What, or who, killed Robert Dziekanski?
Wed, 2007-12-05 18:49
#1
What, or who, killed Robert Dziekanski?
Wed, 2007-12-05 18:49
#2
I appreciate the article written by Dawn Moore, [url=http://www.rabble.ca/everyones_a_critic.shtml?sh_itm=e3eccbdde4ae7463b48..., or who, killed Robert Dziekanski?[/url]
I, too, believe that too little attention is paid to those who killed the Polish immigrant in the Vancouver airport.
But I think that it is not as simple as Moore puts it: that we're distracted by the 'Taser: good or bad?' argument.
I think that the media - particularly CBC - has been right to go after the weapons. If we can agree that police are not going to be eliminated altogether by the Canadian state, then we should be closely examining what powers they are given and what tools they are given.
Moore states that the Taser is a tool and that the [b]police[/b] should be the ones criticized.
I think both should be.
I view the debate over Tasers as a way of evaluating the powers we give the RCMP. I think the public outrage at the death, directed both at the police and their tools, is justified and useful.
It may be the case that Tasers work to distract from the police, but I don't think that eliminates the need to examine the needlessly dangerous weapons they are encouraged to use.
Thu, 2007-12-06 02:04
#3
Lost also in the debate is the fact that the original RCMP version of events differed substantially from what the video showed.
If the official report was similar to the report the RCMP gave to the media shortly after the event, then we have at hand the issue of obstruction of justice, filling a false report, and lying.
Not that lying seems to be a big deal anymore.
Thu, 2007-12-06 03:22
#4
quote:
If the official report was similar to the report the RCMP gave to the media shortly after the event, then we have at hand the issue of obstruction of justice, filling a false report, and lying.
Absolutely true but nothing will be done about it. Business as usual.
Thu, 2007-12-06 07:14
#5
We could also rely on the S.I.U to somehow explain that the actions of the police officers involved were fully justified. That, this was just another Police (killing) use of necessary force.
My belief is that what was meant to be an alternative to using a gun, does not get the same consideration, as the use of a gun would.
I feel that the Police are now thinking they can use this WEAPON for any altercation.
[ 06 December 2007: Message edited by: co-worker ]
[ 06 December 2007: Message edited by: co-worker ]
Thu, 2007-12-06 08:06
#6
Yeah, the Taser-or-bullet argument is total BS, particularly in this case where neither was necessary.
It may be, though I doubt we'll ever know the truth, that he was killed not by the Taser, but by his breathing being cut off.
Perhaps there was an intent to render the victim unconscious with this "choking" technique that went too far. That, too, was the unnecessary act of a control freak, in my opinion. Some may have even seen it as manslaughter.
Thu, 2007-12-06 12:33
#7
quote:
Absolutely true but nothing will be done about it. Business as usual.
True, Stargazer. As we can see from the Cornwall Inquiry transcript that I quoted from (it's languishing unresponded to in the Ontario, Manitoba and Quebec Forum) that the crown and police and judges are all covering for each other.
As I suspected all along.
Perhaps, if jail is something reserved only for the poor and working class, it is time to bring back the lash for professional types.
And not the fun type of lash you can get down at your corner sex shop, either, but one the British Military used to use.
[ 06 December 2007: Message edited by: Tommy_Paine ]
Thu, 2007-12-06 12:48
#8
i asked in another thread who the guy in the suit was that in the video clearly reaches down and appears to check Dziekanski's pulse right after the cops get up, and then quickly walks off.
has this person ever been identified? i have yet to see any mention of it. if there was no pulse, would it not be incumbent upon him to immediately initiate CPR or rescue breathing?