A teenager carrying a Bible and shouting "I want Jesus" was shot twice with a police stun gun and later died at a St. Louis hospital, authorities said.
In a statement obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, police in Jerseyville, about 40 miles north of St. Louis, said 17-year-old Roger Holyfield would not acknowledge officers who approached him and he continued yelling, "I want Jesus."
Police tried to calm the teen, but Holyfield became combative, according to the statement. Officers fired the stun gun at him after he ignored their warnings, then fired again when he continued struggling, police said.
40 comments
ryushikaze wrote:
Right. I just don't see why they needed to use a stun gun on him, as it doesn't sound as if he was brandishing a knife or a gun or anything of the sort. Honestly, I'm just uncomfortable with the usage of guns, be they purportedly "nonlethal" stun guns or not.
He got jesus!
Stun guns are great if the opponent has anything resembling a weapon and you don't want to get too close but also don't want to kill him, but since in this case all he was apparently packing was a book (albeit a dangerous one!), I don't see why simply wrestling him to the ground and getting the cuffs on wouldn't be adequate - surely multiple police officers could take down one guy by hand!
I can think of some reasons why a stun gun would be preferred over wrestling with the guy.
This is simply sad, in my opinion. This poor guy was obviously messed up (either from drugs or from mental illness, at least as much as from religion if not more so), and the attempt to gain control of him just went tragically wrong. If he hadn't reacted fatally to the shocks, he might have gotten the help he needed. Sometimes, though, the dice just are most unkind.
I suppose that point about brutality is enough reason, but I gather stun guns can produce unbearable pain far in excess of anything you could reasonably expect from resisting physical restraint. Based on that, electrocution sounds much more "brutal" if you ask me, but that's just one man's opinion. Either way, though, what else is a policeman supposed to do when some fuckwit decides to violently resist arrest?
Brain_In_A_Jar: Electrocution wasn't the idea; he wasn't supposed to have been killed by it. Yes, the electrical jolt causes pain, but (theoretically) no lasting injury whatsoever, or even any temporary injury beyond the possibility of a small burn -- much less grievous damage than what would be expected for him to incur in a conventional tackle and physical subdual by multiple police officers. Had it worked correctly, this method of subdual would have let the officers bind him securely with no further risk of injury to himself or to them; that's what stun guns are designed for.
MD20/20 beat me to it, but someone in that state of mind is general dangerous in one form or another.
The only good pig, is a dead pig.
if it took two taserings to take the kid down, then physically wrestling him to submission was going to leave someone in pretty bad shape--the kid, an officer, or both.
The police have always had trouble subduing the mentally ill. ie. Using the right amount of force.
The rationale behind the use of 'non-lethal' stun guns appears to have its origins in the increasing prevalence of HIV. Even multiple officers 'wrestling' the suspect to the ground does not obviate the risk of one or more of them being bitten by a hysterical or particularly aggressive person. Being bitten by someone who is HIV positive could be a death sentence (in a horrible way) to the cop who is only doing his job and trying to protect the public. I support the use of Tazers 100%, even if there will occasionally be unfortunate accidents/incidents like this.
The teenager's religious beliefs and the police officers' use of a Taser are two separate issues. While most of us would agree that religion is irrational, it in itself does not excuse the police in using extreme force. It would be helpful if the news story better explained just how "combative" our "I want Jesus" teenager was before being shocked.
Policemen are becoming way too dependent on Tasers and way too many people are dying from their misuse to continue classifying them as "non-lethal" means of subduing criminal suspects. For a good example of the misuse of Tasers, see http://www.ky3.com/home/video/25829234.html
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
