pmsl at this poor sucker.

A MAN burst into flames and died after he was shot with a Taser stun gun by police in Texas.

The story says that a guy poured petrol over himself in a standoff with police, and as pepper spray had no effect, they decide to Taser him. The story goes on to say that police are investigating whether the Taser contributed to the fire.

How dumb can cops be over there, as a Taser is an electroshock weapon. I am sure that the smallest spark would have ignited the petrol, and you can bet your bottom dollar that shooting somebody with several thousand volts would have generated some sort of spark when making contact with him. Lawsuit coming up, and knowing the Yanks, it will be a big one.

LOL

They should of beanbagged him.

hahah... i've heard covering yourself in petrol is a bad idea :P

How dumb can cops be

lol

Oh of course the cops would claim they've done nothing wrong. Remember, these are the people who were able to fire dozens of rounds, reload, unload more, and still claim self-defense.

Cops always tend to inflame the situation.

Why do you always have to spark up over these things?

The situation was inflamed when officers burst onto the scene.

Oh of course the cops would claim they've done nothing wrong.

As cops do ^_^.

The cops would claim that they would never have considered that it would have ignited him, and a good lawyer would sue on the basis of poor police training, having not properly educated the police in the use of electroshock weapons in the vicinity of flamable liquids. ^_^

A couple of million for the grieving widow (who wanted to divorce the poor sucker). Sounds a bit like a plot for desperate housewives...hahaha.

I smell a Darwin award

The situation was inflamed when officers burst onto the scene.

ISWYDT

sounds like this guy got too hot under the collar

...and I always thought Texan's could handle the heat.

Juan Flores Lopez burst into flames

HOT TAMALE!!! HOT TAMALE!!!

^^ lol

The man was stunned when he suddenly burst into flames.

The cops were stunned when one of their own bright sparks burned their mexican turkey to a crisp.

The cops would claim that they would never have considered that it would have ignited him, and a good lawyer would sue on the basis of poor police training, having not properly educated the police in the use of electroshock weapons in the vicinity of flamable liquids. ^_^

I'm sorry, am I an a****** or are you guys saying this is the cops' fault?

The human spark plug.

I'm sorry, am I an a****** or are you guys saying this is the cops' fault?

While the idiot more or less took his life in his own hands with the petrol, I'd also suggest the cops stupidity also played a part i.e.

The story goes on to say that police are investigating whether the Taser contributed to the fire.

Hmmm, could a taser be an ignition source, I wonder!

I'm sorry, am I an a****** or are you guys saying this is the cops' fault?

Sorry Trog, that particular statement is a reference to how an American lawsuit would pan out. Frying the mind over how hot this topic could be might damage some bright sparks, but please Trog, don't nuke this thread until it truly runs out of gas.

And yeah, then comes the American legal system!

Hmmm, could a taser be an ignition source, I wonder!

It's funny that the default policy is to assume that the cops are stupid, in a thread that includes the mention of lawsuits right along side. It seems that the most likely explanation is that they don't want to come out straight and say, "duh, maybe the taser made him catch fire" to avoid lawsuits, but probably more importantly to the cops, the risk of losing their tasers as enforcement weapons.

That article f***ing sucks too, they make it sound like cops are stupid and careless despite the facts

- he doused himself in petrol specifically to make him hard to deal with
- he said he had a bomb

Sorry Trog, that particular statement is a reference to how an American lawsuit would pan out. Frying the mind over how hot this topic could be might damage some bright sparks, but please Trog, don't nuke this thread until it truly runs out of gas.

I don't know why you'd think I'd nuke it at all, other than just because its another typically useless news.com.au article

Anyone see that drunken petrol covered man with a crossbow a while ago on the news?

"Erhhh, come and get me, I'll get 2 of you's down before you get me"

Then he passed out from the petrol fumes and game over.

What's the point of the story? Dousing yourself in petrol is never an advantage it seems.

i believe the correct course of action the police should have took, was to flick a lit match at him while yelling "diaf mexican".

I believe something a little cooler would be "do you like it HOT AND SPICY SENOR"

Smile Trog, they won't lose their Tasers. Some loser on the other side of the world had a flaming argument with the cops and lost. Of course this is just another useless news thread, and we are having some fark'n fun at his expense.

Who cares whether the Yanks lose their Taser's or not. From a truly Logical perspective, the solution to the problem is to include (DO NOT USE NEAR FLAMABLE OBJECTS) in their training, and BINGO, lawsuit problems solved. After that, if some dumb cop wants to fire a Taser into somebody covered in petrol, then at least the force is covered ^_^. May the Force Be With You.



last edited by FurryBear at 10:55:27 21/Jun/07

It's funny that the default policy is to assume that the cops are stupid, in a thread that includes the mention of lawsuits right along side. It seems that the most likely explanation is that they don't want to come out straight and say, "duh, maybe the taser made him catch fire" to avoid lawsuits, but probably more importantly to the cops, the risk of losing their tasers as enforcement weapons.

I think it's more a reflection of the actions of the particular cops on the scene than the statements run through their legal department and released to cover their arses. i.e. The stupidity I'm talking about isn't that in the statement itself, it's that they're in a position where they have to make such a statement in the first place. Of course the guy himself was an idiot for pretty much everything he did by the sound of things.

From a truly Logical perspective, the solution to the problem is to include (DO NOT USE NEAR FLAMABLE OBJECTS) in their training, and BINGO, lawsuit problems solved. After that, if some dumb cop wants to fire a Taser into somebody covered in petrol, then at least the force is covered

HUH?!?! Surely its more logical to say "don't cover yourself in petrol if you don't want to catch fire, especially if you're in a standoff with the police".

I have the utmost respect for anyone who wants to douse themselves in petrol in any circumstances, but f***, you should expect these people to take some responsibility for their actions.

you should expect these people to take some responsibility for their actions.

What if he is mentally retarded, or suffering from some mental state as a result of being pushed over the edge through his divorce. The law all around the world recognises such mental states, whether it is a mental illness or simply a short term mental condition brought about by life's stressors.

FFS Trog, they are professionals, and like all professionals, they come under scrutiny when something goes wrong. That is no different to when an IT professional is called into a small problem and through a stupid act brings the whole network down. It happens, it is life. However, using a common person test, wouldn't your common person think twice about shooting a person covered in petrol with something that might generate a spark. More importantly, why didn't they simply hit him with water cannons or something like that, defuse the petrol situation first. Also, how come this poor sucker died, didn't they put him out straight away, or didn't he get immediate medical attention.

The real quesion Trog, is would this man be alive today if that police officer had not fired that Taser at him. Once you have an answer to that question, then you have an answer to who was responsible for that losers death. Was there an alternative Pre-Taser solution?

Surely its more logical to say "don't cover yourself in petrol if you don't want to catch fire, especially if you're in a standoff with the police".

I don't think that's logical. If I was stupid/mentally disturbed enough to try that as a deterrent I don't think much of what anyone else would stop me.

I'd assume though that the police first have to protect themselves. After that it would be the safety of the public and then the safety of the alleged criminal. Unfortunately for the cops to protect themselves this time meant that a person got lit on fire. I'm not sure if it matters how it happens, just that it happened as a result of lives being put in danger. All this is said based on the facts listed in this thread - I did not read the article.

However, using a common person test, wouldn't your common person think twice about shooting a person covered in petrol with something that might generate a spark. More importantly, why didn't they simply hit him with water cannons or something like that, defuse the petrol situation first. Also, how come this poor sucker died, didn't they put him out straight away, or didn't he get immediate medical attention.

The real quesion Trog, is would this man be alive today if that police officer had not fired that Taser at him. Once you have an answer to that question, then you have an answer to who was responsible for that losers death.

There are obviously a heap of questions that haven't been answered. Using a common person test I would give the right to the police to do whatever they felt was necessary to stop injury to other people (as I mentioned in my previous post). If that means a person's death then that is an unfortunate result of the criminals actions.

Was there an alternative Pre-Taser solution?

I think that's the only question that needs to be asked. But even if there was, did the cops use their best judgement at the time for the situation they were in? Like most things that appear in the news it'll be unlikely there'll be a clear picture of the events that happened.

FFS Trog, they are professionals, and like all professionals, they come under scrutiny when something goes wrong.

I don't get it, you're acting like its a bizarre coincidence that someone that poured petrol on himself caught fire in a standoff with police after refusing to comply with their directions, saying he has a bomb in his house (and incidentally, after threatening for months to burn himself and his house).

I think they're saying it's bizarre that the police wouldn't realise that he would catch fire if they tasered him - - - > are there other ways of detaining someone who has poured petrol on themselves?

i agree with trog.
this is texas anyway, even if the crazy mexican did survive they would have given him the electric chair later.
the cop was just cutting out all the paperwork.

I think they're saying it's bizarre that the police wouldn't realise that he would catch fire if they tasered him

Well the obvious question is, did they know he was covered in petrol? The news stories are so light on detail they're practically useless. Foxnewz also says that "Lopez had a can of gas and a small lighter in his hand at one point, police Lt. Curtis Milbourn said. He tossed gas at officers, but no one was injured, police said."

It's not particularly clear. Either way I don't think it's that unreasonable that they use a taser, to be honest. It's one of their non-lethal weapons to disarm crazy a******s at range. If they'd just shot him would everyone be happier?

Like most things that appear in the news it'll be unlikely there'll be a clear picture of the events that happened.

True, especially since it was on the other side of the world.

Did the dead guy deserve the right to be protected by the law? The police would have shot him with a pistol if he was directly endangering the police or the public. The Taser is designed to subdue and disable a person, but who knows, maybe the cop who fired the Taser arrived after he poured petrol over himself. There are all sorts of unknown variables that we don't know, but at least Trog understands that we are not cop bashing, as that appeared to be the biggest issue at hand. ^_^

If they shot him, they'd probably be up on charges for excessive force. If they didn't shoot him and he blew himself and whatever was around him, they'd be accused of not doing their job.. and the list could probably go on.

Cops have a tough enough job without nut jobs pouring petrol over themselves and threatening to kill people around them. Not only do they face extremely stressful situations such as this, they are also accountable for their inactions and actions if it all goes pear shape.

True, especially since it was on the other side of the world.

I don't see what that has to do with anything, I should be able to go to the local newspaper's website for some small town and get more details - just like I expect people living in the USA to be able to come to the Courier Mail website and get more information about Brisbane-based news and events than they would from their local news source. That's the awesome thing about the Intertubes!

but at least Trog understands that we are not cop bashing

Oh, I thought you were until that statement

edit: local news for that city. Internet, f*** yeh!

last edited by trog at 11:44:17 21/Jun/07

They should have dropped him with a knee in the ribs imo.

If a guy is covered in a flamable liquid and talking about explosives, do I hit him with a likely ignition source? Personally I'd be looking for the magic 8-ball to come up 'explore other options first', if for no other reason than my own safety!

Trog, thanks for the link to the overseas newspaper, I will follow up the case because I put the thread in. You just have to love the Internet.

Spoiler:
PS: Damn I hate links that load in the current window and take you away from your page, especially when target="_blank" solves the problem. Can't you add that automatically to your linking facility Trog.

firefox + always middle click == win

If a guy is covered in a flamable liquid and talking about explosives, do I hit him with a likely ignition source? Personally I'd be looking for the magic 8-ball to come up 'explore other options first', if for no other reason than my own safety!

such as?

Shoot the hostage.

maybe the guy should have taken his buttplug out

From your link trog:

Thomas Lopez, said Monday that his father had a history of mental illness..... Police did not contact any mental health deputies in the Monday morning incident, Faz-Lopez said..... Such deputies are law enforcement officers with special training to deal with the mentally ill. They participated in the early May apprehension of Casey Paul Jurgens, 19, who was captured at Fairmount Cemetery with a concealed, sawed-off Brazilian shotgun, law enforcement officials have said.

Also the fact that they're saying:

Police were looking at…. whether Tasers could ignite anything

Suggests they want to focus on making ignition seem like an unpredictable outcome from the use of the Taser, rather than highlighting that in this situation they had no other options.

Juan Flores Lopez burst into flames
HOT TAMALE!!! HOT TAMALE!!!

lmao.

IMO:

Fuel + electricity = NO. Common sense should tell people this, let alone police training.

Suggests they want to focus on making ignition seem like an unpredictable outcome from the use of the Taser, rather than highlighting that in this situation they had no other options.

I wonder why they might want to do that

I wonder why they might want to do that

Because they had other options, but they didn't use them because a cop had a brain fart and set the guy alight!

trog they may as well have just thrown a match. the cops didn't cover him in petrol, but they lit him on fire.

firefox + always middle click == win

Or IE right click and select open in new window or tab, but still a pain if you left click and have to navigate back to the screen you were on.

Spoiler:
Better still, instead of just adding it to the auto linking facilities, do a check whenever a thread is posted, and insert target="_blank" if it doesn't have them already in the anchor. ^_^


So, the dead man had a recorded mental illness. Yes well, he is toast. ^_^

I would like to read a police news story just once like:

"A Police Officer today, stopped the death of 6 childer and 3 adults by diffusing a tense situation with promises of jelly babies and a massage. A 20 year male was in a state of stress after finding his aging pet goldfish floating upside down in it's fishbowl and held hostages with a knife.

After 20 minutes of intense shoulder rub and evangelising the good properties of an Allens Jelly Baby, Sergeant Thomas O'Mereay convinced the gentleman that it was simply Splashy's time and that the red ones taste the best"

Why are all the stories about the non successful police operations :(

Because the Media/Public likes to bash the police and portray them a separate group to the rest of the community with their own standards and laws. I have the utmost respect for Police. The amount of s*** they get for little recognition in one of the most highly stressful jobs. Well Done.

Here's a story about a successful police operation
http://www.wkyc.com/news/rss_article.aspx?ref=RSS&storyid=69985
kinda bizzare in many, many ways... but I guess that's why it made the news.

separate group to the rest of the community with their own standards and laws

haha you're spot on there

If anything Paveway, they are held to a higher standard than the rest of the community./

you haven't dealt with many cops have you? thats pretty obvious

If you're asking if I've been in any trouble with them, No.

You get free pens from work, they get off speeding tickets.

Perks of the job i guess :D

I've dealt with a few over the years, mainly when I've done something dumb like driven too fast through their speedtrap. sometimes when getting breathalyzed, a couple of times to make a report about property theft, couple of times at car accident scenes, sometimes just plain old chinwagging when touring around the country in my 4wd.

I agree with fade

you haven't dealt with many cops have you? thats pretty obvious

I tend not to knock down street signs with my car, or get pulled up for doing other stupid s*** in a Car.
So No, I dont have many dealings with cops.

The 2 times i've been pulled over for speeding (One 10 over in an 80 zone, and one 12 over in a 100) the cop has been quite nice. Maybe because I didn't assume he was an a******. Maybe I knew he was just doing his job and showed him the respect he deserved.
Both times I got off with a warning. (Though I have been pinged once from a Camera >.>)

You only here about their stuff ups not the good work police officers do and we're lucky it doesn't happen to us. Imagine channel 7 news reporting about the errors you (stereotyping qgl demographic) make when doing your IT work and some fags on a forum sitting here giving you s*** thinking they can do a better job.

He sure had a blast.

damn, i was hoping for a video

same here

You are all idiots. The only other option they had other than the tazer was to shoot him.

And there will be tazers in Australia soon.

i've dealt with more than traffic cops, but traffic cops are infact the lowest of the low.

thats not even in the same ball park alize, cops are meant to be here for the community etc. your f***ups in IT aren't going to affect the community



last edited by paveway at 08:42:07 22/Jun/07

Cops are pretty paranoid about doing things by the book in Qld (now). The CMC is ruthless in hunting down crooked cops. There will always be a corrupt element in any enforcement division though - be realistic.

But in the general hustle and bustle of the streets I suppose they can only take so much from know-it-all ricers and bogans.

it's not so much crooked cops, it's cops that act like c***s i'm talking about

I believe my thread got nuked the last time I spoke of that so "no comment".

Hmmmm....and I thought this thread was running out of gas.... :)

I don't know that a stupid cop who fires a Taser at a person covered in petrol equates to a corrupt or bad cop. Most likely the cop who fired the Taser was simply following orders. He was given a job to do, and the poor cop had to watch his job go up in smoke. ^_^