• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Missouri man trying to save stepson from fire hit with stun gun by police

apdst said:
It's not their kid, either.
Click to expand...

Makes no difference in ability to actually save a child from a fire. It simply doesn't. Adrenaline only goes so far. It doesn't give us magical see-through-smoke-and-in-dark powers. It basically makes us more alert and allows us to ignore pain that would normally be felt when doing things that then are seen as "extraordinary". It is plain wrong to believe that firefighters or even police or other people wouldn't have wanted to save that child if they believed they could actually do it. There is nothing honestly that should make anyone believe that the man had a better chance of saving the boy than anyone else there. And what is more likely is that having to deal with him trying slowed down efforts to actually get in there and try.
 
apdst said:
We live in a free country. I have the right to place my life in danger to protect my family. The cops have no authority to stop me
Click to expand...

Not true. You cannot put yourself in danger when there are others who are better equipped to do so and they are able to stop you. They have every authority to stop you because your efforts could impede their efforts to actually save the person. In fact, you could make the situation worse due to your inexperience and lack of training and protection for yourself.
 
PirateMk1 said:
The puzzling part is I am not quite sure why it drives me so.
Click to expand...
I think it's a normal reaction. A Father has had the natural right since the dawn of time to protect and save his child. To deny him that is to deny his humanity.

PirateMk1 said:
This thread has well and truly pissed me off to no end like no other has.
Click to expand...

It's a very emotional subject, no matter what side of the argument you sit on. I've been a paramedic for 8 years. The last 5 as a critical care paramedic. I've witnessed first hand incredible acts of bravery that have resulted in a successful outcome when on the surface it would appear that there was minimal chance of success - and not always acts from qualified personnel.

I'm not for one minute suggesting that Emergency services personnel shouldn't be actively trying to encourage/persuade anyone to not participate in what could be considered a potentially dangerous/life threatening situation but I do believe there are limits they should be able to employ.

Of all the arguments i'm seeing here relating to why the Father should not have been allowed access, i'd have to say that the one that puzzles me the most is that due to poor visibility "he could've stepped on his Son." "Sorry, i'm not going to try and rescue you because I could've stepped on you"? Sorry, that doesn't even come close to a justifiable reason.

I'm glad i'm a paramedic and not that Police Officer. I'd make a lousy cop apparently because I wouldn't have tasered the Dad, I would've gone in with him .
 
roguenuke said:
Not true. You cannot put yourself in danger when there are others who are better equipped to do so and they are able to stop you. They have every authority to stop you because your efforts could impede their efforts to actually save the person. In fact, you could make the situation worse due to your inexperience and lack of training and protection for yourself.
Click to expand...

Running into a burning building is going to make the situation worse?

This is why the world is goung to be so much worse off if the Libbos are running the show.
 
PirateMk1 said:
Your talking to someone who routinely breaks the law and only follows it as convenience. The law doesn't mean crap to me. That's neither here nor there. We wont agree on this ever. I sincerely hope if any officer that steps in my way rethinks their position if they want to go home, there are certain things you just don't get in the way of. Good damn thing I have fire suppression equipment installed at my residence. You don't agree of course but you have your opinion I have mine.
Click to expand...
I sincerely hope (and doubt) that such a situation ever arise for you.
 
apdst said:
Running into a burning building is going to make the situation worse?

This is why the world is goung to be so much worse off if the Libbos are running the show.
Click to expand...
Yes...'us libbos' are surely the scourge of the earth...
 
Gaius46 said:
Suicide requires an intention to end ones life. Performing an act that might well lead to ones death is not necessarily suicide.
Click to expand...
You have read a piece of a snippet that contains a small amount of information and believe somehow you know what the condition was at the scene. A father would rush headlong into an inferno in an attempt to save a child. That doesnt mean it would not be a suicidal effort.
 
****in bull****. If a person wants to sacrifice themselves to save another who the **** are the police to stop them?!?!? These cops are ****ing with instinct and they are lucky to be alive.
 
Stepping away and thinking about this so more, I'd have to REALLY see what happened to make a decision for certain.

I am certain he shouldn't of have been tasered after cuffed.
 
But Missouri police officers tasered the distraught dad before he rushed into flames that even firefighters, dressed head to toe in gear, had to back away from.
By the time fire officials reached Miller’s son, Riley, it was too late


Read more: Missouri dad tasered while trying to save son from burning home - NY Daily News
Click to expand...

From what this says dad had lost his mind and was going to be a dead father.

My ex once managed to start a raging inferno in our house cooking with oil. While the fire department was in bound she tried to rush back into the house, she was delirious with guilt. I had to tackle her in the street to prevent her from getting herself dead. A neighbor handed me his fire extinguisher and i went back in and put the fire out, but I have fire fighting experience and not only survived with no injury but saved the house.

I'm going to say this, while I understand the outrage, I think the cops did what they had to do to stop a man from killing himself. People CAN lose their minds when faced with tragedy, and as tragic as this is, as horrible as this situation is, the cops prevented it from being worse from what I have read.
 
Serenity said:
I'm glad i'm a paramedic and not that Police Officer. I'd make a lousy cop apparently because I wouldn't have tasered the Dad, I would've gone in with him .
Click to expand...

That's really ivory tower stuff to say. You were not there and it's absurd to say you would have went in against the advice of the fire department, who are some of the bravest people I've met.
 
Ben K. said:
That's really ivory tower stuff to say. You were not there and it's absurd to say you would have went in against the advice of the fire department, who are some of the bravest people I've met.
Click to expand...

Not absurd at all. I think I know myself better than you.
 
So you ignore all your training as a paramedic?

Whether its absurd or not, you're still sitting on an ivory tower with little info.
 
VanceMack said:
Yes...'us libbos' are surely the scourge of the earth...
Click to expand...

I was pointing out how Libbos are contrary on every damn thing.

Just being wrong on occassion doesn't make you a Libbo. ;)
 
Ben K. said:
That's really ivory tower stuff to say. You were not there and it's absurd to say you would have went in against the advice of the fire department, who are some of the bravest people I've met.
Click to expand...

In this particular case, this guy had more balls than the firefighters.
 
apdst said:
Running into a burning building is going to make the situation worse?

This is why the world is goung to be so much worse off if the Libbos are running the show.
Click to expand...

It absolutely could. First of all, someone who doesn't know what they are doing could easily bump into things or open doors that cause a difference in the pressure and air flow that causes the flames to change direction. Second, since the person can't see through smoke (why firefighters have thermal imaging cameras and flashlights and have been trained to look everywhere, not just where they expect people might be), those running in to save loved ones could easily end up running right over top of their loved ones or throwing/dropping something on them because they expect them to be in a certain spot. The person can also spread fire to the one they are trying to save, particularly if their clothes catch fire while they are traipsing through the house. Their clothes catching fire could also spread the fire to other parts of the house. It could also cause the person to panic if the fire gets too much for them and they start bumping into things in their house. There are many reasons that firefighters wear the gear they do.
 
apdst said:
In this particular case, this guy had more balls than the firefighters.
Click to expand...

No he was simply being stupid due to his emotional state. It isn't about guts when it comes to running into a fire to save a loved one. That is pure emotion that causes that. The firefighters were there and ended up even going into the house to save a stranger.

Would it be balls that caused a person to run into a hostage situation to grab for a gun because that person felt the police weren't handling it? Because in most cases that "hero" is going to get him or the hostage or both killed. It certainly isn't likely that he would save the day.
 
roguenuke said:
No he was simply being stupid due to his emotional state. It isn't about guts when it comes to running into a fire to save a loved one. That is pure emotion that causes that. The firefighters were there and ended up even going into the house to save a stranger.

Would it be balls that caused a person to run into a hostage situation to grab for a gun because that person felt the police weren't handling it? Because in most cases that "hero" is going to get him or the hostage or both killed. It certainly isn't likely that he would save the day.
Click to expand...

Soldiers on the battlefield make stupid decisions, due to their emotional state all the time. We call it "uncommon valor" and award them with Medals of Honor and hail their heroism forever

The dad wasn't endangering anyone's life other than his. That's his right.
 
apdst said:
This is why the world is goung to be so much worse off if the Libbos are running the show.
Click to expand...

So if policemen, firemen, and teachers are all Libbos, just what in the hell do conservatives contribute to our society?
 
Crosscheck said:
So if policemen, firemen, and teachers are all Libbos, just what in the hell do conservatives contribute to our society?
Click to expand...

We're here, so that Libbos can put words into our mouths and lie about what we say.
 
apdst said:
Soldiers on the battlefield make stupid decisions, due to their emotional state all the time. We call it "uncommon valor" and award them with Medals of Honor and hail their heroism forever

The dad wasn't endangering anyone's life other than his. That's his right.
Click to expand...

He was endangering plenty of other lives, including very possibly his own son's. He had no idea what condition his son was in and he didn't even truly know where he was. It is more than possible that he could have made his son's situation worse had the kid actually managed to find somewhere that kept him relatively safe from the smoke and fire.

And soldiers are trained. They also don't have better trained people available to do something if something else could be done right there at that moment. They are on their own. The main in the OP wasn't on his own. He was not in any sort of position to try to save his son when others, who are more trained were trying to figure out a way they, in all their equipment to do it safely for themselves and that child.
 
roguenuke said:
He was endangering plenty of other lives, including very possibly his own son's.
Click to expand...
And the tasered guy's life was not endangered by the taser?

It is more than possible that he could have made his son's situation worse had the kid actually managed to find somewhere that kept him relatively safe from the smoke and fire.
Click to expand...
What's worse than dead? According to previous logic used there was no "relatively safe" place.


You keep going back to father "endangering plenty of other lives" yet argue first responders already deemed too dangerous to enter meaning they have no intention to enter fire; which is it?
 
apdst said:
I was pointing out how Libbos are contrary on every damn thing.

Just being wrong on occassion doesn't make you a Libbo. ;)
Click to expand...
One MIGHT suggest that if you are on the same side on EVERY ISSUE...that you might be...not right... ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom