http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...t-police-taser
Printable View
at face value, my reaction is "Oh FFS...", but I know my feisty ass old grand dad... he carried a revolver til he was 92 and moved in to a nursing home... he wasn't fast, but he could still hit the target.
interested in more details, but 6-7 cops to subdue a 95 year old man? yeah, they fucked up. thats the bottom line. it is in illinois.
great quote: "The Japanese military couldn't get him at the age he was touchable, in a uniform in the war. It took 70 years later for the Park Forest police to do the job," Wrana's family attorney, Nicholas Grapsas, a former prosecutor, said in an interview....
sounds like one of pesky contempt of cop incidents.
This is my shocked face. [Eek2] Doubtless he presented a credible threat.[Puke]
stfu all u cop haters. good shot!
u were not there. guy was probably selling drugs out of his bed room. ill wait for the facts to come in.
plus cops went home safely that night. that is all that matters
This is my shocked face that this article appears here. Oh, wait. I'm not shocked.
Until there are more details, that pretty much sums it up for me. Is it possible the cops fucked up? Yes. Is it possible they did what they thought was necessary and they thought they were facing a credible threat? Yes. I don't know and the thoroughly biased article didn't provide a whole lot of answers.Quote:
"When I first heard it, I was like, 'C'mon,'" he said. "Then I thought it through. We don't know what occurred. We don't know what information they had at that time. If you don't have all of the facts, it's hard to judge someone. … Anyone can be dangerous."
So, cop bashers of the forum unite around this story full of speculation. You guys are really good at it.
I've met a few 95 year olds. None posed a physical threat to any able-bodied adult male under 94. If there's a cop out there under 65, that can't handle a 95 year old, they probably ought to find a different teet off the taxpayers nickel.
I agree do with this, no need for cop bashing. There is no other information other than the article. We can armchair judge all we like, but without the facts and not knowing all the story. There was 2 stories listed in the article, which leads to opinionated interpretation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
I do have some doubts about the action by the police in the first place.
This part is what gets me all flustered;
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/images/pixel.gif
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/images/pixel.gif
The man has the right to refuse medical care PERIOD!Quote:
The old man, described by a family member as "wobbly" on his feet, had refused medical attention. The paramedics were called. They brought in the Park Forest police.
My opinion based of what info IS available;Quote:
Originally Posted by hatidua
Cops attempting to subdue a 95 year old man should raise flags with everyone. Why not leave him alone until he calmed down?
I have been in human services for 10+ years and Safety Care (Crisis intervention) teaches to avoid the physical contact at all possible, last resort only. Have been in situations where we almost called the police but backed off, they calmed down and went the right way. Thinking about it later we realized calling the police would have just escalated it further.
Maybe if they would have left him alone from forcing medical care he probably would have calmed down. There was no need to attempt to subdue him, let alone a tazer, a riot shield and a shotgun bean bag.
...Seriously. I really hope this is sarcasm.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowbeyond