Banning choke holds

[89th]

@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.

[Copper]

Link to video

[Mik]

It's already banned in a number of places. I see it as a step in the right direction.

[LuFins Dad]

Ban it.

[jon-nyc]

Banning it is so 1995.

Let’s cancel them instead.

[Copper]

Or maybe lynch them.

[Loki]

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?

[Horace]

Cops must have a judge's warrant to employ any force whatsoever. Otherwise all cooperation with cops is voluntary.

[Jolly]

@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.

[89th]

@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.