Banning choke holds
-
It just all seems very logically precious to me. I have no real problem with not allowing choke holds either. I only think it's absurd to believe that the world is a predictably better place with cops who follow that rule. It would be good to train cops in effective martial arts which maximize ability to incapacitate without permanent damage.
-
@jon-nyc said in Banning choke holds:
I don't see any issue with it. Can't say I know what the costs and benefits are. But it's much better than disbanding the cops or not giving them weapons at all.
While I agree with the latter. For me, if I were a cop and there was someone who was resisting arrest or (other scenario that requires using force to restrain the individual), if I'm not allowed to use a choke hold to maintain control, what's the next option... taser? Threaten with gun? Round house kick to the face? The choke hold seems to be the best of those options.
-
-
Ban it.
-
@Loki said in Banning choke holds:
The New question of course is how do you immobilize someone such that they no longer are a safety threat. Apparently handcuffs are not enough. A net?
That's a really good question. Especially if the person is having a psychotic episode or is as high as a kite.
Any of you ever have to subdue somebody under those circumstances? Ain't easy.
-
@Loki said in Banning choke holds:
The New question of course is how do you immobilize someone such that they no longer are a safety threat. Apparently handcuffs are not enough. A net?
How is this the new question? This was literally my question when starting this thread!
And yes, I vote bring back the cartoonish big dog catcher nets.