Man 61 Riding Bicycle Shot With Stun Gun Dies

I think it's more probable that cop overreacted and used unnecessary force.

I mean, I seriously doubt that the cop was worried that this man on a bike was gonna outrun his police cruiser and get away. The man on the bike might have assumed that the patrol car following him had its siren and lights on because of some more serious infraction of the law than an old guy riding a bike. The article did state that the man had trouble hearing. Is it possible that the man on the bike heard someone yelling and a siren blaring and got scared that he was in the middle of a law enforcement action that didn't involve him...that maybe he was trying to get himself out of the way of a potentially dangerous situation?

There are all sorts of possibilities - and a cop who will use potentially deadly force to stop someone who is not an obvious threat needs to find another line of work.

.

Repeat after me: Tasers and mace are for self defense only. These tools are dangerous, they can cause harm, and should not be used unless necessary.

JERRY

i always get a kick out of the WHAT IF THEY SCREENED better.

Heres a better one, what if you and the other what ifs - got away from your computers and went down and got in a squad car or went down and spent half a shift in a jail.

Not so you could change your mind -- but so you can see, that NO ACTION doesn't always work best.

And even you would have to make a decision on what to do, and then know that it would be reported and you would have to read these comments knowing those people weren't there and that the laws that exist are not used in there reasoning.

Lets do it this way jerry, lets make sure you have to get stuck on the streets with a whistle and can only go to domestic calls, during your whole shift ok.

Then were see how much your notice the fact that mace, guns, taser and such allows you to have a chance to make it home to your family at EACH night.

My point is that yes some officers love to use there tools in correctly - but because they deal with more then one call a day, they have to be ready to react when others run.

And feel free to see what happens with the autopsy, the taser will have helped enhance any medical issue but i doubt it will be the direct cause of death-- but TIME WILL TELL, o m g i could be wrong too.

JERRY

stop protecting dumb people. Jerry read it very careful, it said he died after being tazer, NOT BECAUSE HE WAS TASERED.

Plus what law does this guy got to follow, lets see, lights and sirens , he doesn't have to pay attention, riding a bike intoxicated - he doesn't have to pay attention. lets see the officer yelled at him-- he doesn't have to pay attention.

Any body can be dangerous, i mean Jerry you act like hand holding and doves and handing out flower roses is how people are supposed to be treated.

And how do you know a push would have sufficed, then what would you say if he did push the guy and the headline read " cop pushes drunk off bike and dies".

ugh personal responsibility should have started with THE MANS SISTER caring enough to not let him leave.

The article never said he was drunk, only that he was suspected of being drunk.

The article did say that he was disabled and suffered from seizures which could explain the seemingly drunk behavior.

In any case if alcohol use was suspected, then the use of a taser should have been avoided at all costs as there is evidence to support that tasering someone who has alcohol in their system could have lethal consequences.

JERRY

do you have any idea why tazers are used, they are used so you dont have to make contact with someone. Jerry you keep acting like people just comply and just listen and do the right things

THEY DONT JERRY, even this guy, didnt, he didnt respond to the lights, he didnt respond to verbal commands and he didnt respond to the word stop.

Also why in the world does the officer have to get into a physical fight with someone who is on a bike and use it as a weapon, do you not remember how you felt the first time you feel off your bike as a kid(if you ever were one).

why does the officer have to potentially get injured trying to get someone off a bike just because someone cant figure out how to be coherent.

give me a break, fail to obey is against the law, its still against the law to attempt to flee, the officer was there on legal business-- HE DIDNT pick him out of a crowd or just decided this guy was the man to take out.

and JERRY this is not in slow motion it is in real time with real people doing real things, like this guy wanting to leave.

and get it through your dam head, jerry stop USING my stance for thinking i justify actions of officers, I DO not believe that every time you post an article it is the absolute truth, and when the facts that DO PROVIDE a clear picture of guilt then i will comment as such.

But when you spend the same amount being observant of the law, things become so clear that you NEVER EVER stop to think WHAT PART of how our laws work does this person have a sense of responsibility.

i have a funny feeling you not so dam old that you dont know what a police car looks like, that you dont know what a cop looks like and that your not so old that you hearing is so bad that you dont know when someone is yelling at you-- really it appears everyone one else has those issues huh,silliness its sillliness.

And common sense says that -- people dont act the way jerry thinks just cause he posts an article about the cops actions not the persons actions.

jerry

A person doing ski patrol knows what the safe and un safe conditions are and people still are stupid enough to ignore warnings, postings, and the news. And depending on where there are ski patrols needed they go through extensive training because they like police work have extremes.

Jerry any time you want to go to the toughest part of your town and pick a fight with someone or let a 1.00 hang out your pocket go ahead. Then try to figure out how often you want to do that a week.

The point is that the extremes of the job depending on where some officers work occur daily. The potential for confrontation can happen for the smallest of reasons, and this can occur more then once on a shift. You seem to try to interject that there is some level of normal response of people in the general public that exist, WELL THERE ISNT JERRY.

The gray matter doesn't work on anything but the impulses it gets and then turns it in to action. And some peoples actions dont follow a norm just because they are rich or poor black or white, the variables are numerous, just like the crimes committed by those you think should have no reason but still do.

if your tired i am more tired, and i like some reasonable folks wonder why those who make chioces expect a pass from it. when those who actually know to stop or comply or be patient seem to get through life just fine when contact with police occurs.

And jerry what is afraid, is it really or is it the need to survive confrontaion, no different then how you feel when you slip or step wrong, you FEEL the moment where you really am glad you didnt fall and break your hip or twist your ankle because you know thats a hard road back to full strength or health.

but theres that moment and thats a moment that occurs at times in some officers daily interactions. In this situation, being afraid may not have played a big role but attempting to leave for reasons unknown doesnt give the man the right to disregard the officer who is there legally.

construction workers may die more then officers but in some of those cases those men had no ablity to protect themselves, from the fall or slip or the hit. And thats too bad, because the goal for those men and women who do the dangerous aspects of construction is always to get home, no different then a cop.

In the end jerry there are enough cops that will cross the line in there moments of selfishness or greed or weakness and that really is too bad and the facts are clear in most of those cases, but in cases where facts are noted to have occurred like this one, sometimes the decision to take action wont please everyone but that doesnt mean it was anything but what it was , which was a situation to have a person control himself enough to have the officer figure out what was going on. And part of that has to be looking a self control, which the man decided didnt apply to him, thus i am tired of your TYPE always believing that a person doesn't have choices to minimize the issues that make cops react to those choices.

JERRY

i repeat that people have rights and laws they have enacted to be treated fairly across the board.

give me a break about the minimize, its not that hard to figure out, the man was reported by a by stander and because he was the officer had a duty to investigate, the officer made multiple reasonable attempts but since he has the right attitude you can appreciate which is to IGNORE the officer, the officer made a decision to get him to comply after those attempts failed.

The result of the officers actions did not favor the man and other factors besides being tazered may have lead to his death.

The quarter backing you insist on doing is fine if it didnt always assume the officer had some HIDDEN agenda. That the man could have acknowledged the officer, which NO WITNESS OR THE REPORT said he did. He could have got off his bike, he could have stayed at his sisters to sober up, but he decided against all of them.

The health of this man as someone the family knew had issues will come into play. It fine if you want to keep up the rights of citizens must be maintained but not the right of the officer to do his job, which was to stop and identify what the issue was that caused SOMEONE ELSE to call on this guy.

Like i said, i could only imagine how you would post an article if the cops saw this man and didnt make contact and he got hit in traffic or much less FELL OFF HIS BIKE AGAIN, and they did nothing.

JERRY

first off jerry he wasnt riding a bike, he tried to leave riding a bike. the officer didnt just run along side him and tazer him with out making attempts, the man choose to ignore the lights and the siren and then the officer yelling at him, meaning the officer was outside his car.

your statement of the cop should have cut the guy off, with what his squad car, wow jerry then the reports says COP HITS MAN ON BIKE, give me a break jerry.

The guy could have gotten off his bike answered a few questions and then been on his way.

And if you think the officer has to get in the way of his bike and hope that he nothing bad happens, try to remember teaching your kids how to ride a bike, the feeling of how wobble you were trying to keep your kid up, so the officer now has to try and do that and not get tangled or possibly clipped by a pedal or hit with the handle bars, or have the tire hit him wrong or run over a toe.

some people got it jerry that the man should have been responsible enough to just stop and be aware of his surroundings, and if he was so incoherent enough then there was a good chance he was going to hurt himself any ways, which may have already occurred.

JERRY

stop thinking a tool called a tazer has to be used ONLY WHEN THERE IS PHYSICAL THREAT.

the tazer is CONSIDERED a compliance tool and is on the USE of FORCE continuum just after verbal commands.

You have determined someones ability to law abiding or complying based on age, I haven't, i have stated that anyone can be deliberate in there ability to not comply. And this 61 year old guy proved that to the letter.

His being 61 doesn't give him a pass on not paying attention, or the right not respond to squad lights, verbal commands and police presence.

The fact that someone else witnessed him fall down earlier, along with his actions in front of a police officer, would not make most people think this guy is acting normal, and thus would want the police to determine what his issues are, medically or other wise.

His dying after being hit with a tazer will only expose any issues via the autopsy which will give a better insight in to what it was.

There is no doubt that the stress on a body increases with age and COULD be what killed this man, but that also means a person who has been on the planet for 61 years should be one of the first to be compliant or at least appreciate an officer checking on his well being SINCE he might have injured himself at the time a witness noticed him before.

does that mean the officer is wrong in having the legal right to make an investigative stop, nope it doesn't. Is this a sad result to police contact, yes it was, does it matter if the officer is young and new, or old and wants to retire NO it doesn't. The benefit for the family is that IMAGE rules society more then facts do, and thus they will get there HAND OUT for all the wrong reasons, which will please your type but the citizens who play by the rules will lose tax money on those who dont.

It clear that your not appreciating the simple rule of law that you follow and i am sure wouldn't disregard or blow off officers who made contact with you because your old, or would you?

The fact that someone else witnessed him fall down earlier, along with his actions in front of a police officer, would not make most people think this guy is acting normal, and thus would want the police to determine what his issues are, medically or other wise.

He's not normal! He's @!$%#ING DISABLED!

the tazer is CONSIDERED a compliance tool and is on the USE of FORCE continuum just after verbal commands.

Hmpf, just like a gun is a tool? A taser can have lethal consequences and should only be used to defend yourself or others from imminent harm.

KOZAKURA

He's @!$%#ING DISABLED, thus the question for you is, how would you determine that if you didnt take the time to find out. And thats exactly what the officer was trying to do and based on the complaint by a witness, he had the legal obligation to attempt to make a determination about it.

just like a gun is a tool? A taser can have lethal consequences and should only be used to defend yourself or others from imminent harm.

thats a nice warm and fuzzy thought, but thats not what the stardard is set for its usage.

Now for the sake of argument, please know i understand how you feel but, feeling is not what makes the differance in when a tazer is deployed, action is determered and the need of the officers to react to it, in real time.

JERRY

its ok that real life takes place because newsvine should always be second(or 4th) in your life, take your time, sorry for your loss.

Its wrestling season, and these kids wear me out, and makes for a long night at work.

Believe me, your not missing anything not being on the VINE jerry!!

So it's okay to assault someone who has yet to be even accused of causing harm to anyone?

thats a nice warm and fuzzy thought, but thats not what the stardard is set for its usage.

If that's not the standard, then the standard is wrong and needs to be evaluated.

KOZ

first off- either take your feelings out of it or feel free to understand what the story says.

1. the man was reported to the police - the officer didnt pick him out just for sh-ts and giggles.

2 the man ignored the police car, and the verbal commands

3. the man also refused to acknowledge the officer and made an attempt to flee, when the officer had a legal right to stop him.

lastly the tazer was not determined as of yet to HAVE KILLED the man. The man died after he was tazed, WHEN he died was not made clear, why he died was not made clear.

Citizens rights dont go on indefinite, they stop at certain points and then resume.

Your feeling about the tazer still comes down to its purpose, and yes feel free to go on a crusade and get the use of WHEN officers can use a tazer, changed because thats your right and just might be a good agenda to have.

As has already been stated, feel free to wait for the doctors report which will provide enough ammo for your feelings to be justified as a main result of death. Or you just will have to accept that he might not have had to been tazed at all based on his personal choices to not ignore the officer or the squad car.

He may not have ignored the officer either, he ma have been unaware of the officers existence, the man was also deaf.

Yeah, yeah... the officer didn't know this or that about him, assumed he was a perfectly normal old drunk guy riding a bike.

Once again, the issue is the amount of force used in order for the officer to avoid an non life threatening booboo.

KOZ

let me get this right, your ok assuming everything about this man, but yet the officer is to ASSUME that his ignored responses means this man is acting normally or reasonably.

Thus the officer cant use the tool designed for compliance.

The amount of force used equal to the amount of failed compliance. The officer didn't use a hard edged ASP and walked up and clubbed the man, The officer didn't detach his gun and fire of a round at the man, the officer didnt bump him with his bumper hoping he didnt fall under the wheel.

The officer gave a verbal command to stop, and there is no job requirement that has an officer needing to put himself is potential harms way to effect an investigation.

Again i am not here to change your mind on how you feel about this story, i am simple having you realize that the officer was provided facts that allowed him to make a job related choice IN REAL TIME on how to deal with this situation.

which doesn't allows mean the officer did something wrong.

JERRY

try to stop suggesting that i dont get it--- what i get is that YOU and folks like you feel that your reaction would be different if you were there, and i KNOW it wouldn't because you would have the same need to know what the hell is going on with this dude.

You also would know you have a legal right to make contact and that you also would attempt to do your job based on the description provided by a WITNESS that called in concern.

Your assumption that after your time on the streets, would make you go up to a man that has ignored you police car presents, and also ignored your verbal commands, that to walk up to him and have a face to face chat WOULD NOT HAPPEN.

Because you brain would not let any risk of this guy going off on you and either grabbing you, or attempting to use his bike to slightly or significantly injury you.

you wouldn't risk potential harm to yourself, HOPING, WISHING, AND PRAYING, this man is sound and sane, when all indications have provided you a reasonable sense that he ISN'T.

And again, your total disregard that officers are to accept potential harm because they do the job is LUCIDCRIS and provides for validation that arm chair quarterbacking is your goal.

THERE is no issue, jerry I faught and wrestled with EVERY AGE under the sun while working in the jail. And there is no way YOU SITTING at your computer makes any one on the street less dangerous just because you sitting there.

I again dont care if he tazed him or not, i care about what makes the officer wrong when the CITIZEN HAS CHOICES and doesnt use them properly.

And when a citizen choices to not be reasonable in his choices, then the officer has the right to do his job, and to whine about this mans age is silly, to think he has more reason to disregard the legal right of the officer after 61 years on the planet, to me is more disrespectful, because he knows to stop and acknowledge the officer.

Lastly, to respond -- i dont care who some one is, there potential for violence is just that, and anyone can be a threat and almost anything can be a weapon, and when an officer goes through the proper amount of reasonable ATTEMPTS TO MAKE contact. And is disregarded then that citizen has narrowed the response an officer has to use to deal with him.

And by the way based on your comments about bruises, the question is how many bruises does an officer have to have in a 8 or 10 hour shift to make you happy he has done his job.

Sheesh jerry, this call this officer took may be one of a few, and making contact with people who act unstable can occur more often then you care to honest about.

JERRY

thats a cowards answer your buddy has just forgotten his time doing the job he looks down on others -- he knows if that at some times every he would have to make choices that HE WONT TELL YOU OR YOUR FRIEND ABOUT because of your views.

Thats the way it goes, your assumption that CITIZENS are powerless and mindless about how to keep there own personal control about them and how to keep there LEGAL RIGHTS intact, is about choice.

Jerry i can say the same thing- i see the younger officers love to get into use of force sitations with inmates for some of the silliness reasons, not because they always have to but because they can.

What you dont get or seem to be soft assed about is that I HAVE ALSO seen in the jail and on the street GOOD officers forced into situations they would never CREATE but the choices of some people put them into a no win situation, AND you only hear about the end result as told by ONE SIDE OF THE STORY.

STOP ASSUMING i dont get it- what i dont get is that people like you never get your balls up enough to ask the question WHY, why didnt he stop, why did he ignore the officer, why did he run, why did he not pay the fee or fine and keep his license why did he fight with cop who was going to give him a dam ticket,

I dont represent the cops that make the selfish choices and knowingly break the law, i support the officers that are put into sitautions BY CHIOCES made by others and just cause you think EVERY THING is an option, then keep thinking that jerry.

But just like coaching , i can try to tell a ref that call that went against my wrestler was wrong and sucked and i do that because i want the kid to know i tried to help but i do know the rules and the ref was right-- but the kids knew i supported his effort-- and in the end, ALOT the stories you and other love to hate, sometime have cops doing the wrong things but just as many YOU DONT HEAR about ----the cop did his job and used the right tools and under the legal authority that sitation provides

and jerry people like to gloss over crap so they look good, like i said your buddy has been forced into ACTION because of his job, how he feels about it may be like me-- if forced is used its because its needed not because i want too.

JERYY

what you think of my job is not different then the time you spend posting -- its what you WANT TO DO.

your attitude has been swallowed up by your mentailty of thinking that posting makes the world change, it doesnt.

i like my job because it allows me to do what i love which is coach wrestling where i can help get kids ready for the mat and for life.

You have defined me into a box that works for you jerry as we all do, but i know me, i know that i have been doing this type work and have been lucky enough to have been around the world as a body guard and yet dealt with the drunks as a bouncer and have worked corparate with unrealistic people and been on the streets in st paul to see people struggle and be successful when they come from dirt.

In the end jerry you have decided to twist everything we say in support of some cops actions in to a wall that you use for your own reasons,. the fact that most cop stories are one sided and also dont have the retro spective of time on there side, makes the public feel the way they do, but when most people get the other side of some stories, then they GET what you dont

which is the person had choices or the person didnt have the right to do what they did or the cop had to do his job,.

now for the 500th time when the facts dont allow for myself or yellow to support the officer we dont have any issues stating that also-- at the times we do it just comes down to CAN YOU REMEMBER WE DID, clearly you have selective memory

ugh