.. Think that stuff is flammable ? "

" Yeah ! Let's do it ! ! "

[Bikewer]

We had only been issued our Tasers for a few months when the department confiscated all of our pepper-spray containers and issued new, "Taser compliant" stuff.
Seems the carrier could, under some conditions, burst into flames if a Taser was fired.

Subsequently, one of the police-oriented magazines did a test of a number of these "compliant" sprays and found that about half of them were still flammable when first sprayed....

[Ladewig]

Tasered Homeless Man Catches on Fire


So, the policy warns - but doing it anyway is appropriate ....


" Hmmmm.. Think that stuff is flammable ? "

" Yeah ! Let's do it ! ! "

There are over a dozen reason why I should not be a law enforcement officer (LEO). My overwhelming curiosity to witness such a flammable event is one of them. That would be so cool.

[johnny karate]

The link isn't working for me. Is there anything in the story that indicates the police officers were aware flammable chemicals were present?

[Ysidro]

My girlfriend lived and worked in that town for awhile. She says the cops just got their tazers the week before. I wonder if they were a bit anxious to play with their new toys?

That snark out of the way, I did point out to her that tazing is usually safer than trying to wrestle a perp to the ground.

Still, the town is... nuts. No seriously. They're nuts. They go gaga over mispronouncing the town's name (and no one says it the way they do but them) and have a major homeless and drug problem for such an idyllic looking little place.

Blah, I'm glad she's out of there.

[Skeptical Greg]

The link isn't working for me. Is there anything in the story that indicates the police officers were aware flammable chemicals were present?
Looks like I may not have created the link ..

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/19/national/main5251739.shtml


To answer your question:

.....one officer had seen the man inhaling a chemical from an aerosol can Monday night.

[johnny karate]

Thanks for the link and the quote.

After reading the story, and considering the limited information we have, I don't have problem with what the police did. In another thread on the same topic, I had this to say:
You know what would go a long way in garnering my sympathy for a person being tased and my concern about those doing the tasing? Hearing at least one of these stories where it ends up the "victim" was sober and/or not acting like an idiot.

Police officers perfom a difficult, dangerous job, and until all the facts have been brought to light, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

This wasn't a situation where taser-happy cops decided to torture a homeless person doused in kerosene to alleviate their boredom. They were in a struggle with a potentially dangerous individual who was under the influence of chemical stimulants and they made a judgment call. As an unintended result, "a flame appeared on the man's chest, and officers patted it down". Fortunately, he was not seriously injured.

Unless more information comes to light that contradicts this account, I say these police officers performed their duty under difficult circumstances by apprehending someone who might have possibly harmed himself or others.

[Skeptical Greg]

Really ?

[cynical-skeptica-sorta-libertarian voice]
Are our police officers really making the most of public funds ,by taking the time and trouble to immolate and apprehend an aerosol junkie ?[/done]

[johnny karate]

Really ?

[cynical-skeptica-sorta-libertarian voice]
Are our police officers really making the most of public funds ,by taking the time and trouble to immolate and apprehend an aerosol junkie ?[/done]

Without being familar with the exact ordinance, I feel pretty safe in assuming that huffing chemical stimulants in public is against the law. So to answer your question, yes, I think police apprehending persons violating the law is a perfectly valid use of public funds.

And that's assuming that was all this guy was up to. The details are sketchy, but in such a situation I am more willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a police officer as opposed to the crazy-eyed, chemical-huffing homeless guy.

[FlamingMoe]

We had only been issued our Tasers for a few months when the department confiscated all of our pepper-spray containers and issued new, "Taser compliant" stuff.
Seems the carrier could, under some conditions, burst into flames if a Taser was fired.
I wonder what the new carrier liquid was. Being isopropyl alcohol, the standard carrier is hella flammable.

(We just started OC training today :D )

[Ladewig]

There are over a dozen reason why I should not be a law enforcement officer (LEO). My overwhelming curiosity to witness such a flammable event is one of them. That would be so cool.

Clarification: I do not want to a see a suspect burst into flames. I'd like to see an inanimate object burst into flames.

[Vox Humana]

Clarification: I do not want to a see a suspect burst into flames. I'd like to see an inanimate object burst into flames.


So you're a big proponent of deadly force, then. Thanks for clarifying, but I suspect it's not helping your cause. :D

[WildCat]

crazy-eyed, chemical-huffing homeless guy.
Who wants him as their avatar?

http://home.mindspring.com/~a.lo/crazy_eyes.jpg

[Matthew Best]

Still, at least they didn't shoot him. (http://fkaady.blogspot.com/2005/10/witnesses-say-police-not-justified-in.html)