Thoughts on Cardinals vs Phillies

[GTDawg]

Justified or no?

[JDMcNugent7]

haha was watchin that. Ya justified, I dn how anyone says its not. It's not justified to run on the field either thats for sure. Players/coaches have been beaten up before from fans running on the field, who knows what some weirdo might have planned. Probably nothing, but he's still running on the field illegally so I'd still taser him

[Reel Deal]

No. That's fucking ridiculous and the cop should be canned. It's excessive force, just tackle the kid for crying out loud. If he appears to have a weapon or appears to be out to hurt someone on the field, then different story; but absent of that, it's excessive force.

[JDMcNugent7]

Tasering is so much more fun than tackling though. I still think it's no big deal that he tased him and that everyone saying omg excessive force is pretty ridiculous. He's running around on the damn field which everyone knows is illegal, you think the cops are going to go hug you and gently carry you away?

[Reel Deal]

It's just a kid running around that doesn't appear to be a threat to anyone... if the police are going to use something as forceful as a taser on a citizen there had better be a threat to someone to justify the use. Tasers have caused serious injury, even death, so I don't think their use should be taken lightly. What's next? Shoot the guy in the leg just because he's running around on a ball field?

That Hangover stungun scene is awesome tho.

[GTDawg]

If we replaced "baseball stadium" with any other business, would the police or security be as forgiving about a drunk person illegally trespassing while running around and evading them?

Office building, restaurant, bank, courtroom, mall, whatever

[JDMcNugent7]

No and it's ridiculous people are freaking out about this. Also another fan ran on the field tonight, this time no taser action

[PShabi]

Bullshit. He's trespassing and resisting arrest. Tase away.

[Reel Deal]

Wow, I'm surprised... I thought most of you all would say fuck the cops.

It's funny because my first reaction was, "yeah, tase that stupid punk." But the more I thought about it I just didn't think the force used to stop him matched the threat. I'm still somewhat on the fence. It's an interesting question to think about where is the line where it is OK for the police to use a taser. Should they be free as soon as someone starts to resist or evade arrest? Some people resist but are relatively passive about it, should they get tased? I just think from the video I saw in this case the kids was obviously goofing around and wasn't a threat to anyone, hence a taser is excessive. But, meh, I don't know.

[GTDawg]

When does he become a threat? When he gets within 30 feet of a player? When he gets within 20 feet? When he is within an arm's length? After he tackles a player? I am perfectly ok with not playing this "what if" game after another player/coach/umpire is attacked.

Looking at the situation NOW, yes he seems to be a drunk kid that is screwing around because he wants to be an attention whore. At the time, I am really not sure how people can just say "well, he's just goofing around"....how do you tell?

He is knowingly breaking the law by trespassing. And, I'm going to assume that there were repeated warnings that he disobeyed and ignored.

After the Tom Gamboa and Laz Diaz attacks, I have no sympathy for someone just goofing around by running on the field.

And, I look at it like Shabi. He's knowingly breaking the law and resisting efforts to detain him. In any other location known to man, the cops would not be nearly as forgiving. But, for whatever reason, people are allowed to act like goofballs as long as they aren't hurting anyone even though they are trespassing and resisting arrest.

[Talking Poker]

I'm fine with it. He clearly knew what he was doing was illegal (he actually called his Dad and asked permission before doing it, telling him it was a once in a lifetime opportunity) and he was resisting arrest. Tase away.

That said, I think the rules should be different during rain delays when there are no players on the field. Let the guy slip and slide into every base on the tarp and then tackle him at home. No need for tasering there.

[melioris]

I'm with RD on this one and think it is pretty clear cut for basically all the reasons RD said.

The only thing I will add is that I think we are all allowing the area between acceptable behavior and use of force to ensure "public safety" to get awfully small and this is a great example. It is a fucking baseball stadium. The entire point of that building is to distract 30-60K people with a sporting event while getting them to spent as much money as possible on food and drink. There should be some thought and effort put into encouraging fans to behave responsibly without using force, as clearly in our society a lot of stupid cunts are going to try shit like this.

Frankly, it is a negligent business model if the idea is fleece the sheep and tase them if they don't follow the rules.

[Reel Deal]

So, for the guys in the "tase the bitch" camp, are you in favor of it because (a) you think the force matches the threat, (b) you think it will act as a deterrent, or (c) fuck him, he knowingly broke the law and should therefore expect to have volts shot through his body?

[JDMcNugent7]

C for sure. but if it's some big ass dude that could actually do some damage, or a group of people, it could be A or B too. Haven't you seen the video of 3 people jumping out the stands and beating up I think Chicagos first base coach?. In this spot it's fuck him, he's being a dumbass and breaking the law, wtf did he expect to happen

[sjay2k]

Wow.

From the video it looks like there were at least 5 men chasing him around the field. Chasing one skinny kid, clearly unarmed, running around in circles, waving a shirt. Threatening nobody and the 5 of them would have easily stopped him. It says in the news report this kid was 17?

And the police shoot him with a taser gun? That's disgusting.

Are you comfortable with your government using disproportionate force against you?

If your reasoning is that "he knew it was illegal, so he deserved it", would you be okay with the Police shooting your tyres out the next time you speed in your car?

Tasers are very dangerous, they can actually kill you. I can't believe the police would be allowed to use them purely for convenience (for fun?) like that.

[GTDawg]

If your reasoning is that "he knew it was illegal, so he deserved it", would you be okay with the Police shooting your tyres out the next time you speed in your car?


If I drove my car on to the tarmac at the airport and proceeded to drive around in circles at the far end of the runway while avoiding the cops, I have no doubt they would be ending my joyriding swiftly and in any means necessary.

If I were going 80 in a 55 zone on the highway and a cop began following me with his lights on and I didn't stop and instead continued to speed through Atlanta, I have no doubt they would be using one of several ways to stop my car.

Do you feel that using a tazer after someone has already trespassed and is continuing to avoid being captured is similar to shooting out tires upon being found to be speeding? Because I'd say the situation is more similar to continuing to speed without stopping after a police officer has already pulled behind you with his lights on.

-------
(a) you think the force matches the threat, (b) you think it will act as a deterrent, or (c) fuck him, he knowingly broke the law and should therefore expect to have volts shot through his body?

I think it is a combination of B and C. If I were to trespass and evade capture from the police in my daily life at any place of business everywhere on the planet, I would not expect the police to let me run around until I get tired cause it is obvious I am not a threat.

There are no metal detectors at baseball stadiums (that I know of). It isn't out of the realm of possibilities that this person has a knife or worse.

Looking at the situation KNOW, yes...it is a drunk teenager who did something stupid to be an attention whore. However, at the time, I'm not exactly sure how you are making that analysis.

The person is breaking the law and evading the police while ignoring obvious calls to stop. In, literally, any other situation known to man...he would be stopped in a similar way. But, at a sporting event, there is some leeway given since drunk people running on the field is nothing more than stupid wastes of time.

You are told not to run on the field many times. There are signs everywhere. There are countless announcements throughout games. Players, coaches, umpires have been attacked in the past. And, personally, I'm all for ending the problem as swiftly as possible.

My personal idea is to use snipers with rubber bullets stationed on the roof. Just go ahead and put a few body shots in to the person as soon as they cross the foul line.

[GTDawg]

I am also interested in looking at who considers themselves a "baseball fan" as opposed to someone that is mildly interested in the game.

Do you watch baseball on a regular basis RD or would you rank another sport higher up on your interest scale than baseball? same with SJ and Melioris.

I believe Shabi, TP, JD, and I all view baseball as their favorite sport and we all hold the same view concerning the use of a taser (correct me if I'm wrong about your interest in baseball).

[sjay2k]

Ignoring the analogies, etc. above - I think this is the most important point. Whether it is right/wrong for police to deter people against breaking the law by way of using force that is in excess of what is necessary to detain offenders.

It might seem like a joke question, but why would you stop at rubber bullets? If deterring people is the one and only goal, then surely killing all intruders would be the best solution, no? I can assure you that there would be no pitch intrusions if such a policy was introduced.

If you need to deter people from invading the pitch, then fines/imprisonment should be the deterrent, rather than gratuitous violence meted out by police officers. Punishment is a matter for the courts and not police (for many good reasons).

As for your question about whether we like baseball -- I'm not sure how it's relevant, but I am a big fan of cricket, which is similar to baseball and also commonly involves pitch intrusions. In cricket (as well as AFL, etc.) the intruder is chased by security/police and tackled and then punished according to law.

[GTDawg]

Why would I stop at rubber bullets? Because me drawing the line at a different point of the line concerning what is "excessive" doesn't mean I'm all for shooting people with lethal rounds at the drop of the hat.

I had a similar conversation with someone yesterday and they said crucifying people on the foul poles would stop the running on the field too.

The histrionics are all well and good, but that is a ridiculously simplistic way to frame the argument. Someone advocating that more extreme measures be taken to stop people (as compared to letting him run until he is tired or tackled) is not automatically calling for the death penalty on a minor infraction.

My specific reason for using snipers and rubber bullets is because you avoid the idea of having to "catch" the person. When someone runs on the field, it takes a few seconds before everybody realizes what is going on. Depending on where they enter the playing field, it isn't out of the realm of possibilities that they could reach a player/coach before more than 1 or 2 people notice what is happening. The idea of using snipers and rubber bullets isn't the excess force to deter people in a scare tactics way...it is to stop them the instant they enter the playing field without giving them the opportunity to reach a player/coach/umpire.

I would like the situation to end immediately with little to no injury to players/coaches/umpires/police/security. Using a taser on the person does that in the most effective way possible. Either that or canine units.

I don't look at it as SIMPLY punishment from cops to scare people. I see it as a more immediate ending to the situation. The matter ends quicker and you don't have cops or security guards tackling someone which is ridiculously inefficient (not to mention much more dangerous for the cops and security guards). It isn't like 4 security guards tackling someone is totally safe and crazy effective at ending the situation.

The fact that it can be used to deter people since they see the consequences is an extension of the above benefit. Because, let's face it, people don't see the few hours spent in the precinct under the stadium, they don't see the conviction, the fine, the community service.

I'm not sure if it is relevant either. That's why I asked for the views of you and others.

From what I could tell, the most vocal baseball fans on the forum all held a similar opinion. I felt that was interesting.

[Talking Poker]

Mostly B for me.

But back to the real question this thread's title poses: My thought are the Phils are up 2-0 and Halliday will complete the sweep tomorrow afternoon.