Ooops.....

[TehBorken]

[font class="headline"]Fla. Woman Dies After Taser Gun Shock
[/font]     [font class="date"]
Apr 25 11:48 AM US/Eastern[/font][font class="date"]
GREEN COVE SPRINGS, Fla.[/font]
[font class="story"]A woman in a wheelchair who swung knives and a hammer at relatives and police died after being shocked by a stun gun, officials said. [/font][/p][font class="story"] Police tried to talk Emily Marie Delafield, 56, into dropping the weapons before they used the Taser to subdue her Monday, Police Chief Robert Musco said. Delafield lost consciousness after the electric jolt and later died at Orange Park Medical Center. [/font][/p][font class="story"] The Florida Department of Law Enforcement is investigating and an autopsy will be conducted to determine a cause of death. [/font][/p][font class="story"] The two officers involved have been put on paid administrative leave during the investigation, which is standard procedure. [/font][/p][font class="story"] Tasers deliver a 50,000-volt jolt through two barbed darts that can penetrate clothing. About 7,000 of the nation's 18,000 police agencies had them last year, and they were used by police more than 70,000 times. [/font][/p][font class="story"] Amnesty International counted 61 U.S. deaths following Taser use last year. Taser International officials disputed that count, saying it linked some deaths to Taser use when there had been no such official conclusion. [/font]  

[kitten]

If someone was waving cutlery and blunt instruments at me with intent to do serious bodily harm, I doubt I would pause to consider the potential effect of trying to protect myself in any way possible.

[TehBorken]

 kitten wrote:
If someone was waving cutlery and blunt instruments at me with intent to do serious bodily harm, I doubt I would pause to consider the potential effect of trying to protect myself in any way possible.
 
I concur, however, she was in a wheelchair and as such could only pose a fairly limited limited threat. Tasers aren't as foolproof as they would have you believe.

[kitten]

I do see your point, TehBorken.  Isn't there a net that can be thrown from a distance to control an agitated or violent person?  Are police equipped with that option?  If not, why not?  There should be a safer way for all involved.

[Jolly Green Giant]

"Oops" is normally written with 2 o's, except when it is spelled "ooops", in which case it is written with 3 o's.

[TehBorken]

 Jolly Green Giant wrote:
"Oops" is normally written with 2 o's, except when it is spelled "ooops", in which case it is written with 3 o's.

Not when I write it.  

As long as we're nitpicking, when you specify a single letter it's normally enclosed in a pair of single quotes, like this: normally written with 2 'o's, except whe...

The way you wrote it is the possessive form which is incorrect, as alphabetic characters can't legally own anything. Also, in that context numbers are normally spelled out, so your text should have read:

"Oops" is normally written with two 'o's, except when it is spelled "ooops", in which case it is written with three 'o's.

(Full Disclosure: I've been a Technical Writer for Boeing, Microsoft, and numerous other large, stupid companies. I normally follow the [a href="vny!://www.libs.uga.edu/ref/chicago.html"]Chicago Manual of Style[/a], but not always.)

[TehBorken]

 kitten wrote:
Isn't there a net that can be thrown from a distance to control an agitated or violent person?  Are police equipped with that option?  If not, why not?  There should be a safer way for all involved.

Tranquilizer guns?  

[kitten]

That sounds good, but if the person is flailing around there would be the possibility of hitting an eye or in the temple that could cause significant damage, or is this unlikely?

[TehBorken]

  kitten wrote:
That sounds good, but if the person is flailing around there would be the possibility of hitting an eye or in the temple that could cause significant damage, or is this unlikely?
I was kidding, but given a standard [a href="vny!s://www.pneudart.com/index.php"]tranquilizer gun[/a] I bet I could nail someone from a safe distance without fear of hitting an eye or temple.

[h1]Model 176 Projector
[/h1] This rifle is a CO2 operated dart projector recommended for close range shooting. It is ideal for penned animals and for use in populated areas when used for dog control. Under ideal conditions (no wind) these projectors are accurate to 30 yards. By using the power control valve, caged animals can be shot as close as two feet without injury. Only $265![/p]

[Gopher]

TehBorken wrote:
kitten wrote:
[SPAN style="FONT-STYLE: italic"]Isn't there a net that can be thrown from a distance to control an agitated or violent person?  Are police equipped with that option?  If not, why not?  There should be a safer way for all involved.[/SPAN]



 Tranquilizer guns?  


 Hypnotism?

[Jolly Green Giant]

TehBorken wrote:
Jolly Green Giant wrote: "Oops" is normally written with 2 o's, except when it is spelled "ooops", in which case it is written with 3 o's.

Not when I write it. <img src="/forums/richedit/smileys/Happy/14.gif"

As long as we're nitpicking, when you specify a single letter it's normally enclosed in a pair of single quotes, like this: normally written with 2 'o's, except whe... The way you wrote it is the possessive form which is incorrect, as alphabetic characters can't legally own anything. Also, in that context numbers are normally spelled out, so your text should have read: "Oops" is normally written with two 'o's, except when it is spelled "ooops", in which case it is written with three 'o's. (Full Disclosure: I've been a Technical Writer for Boeing, Microsoft, and numerous other large, stupid companies. I normally follow the <a href="vny!://www.libs.uga.edu/ref/chicago.html">Chicago Manual of Style</a>, but not always.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wasn't nitpicking, I was subtly joking without afterthoughts.
I do admit I had the problem of choosing between "o's" and 'o's. Usually I make a difference between attaching the final "s" to the word or not as I am aware of it indicating the genitive, but even so, let's not consider the legal aspects of the case, I beg you, as this would lead us really too far and all without a purpose. In a moral sense moreover, anything you could conceive of can "own" something, if only a quality of some kind, which the character "o" definitely does. Doesn't it display the qualities of being lower-cased and single, after all ?  

I also must admit this topic has the added value of having raised my IQ with at least two points through learning me that you were a Technical Writer for a few very large and important companies. Thank you, TehBorken.


P.S. Damn stupid software. Instead of posting this on the forum, it sends me the message "Notice - while you were typing 2 new replies were posted. You may wish to review your post.", and makes me reformat my post again and delete all the stupid add-ons such as backslashes which it added meanwhile to it.

[TehBorken]

  Jolly Green Giant wrote:
I wasn't nitpicking, I was subtly joking without afterthoughts.

I know, I was just screwing with you.


even so, let's not consider the legal aspects of the case, I beg you, as this would lead us really too far and all without a purpose.

Fair enough.


In a moral sense moreover, anything you could conceive of can "own" something, if only a quality of some kind, which the character "o" definitely does. Doesn't it display the qualities of being lower-cased and single, after all ?  

Oh, the 'o' is a fabulous letter that I'm personally very fond of, but....I have to question whether it "owns" those qualities or if it's simply intrinsically imbued with them. A question to ponder over many many beers, I suspect.


I also must admit this topic has the added value of having raised my IQ with at least two points through learning me that you were a Technical Writer for a few very large and important companies.

Hmmm, I never said they were important but I suppose you could look at it that way. Not me, and certainly not of Microsoft. Large, ponderous, and well-funded, but it rubs me the wrong way to call Microsoft "important". Even if they are, lol. Boeing could be considered important, but I just worked there for the intellectual stimulation and heady sense that I something to do with building airplanes. (And the cash, let's not forget the cold, hard cash they paid me....)


P.S. Damn stupid software....makes me reformat my post again and delete all the stupid add-ons such as backslashes which it added meanwhile to it.

That's not a bug, it's a feature!    lol