Philly Fan Taser

Think about it from the rent-a-cop or athletes point of view... They have no idea what the intent is of someone coming into "their" world. Think about the athletes that have been assaulted over the years. They just aren't taking chances anymore and aren't waiting for someone to act before they react. What if this kid had a weapon... Should they wait until he lights up a couple of people before they stop him? I don't blame them at all and he should feel lucky that it was a quick jolt rather than a full on beatdown from a couple of MLBers.

honestly tho, if you run out there you're breaking the law, maybe this will make people think twice before doing this. baseball games are long enough as it is

mixed feels about it.....funny as shit tho. But do have to protect ppl, dont remeber wat game it was but homeboy stabed a player wit a pocket knife couple years ago.

It was some shirtless crack head and his son who rushed a first base coach. Zap fools like that, for sure, they were violent. Zap someone who isn't violent? Nah. Common sense. Zap someone because they might be violent? Lacking the sense. Why not kill them, shoot them, they might kill someone first.

there is a thing called discretion. This was a 17 year old kid and didn't have a weapon. He wasn't running towards any players. There was no need to taser him. Those things shoot out fish hooks that get caught in your skin and electrocute you. In my opinion running on to a baseball field is annoying and stupid but i dont think you should be tasered for it.

Just heard that prior to running out the idiot kid called his father and asked him if he thought he should run on the field as it would be a once in a lifetime experience that he would remember forever... Oh, the irony in that statement! His father told him he thought it was a terrible idea and he should stay in his seat... Listen to your parents, kids!!! After he hung up, his father started calling the kids friends to stop him as he knew he was about to do something incredibly stupid...

It's a 17 year old kid running circles in the outfield waving a towel, they should of shot him, he could of really done some damage.

GDPofDRC wrote:

It was some shirtless crack head and his son who rushed a first base coach. Zap fools like that, for sure, they were violent. Zap someone who isn't violent? Nah. Common sense. Zap someone because they might be violent? Lacking the sense. Why not kill them, shoot them, they might kill someone first.

The Gamboa incident is exactly why they aren't wating around to ask what their intentions are. How does anyone know whether or not this kid has a weapon? Do you wait until he pulls it and takes a couple of people out before you act? This way he's immobilized and can be questioned later... The other way you risk other people being hurt and then having to take someone's life to stop a situation. If you ask any player on that field they will tell you the kid got what he deserved. He had no business being there... And he risked his own safety by going to a place where he didn't belong...

Shoot first ask questions later?

usually they ckeck you for weapons before you come into a game. That said he had a towel in his hand. Not exactly a deadly weapon. If he was getting violent or confrontational i can understand, but stupidity is not a reason to taser someone. An investigation is being done as well as to wether it was really necessary for the cop to taser him.

Bottom line, i guess because i've seen so many cops abuse their privileges with excessive force, i just dont trust any of them. I didn't think the kid deserved to be tasered. He wasn't a threat.

In this case, yes. He was BREAKING THE LAW... The officer had ZERO knowledge of his intention. They have every right to use this force in this situation. They didn't pull the Glock and put two in his back, they took him down with some voltage because he was where he shouldn't be and didn't stop and get down when they told him to. Why do some find it necessary to defend the law breakers for being idiots?

What is a better way to stop him?

If the the cops gang tackle him then not only is the guy in danger but the cops are too. With a taser the cops aren't in danger and the guy won't accidentally lang wrong and break his neck.

If a single cop catches him and then get "outmuscled" or something similar then the guy can grab a weapon from the cop (gun, knife, taser, etc)

If you don't do anything then the guy could hurt a player, himself, and is ruining an event for thousands of people.

Tasering someone is quick and easy with little danger compared to the other situations.

LikesToFightGuy wrote:

In this case, yes. He was BREAKING THE LAW... The officer had ZERO knowledge of his intention. They have every right to use this force in this situation. They didn't pull the Glock and put two in his back, they took him down with some voltage because he was where he shouldn't be and didn't stop and get down when they told him to. Why do some find it necessary to defend the law breakers for being idiots?

Good question

Was he violent? Zaping people because of maybes is irresponsible. Crime doesn't fit the action. Maybe I'm gonna beat up the next person I see, someone better get over here and tease me quick.

GDPofDRC wrote:

Was he violent? Zaping people because of maybes is irresponsible. Crime doesn't fit the action. Maybe I'm gonna beat up the next person I see, someone better get over here and tease me quick.

As an officer, when a fan jumps the fence (An illegal act) and eludes security and then refuses to cooperate when you are telling them to stop and get down, exactly how are you to know what his intentions are? Are you of the opinion that he should be allowed to grab a weapon and go after a fan or player before he gets tased? What if he harms or kills a fan or player while the officer is weighing the options here? Then you're on the cop for that... See with some it's a lose-lose for the officers and how they react. The only way they can win in the court of public opinion is if they leave the law breaker alone and he does nothing violent. If they use force to subdue, then they are wrong. If they do nothing and the kid goes postal on the field, then they are wrong...

let's just say the amount of cases where cops have abused their taser rights is far too many already.

oggy420 wrote:

let's just say the amount of cases where cops have abused their taser rights is far too many already.

Great, so you're basing your argument here on other cases then?

Stop tasing me bro

No. I stand by my opinion that using a taser was completely unnecessary in this situation. I feel that a taser should only be used when someone is acting violently towards others. This kid wasn't violent. He was just being an idiot and trying to get on tv. You don't be deserve to be tasered for that. Look, if they identify that he A) is acting violent B) has a weapon (which in this case he didn't, and you asked "well how are they supposed to know if he has a weapon?" Well how about looking at his hands and seeing if there is a weapon in his hands?) Then it is ok to use the Taser. If not, get your fat ass to chase him down and yes, tackle him or do whatever you have to do. It is still better than electrocuting them. How about adding more security so that they cant come on to the field at all?

But he could of had a nuke!