[QUOTE="ownage_denied"][QUOTE="Cloud_Insurance"][QUOTE="DJ-Lafleur"][QUOTE="Cloud_Insurance"]

[QUOTE="majadamus"]Why would you need to taser a naked man? chesterocks7

Because he attacked the police? Besides, if you are on patrol and encounter a naked man who seems "out of mind" you have absolutely no idea what they might do, they could do anything.

If he was naked, and had no sort of weapon at all on him, then what could he do? It's not like he could hide it in clothes, since he had none. He could attack them with his own fists, which in that case a taser isn't necessary, 2 cops should have been able to take care of the naked man without going to extremes.

But he had a weapon. Besides the question I answered was a general question pertaining to tasering a naked man, not this specific one. If a police officer is attacked he has the right to defend himself. Its that simple. The suspect was out of his mind and attacked the officers, so they tasered him. If he didn't fall on his head, he would have been fine, and this wouldn't even be a story. And again, they only tasered him because he attacked them. If the suspect got a hold of one of the officers he could have taken him off the ledge with him.

First of all, considering he was on a ledge 10 feet above the ground, I don't think the officers were fearing for their lives. Second, in the article it says the officers tied themselves to the fire escape so they wouldn't fall when they grabbed him. Third, they could've waited a few extra minutes for the air bag to get there.

While I'm all ready posting, I might as-well go ahead and completely destroy your argument about them having the right to tase him with this quote from the article

" The NYPD quickly admitted after the Sept. 24 incident that the ESU cops violated policy when they used a Taser against someone at risk of falling."

Nice try though.

Ok now put yourself in their situation, I'm sure they were all thinking of what the textbook said on every specific circumstance it's ok to use a taser. You have no idea if they felt threatened, or if they felt they needed to subdue him. Tasers are not lethal, so it's not like they were thinking there was a great possibility that the man would fall and land on his head. You can read the textbooks and sit back in your home and make judgements all you want, but until you are put in a real life situation like that, you are in no position to judge.

If they weren't worrying about the man falling and getting hurt, why did they send for an air bag:| .

Don't you think a cop with 21 years of experience should've had better judgement than this?

[QUOTE="DJ-Lafleur"][QUOTE="Cloud_Insurance"]

[QUOTE="majadamus"]Why would you need to taser a naked man? Cloud_Insurance

Because he attacked the police? Besides, if you are on patrol and encounter a naked man who seems "out of mind" you have absolutely no idea what they might do, they could do anything.

If he was naked, and had no sort of weapon at all on him, then what could he do? It's not like he could hide it in clothes, since he had none. He could attack them with his own fists, which in that case a taser isn't necessary, 2 cops should have been able to take care of the naked man without going to extremes.

But he had a weapon. Besides the question I answered was a general question pertaining to tasering a naked man, not this specific one. If a police officer is attacked he has the right to defend himself. Its that simple. The suspect was out of his mind and attacked the officers, so they tasered him. If he didn't fall on his head, he would have been fine, and this wouldn't even be a story. And again, they only tasered him because he attacked them. If the suspect got a hold of one of the officers he could have taken him off the ledge with him.

First of all, considering he was on a ledge 10 feet above the ground, I don't think the officers were fearing for their lives. Second, in the article it says the officers tied themselves to the fire escape so they wouldn't fall when they grabbed him. Third, they could've waited a few extra minutes for the air bag to get there.

While I'm all ready posting, I might as-well go ahead and completely destroy your argument about them having the right to tase him with this quote from the article

" The NYPD quickly admitted after the Sept. 24 incident that the ESU cops violated policy when they used a Taser against someone at risk of falling."

Nice try though.

[QUOTE="Film-Guy"]What is the point of owning an assault rifle or a rifle of any kind unless you are a hunter? A pistol is fine i guess for self defense, but an Ak-47?Neoyamaneko

But...but...wut if one dem grizzly bears tries to assault you.....seckshally?!

This made me :lol:

Why aren't most white children disciplined? Why do I see so many spoiled little brats running around in the stores screaming at their parents? How do the parents let their kids get away with this? Why have the irresponsible parents turned to shows like Supernanny? White parents really need to get a grip on their children before it's too late. Things like Columbine could have really been prevented if the parents would just stop being afraid to tell their children what to do. In your opinion, isn't it absurd to be so afraid of your child due to lack of discipline that you sit there and let them make pipe bombs in your living room and train to kill people in your back yard. Don't you think the parents should set better examples for their children instead of being caught on shows like To Catch A Predator? What can we do to inform these parents and help them raise their children better?

[QUOTE="dracula_16"]

I don't think eating animals is right ... As long as they don't think I'm immoral just because I like meat

clicketyclick

You don't think eating animals is right, therefore, you think eating animals is immoral... and you don't want them to think that what you're doing is immoral despite you acknowledging that it is?

[QUOTE="Cpt_Meh"]As long as I don't get a 20 minute lecture while I'm trying to enjoy some bacon, I don't really care. One of my best friends is a vegetarian (well, actually she still eats fish/seafood, but no other meat) dracula_16

Then she isn't a vegetarian. It's like claiming to be a buddhist but worshipping allah.

Fish isn't meat. She is a pesco/lacto/ovo vegetarian. There are different varieties. It's like claiming to be Christian and worshipping at different denominational churches. ;)

Why isn't fish meat :|

[QUOTE="ownage_denied"]

[QUOTE="7guns"]Live a second life in my dreams, I mean when I'm sleeping.7guns

Why not? It's possible to control your dreams. I control mine all the time.

What I meant is that I want a separate existance in the place I like.

Maybe being in a coma would work :lol:.

Live a second life in my dreams, I mean when I'm sleeping.7guns

Why not? It's possible to control your dreams. I control mine all the time.

Eating my own heart.Oborozukiyo

You could get a heart transplant and then eat your old heart:P

lol no

first of all the arcade and elite difference is 150 not 200 for a 120 gb upgrade, black matte finish, wireless instead of wired controller. i don't think the upgrade is 150 bucks better but neither is the 80gb and 120 gb ps3 upgrade worth $100 more. at least you are given 3 options whereas you have to have to pay for blu ray with any ps3 sku

and please, how many people have 7.1 surround sound systems in their homes worldwide? the adoption rate worldwide for hdtv's is still extremely low. i'd be suprised if more than 1% of households w/ tv's have a $300 7.1 surround sound system with most of the world living below the poverty line for an industrial nation.

I thought the elite was $399.99 and the arcade was $199.99 :?.

I was being a smartass with the sound system thing, but what's the problem with using uncompressed audio for those who do have 7.1 surround sound systems? A lot of fanboys act like it's a bad thing.

The adoption rate for hdtv's is still low, but I don't ever hear anyone complaining about a system that comes with a hdmi cable. Why complain about filling up a bluray disk with uncompressed audio.

[QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="ownage_denied"][QUOTE="loganh92"]

Why do people act like uncompressed audio is a bad thing?

The better it sounds, the better experience you'll have IMO.

ownage_denied

Exactly. Fanboys keep crying bu bu bu teh bluray not needed!!

Who cares if it's needed or not. It's better.

$200 extra better? no way. the arcade plays all 360 games without installs for half the price of the lowest end ps3. casuals don't need wifi, blu ray, hard disks (just look at the wii). also 99% of poeple don't have the sound system to take advantage of uncompressed 7.1 surround sound and many can't tell the difference. asking them to pay $200 more is robbery.

I wasn't making a ps3 > 360 argument. I was making an uncompressed audio > compressed audio argument.

I also didn't make an argument about what casuals needed, but I hope you're not suggesting that only hardcore gamers want wifi, bluray, or hard disks.

Using your $200.00 better argument, is the elite $200.00 better than the arcade?

Please give me the link to your 99% sound system argument.

I guess I left you speechless?