Man Almost Dies After Tasering, Struggle; Cops Give Him CPR


Shocked that the cops didn't shoot the guy dead with a gun once they caught up to him the second time and he reached into his waistband. Maybe this is some sort of progress?

"One officer caught up to him and the man again said he had something for the officers as he reached down into his waistband. One officer was struggling to gain control of him but was unable to so the other officer deployed a Taser."
That sounds like 100% appropriate response to the situation. The police were faced with deadly force and an erratic, uncooperative, agitated man. They attempted to restrain him without using any sort of deadly (or "less-lethal") force, and were finally forced to use a taser to prevent harm to themselves or the assailant.

Unfortunately, the assailant had a medical reaction to the taser. The officers immediately requested medical assistance and began to perform CPR.

What more can you ask for?
Dan Handelman isn't right on this one. This guy had two weapons and threatened the officers and wasn't cooperating. I haven't always been too keen on the cops use of force but we can't expect them to get stabbed. One problem with the activists like Handelman is they do good work but go too far. Bottom line, if this guy would have died, it was his fault and no one else. I don't want the cops to stop taking idiots off the street who are riding around high on meth with deadly weapons.
Agree with Hank. As many problems as PPD has had what do you expect officers to do in this situation?
It's a much easier stance to criticize taser use by police AFTER it has occurred than to have an effective stance on when is an acceptable time and place to use a taser -- or if the use of tasers should be an outright ban altogether?

What is Dan's official stance on the use of tasers?

A cursory browsing of Portland Copwatch did not reveal a specific stance on tasers (i.e., whether they should be banned outright or any specific standard operating procedures a police officer should follow in order to be justified in using tasers).

I think a meth-head under the influence of drugs with felonies threatening people with deadly weapons is probably a justified case.
I wonder if Sam Adams has ever been in a situation where he had to use force to subdue someone?

Taste the rainbow, bitches.
I think they tried much harder to subdue this guy than they should have. Those of you applauding their restraint - you still think cops should be superheros, tackling bad guys to the ground and occasionally getting punched, kicked, bitten, whatever. Its nice to hear that you draw the line at stabbing, but they're just city employees making $50k a year. Believe it or not, but brawling with drug addicts ISN'T part of their job, any more than it is for the meter maids or the DMV staff.

I'm glad they were able to get the knives away from this guy without getting stabbed, but what about the next guy? And the one after that? And the one after that? How can they expect to live through a 30-year career, if they have to manually tackle every guy with a knife? The risk for any one encounter should be low enough that, when you add up all the encounters for a 30-year career, the total is STILL low enough that everyone can live to retirement! That's NOT what happened here.
I mean, imagine you're facing a man with a knife who's trying to stab you. You're highly trained, and he's drugged out, so the odds are in your favor. It's 20-to-1 that you'll take him down without getting stabbed. Great odds, right? Except that if you have to do that every week, you'll die within 20 weeks. You'll probably die before the end of January.

Even if you only had to do it once a year, you'd still die within 20 years.

Who the fuck would sign up for that career, for $50k a year and all the hipster hatred you want?