I posted this earlier at http://www.unfilteredradio.com/

good morning, I'm listening via the web, so I'm about 20 minutes behind. I just heard the Pap attack and it reminded me of a recent event here in Madison, WI. Even though I know the links don't work well, I'll post a link to the whole story.

http://www.channel3000.com/news/4158543/detail.html

My wife and I have been talking about this one a lot. On the one hand, I think that non-lethal law enforcement is great. I just can't get on the "Tasers are evil" band wagon. BUT, I think that the key to their effective use is that guideline "only used in place of a gun". I don't think that guideline is being enforced (read the above story for an example).

The Pap attack story for instance was just a couple frustrated cops that lost their temper. Would they have shot him if they hadn't had tasers?

In the Madison story it pretty much comes down to a split second decision between running after the 15 yr old kid, or dropping him with a taser shot. Would they have shot him if they didn't have tasers?

I'd hate to see the use of non-lethal force rolled back because of irresponsible individuals. But still, this story about the 15 year old kid just makes me sick. I'd have done the same thing he did, and I bet my kid would do the same thing too.

This is getting long, but here's one little quote from the article

"Since 2003, Madison police have tased 84 suspects. Five of them were injured, but the department believes Tasers allowed them to avoid using deadly force in 6 of those cases."

What was the justification in the other 78?