Meeting Stupidity with Stupidity

For every action, there is an equal and opposite overreaction


Isaac Newton formulated three laws of motion, No. 3 being: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. If he were still around, he'd propose a fourth: For every action, there is an unequal and opposite overreaction.

Lately, Americans seem to be taking advice from Oscar Wilde, who said, "Moderation is a fatal thing." Stupidity can be met and defeated with sensible, proportionate measures. Or it can be met with even greater stupidity. Guess which is the preferred option these days.

Last week, a 17-year-old knucklehead exposed his idiocy to the world by venturing onto the field at a Philadelphia Phillies game and running around waving a towel. When a pursuing policeman got weary of the chase, he pulled out his Taser and shot the kid.

For that, the officer won praise from players, sportscasters, and city police commissioner Charles Ramsey, who said the cop "acted appropriately. I support him 100 percent." The cop was in line with department policy, Ramsey said, because "he was attempting to make an arrest and the male was attempting to flee."

Really? Hitting a delinquent with a potentially fatal 50,000-volt burst of electricity even though he poses no physical danger to anyone and has zero chance of escaping? Maybe the commissioner should read the directions from the Taser manufacturer, which say the devices are meant to "incapacitate dangerous, combative or high-risk subjects."

The Police Executive Research Forum says they "should be used only on people 1) actively resisting or exhibiting active aggression or 2) at risk of harming themselves or others." A federal appeals court ruled that cops may not use Tasers unless "the suspect poses an immediate threat to the officer or a member of the public."

Sure, shooting the kid with a Taser taught him a lesson and will undoubtedly deter others from following his example. But if that were the only consideration, riddling him with live ammo would have been even more effective. The rational response would have been to let him cavort until he ran out of gas, then take him away, leaving punishment to the courts.

That is not to say the courts are always rational. The other day, a 19-year-old woman showed up in a Lake County, Ill., courtroom gallery sporting a T-shirt that only a person of incompetent judgment would wear outside the house. "I have the (female sexual organ), so I make the rules," it announced.

That claim might be true if she were the only woman in possession of one. True or not, it was the wrong message to present to Judge Helen Rozenberg, who immediately held her in contempt and sentenced her to 48 hours in jail.

The judge could have ordered the offending party to leave. She could have insisted that she cover up. She could have delivered a stern lecture.

But the only remedy the magistrate could devise was to lock her up like a criminal. In Rozenberg's case, "judicial temperament" is a contradiction in terms.

Critics of the new Arizona immigration law likewise have decided to fight fire with napalm. Rather than merely object that the statute is shortsighted, counterproductive, and vulnerable to abuse, they decided to pretend it's the greatest atrocity of the 21st century.

"When I heard about it, it reminded me of Nazi Germany," insisted Hispanic Federation President Lillian Rodriguez Lopez. Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony said Arizona was "reverting to German Nazi" methods. A New Jersey cartoonist drew Hitler with a mustache in the shape of Arizona.

The only value of statements like those is to reveal how little the speaker knows about life under the Fuehrer. Where are the concentration camps? Where is the mass slaughter? Who is the all-powerful dictator?

Arizona may have become an uncomfortable place for Latinos, legal or illegal, but it bears about as much resemblance to Nazi Germany as it does to Antarctica. If a law like this were the worst thing Hitler had ever done, nobody would remember him today.

In moments when we are presented with a sore provocation, the temptation is to respond with unrestrained fury. But wanton indulgence of anger usually ends up compounding foolishness with lunacy.

You can fight fire with fire. As a rule, though, it's better to use water.


NEXT: The Fugitive

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Good morning.

    No alt-txt on the Kindle ad?

  2. Yeah, tazering a guy for acting like an asshole is bad; throwing a woman in jail for 48 hours for acting like an asshole is bad. And comparing Azizona’s anti-illegal immigrant legislation to Nazi Germany is, well, being an asshole. But Arizona’s new law is worse than, well, being an asshole. A Turkish friend of mine told me about some friends of his who were picked up in Arizona for being brown and talking funny. When one of them showed the cop his driver’s license, the cop said “You could have bought that,” which is true, but, after all, you can buy a passport, you can buy a birth certificate, you can buy anything. The fact that some people are tedious enough to compare Arizona’s law to Nazi oppression doesn’t mean that it isn’t, well, oppressive.

    1. But it’s intellectual laziness. There are so many more suitable historical references than Nazi Germany. I think it’s time to give Hitler a break and let the hundred-thousand other regimes have a go at it.

      1. +1

        1. For instance:

          Exodus 32:27-29

          …Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor.

          That’s way worse than Arizona SB 1070.

      2. That’s nitpicky and catering to a sensitive minority. Degrees of evil and oppression do not exsist. “Who had it worse” competitions are lame. Embrace the Nazi reference.

        1. “Degrees of evil and oppression do not exsist.”

          What a strange statement. So you are saying that every government is exactly as bad as Nazi Germany?

        2. Degrees of evil and oppression do not exsist.

          I tend to agree with that. Perhaps the consequences can be more or less devastating, but a violation of liberty is a violation of liberty, regardless of scale.

    2. I certainly hope for your sake, sir, this observation your own, because it certainly feels familiar to me. I think we need to sit and have discourse regarding your breach of literary etiquette.

    3. Damn, your friend’s story sure does have elements of my work too! Are you sure you haven’t been lifting my work either? Or were you just waiting to incorporate the prison rape later for effect? Either way, we need to have a fucking chat, bub!

    4. But is it the law, or is it the way the law is enforced that is the issue? If the law is substantially similar to federal immigration law, then it’s not a legislative branch issue, unless the U.S. government is also Nazi-esque in this regard.

    5. I have a friend of a friend of a mutual aquantance who has PROOF that George W Bush is really Satan!

    6. Very interesting that your “friend” was already a victim of a law that has yet to go into enforcement. That must have taken some real effort.

    7. They should compare it to Mexico’s immigration laws, and say well Arizona’s law is slightly less draconian.

  3. “The Police Executive Research Forum says they “should be used only on people 1) actively resisting or exhibiting active aggression”

    Running around in an attempt to evade arrest constitutes active resistance.

    “The rational response would have been to let him cavort until he ran out of gas, then take him away, leaving punishment to the courts.”

    If security didn’t pursue him, it would have been hours before he ‘ran out of gas,’ since he wouldn’t have had to run around to evade arrest. Wasn’t there a recent article complaining about the length of baseball games? How much longer would that game have gone had security just stood there and watched this idiot wave his towel around?

    1. I’m usually very wary of the over-use of force with tasers, but this guy had it coming.

      At least James Harrison doesn’t play for the Phillies.

    2. But he wasn’t running with the intention of evading arrest, he was running with the intention of causing a ruckus. Legally, your’e right, but the use of a taser was still unnecessary.

      1. The tasing was necessary because the cop can’t stay away from the donuts.

      2. He kept running away from security personnel, which seems indicative of a desire not to be caught.

  4. It’s probably overreacting to go on and on about how the security people overreacted, but that’s what we do, isn’t it. The solution: post a recipe.

  5. In the case of the 19 year old female with the t-shirt, the author’s assumption that the judge overreacted may be incorrect.

    We do not know the past history of the young female vis a vis the justice system; she may have been a repeat offender for all we know and the judge may already have exhausted the normal measures of warnings or fines.

    1. Or maybe the judge was just prickly that day, who gives a shit? In fact, who gives a shit about the dope at the ball game? For me, and my house, we’ll go with riddling the asshole with bullets.

    2. Agreed. Contempt rules are drafted ambiguously for a reason. I see no problem with what the judge did here. It’s a discretionary matter, and none of us were there. You know, hindsight and all that…

    3. She wasn’t a ‘repeat offender’ (and prior record may influence sentencing but is IRRELAVENT in determining guilt anyway). In fact she wasn’t even involved in a case. She gave a friend a ride and didn’t have time to change into more court appropriate attire.
      Maybe she should have waited outside the courtroom, but who expected jail time.
      Total judicial power trip, you law and order types can stop rationalizing this.

      1. But not irrelevant in determining sentencing

  6. By using the Tazer, the officer is showing how weak he is. Are you telling me he couldn’t deal with a non-violent kid running around a field? He needed a Tazer?

    1. He is also overweight. That’s pertinent. It’s hard running.

      1. Right.

      2. You have a point. It was a dangerous situation. Officer Fatty nearly gave himself a heart attack.

    2. I wonder if Carl Lewis could have chased a kid in sneakers and shorts around while wearing slacks and dress shoes, and wearing a belt with about 20lbs of equipment (sidearm, cuffs, etc.)

      1. Maybe not, but Carl Weathers could’ve.

  7. Science, Chapman, never heard of personal responsibility? Why should thousands of people sit around watching some jerk act like a an asshole? They should have tased him. The crowd cheered, you say? Big surprise there.

    This piece reads like the parents of disruptive “children” in public schools. When they find out their little angel got punished, instead of piling on more, they attack the punisher, for being so mean.

    What ever happened to “you act like an ass, you get what you deserve”?

    1. The crowd also cheered the tasing, so being cheered on doesn’t seem to support not tasing him.

      Seeing that guy get tased made me realize the Romans had it right. We should release a drunk asshole from Philly on the field during every 7th inning stretch for a ritual tasing.

    2. He may have deserved to be tased, but there is still the idea that the policeman overreacted to the situation and used too much force. Some people deserve to die, that doesn’t mean anyone should kill them.

      1. Does anyone remember what cops did before tasers? They beat suspects into submission with nightsticks. The taser is merely a remotely administered beating to compel submission. If a beating with a nightstick wouldn’t have been appropriate then, a taser isn’t appropriate now.

        If a cop merely has to get his uniform sweaty and dirty to do his job, that’s what cops should do.

    3. And what you deserve is entirely at the discretion of law enforcement and judges?

      Well that’s comforting.

      What are you doing on Reason again?

    4. So, for being a fascist dumb-ass, you qualify for a Tasering?
      Works for me. What’s your address?

  8. What ever happened to “you act like an ass, you get what you deserve”?

    We Lawn Gnomes notice that you humans seem to revel in acting the fool. Especially in America, where you regard your right to offend others under the guise that others haven’t the right to not be offended.

    We Lawn Gnomes don’t have much use for offending others, as we are a docile and non-agressive people.

    When was the last time you heard a Lawn Gnome say, “Don’t taze me bro?”*

    *There was that unfortunate Travelocity Gnome that nearly fried himself, but we don’t claim him. He is our village idiot.

    1. What’s your position on cereal endorsing Leprechauns?

      1. We like them. We feel he is a credit to Leprechauns, leading by example promoting market expansion of a product that some may feel is profiting off of a stereotype. There is a reason Leprechauns have much gold to hoard. Very Libertarian.

        Unfortunately, he has raised the ire of your First Lady, as she feels such cereals are unhealthy and promote childhood obesity.

        1. The only problem with that is that the cereal Leprechaun is actually a Fairy in disguise. You can tell because he keeps dancing around asking everyone to “Eat my Lucky Charms”.

          1. Lawn Gnomes tend to be accepting of Fairies; every once in a while a Lawn Gnonme gets approached by a Fairy with carnal suggestion which a Lawn Gnome will generally rebuff. To each their own we always say.

    2. He is our village idiot.

      Then you should elect him to be President of all the gnomes.

      1. Didn’t we just elect one for President of the United States?

  9. What ever happened to “you act like an ass, you get what you deserve”?

    If this statement were taken literally and enforced uniformly, half of the world’s sports fans would be dead tomorrow.

    1. OK but i guess the question is whether a tazing is what he deserved because constable lardass wasn’t capable of chasing him down the old fashioned way and was probable feeling humiliated in front of all those hometown fans

  10. Comparing Arizona to Nazi Germany is going too far, as is jailing a woman for wearing an offensive shirt, but the Phillies kid got what was coming to him. He was trespassing and resisting arrest. Getting tased is a legit (and hilarious) response. Plus, it’s better to get tased than to get knocked down by a NFL linebacker, which I’ve seen happen to a guy that ran onto the field.

    1. That must have been a crushing experience.

    2. Okay? Believe it or not, it’s wrong to use potentially deadly force all willie nillie. People actually die when they get tased. Tasing someone who poses no physical threat to you from a distance is WAY beyond appropriate force.

      1. Getting tackled is potentially deadly force as well. He could snap his neck when he gets tackled. It’s not like he got tased for mouthing off, he got tased for resisting arrest for trespassing.

  11. Everyone’s a hanging judge these days.

    1. But I was first

      *puffs up chest*

    2. Moderation in everything. Including ‘moderation.’

  12. You libertarians just don’t get it. If that kid wasn’t tazed HE MAY HAVE CONTINUED RUNNING AROUND WAVING A TOWEL! That cop, like every cop, is a hero. The heavy hand of authority coming down at any time, even unprovoked, is just the price we pay for living in a free society.

  13. I totally agree with the author’s position on when and when not to use a Taser. But I would actually add one exception for tasering people who get naked and run around on the field during – and interrupting – a large public event (assuming they don’t stop immediately when told to by the authorities). I just don’t find a problem with tasering this person, when normally I’m so against tasers I don’t believe police should be allowed to have them. Maybe there should be someone whose job it is to stand around at sporting events and taser any naked people who jump onto the field and run around, interrupting the game (or concert or whatever).

    I think, unlike a “suspect” who gives the police a wrong look or a raised chin, these people (and they’re fairly rare for the most part) deserve to be tasered. They deserve the pain and risk of death.

    So in all police department SOP manuals, it should be extremely restrictive on when police are allowed to use tasers (and even moreso with respect to their firearms), but there should be one per se allowance for tasering naked people running on the field at a sporting event. Taser the hell out of them.

    1. No! That is NOT appropriate force. The idea is not supposed to be punishment for committing a crime, it is to incapacitate someone so they can no longer commit that crime, and the crime has to be, you know, threatening the safety of others, in order to use that kind of force to stop it. Otherwise, you have to actually CATCH the guy and charge him with something. Bill the kid for your time. Jesus. Are you kidding me? You’re like those assholes who say “People don’t seem to get it- Rodney King really WAS a criminal”- who fucking cares?!?! If you don’t have to hurt someone, you don’t. Simple as that. This cop was TOO LAZY, and TOO FAT, and UNFIT to do his job. Your right to watch an uninterrupted sporting event does not trump anybody else’s right to due process. Why stop there? Maybe arm the ushers at the movies- after all, why do I wanna pay 10.50 for a movie and waste 3 hours of my life if some asshole teen is gonna talk thru the whole thing? Should I personally assualt the guy because getting an usher to have a conversation with him might take too long?

      That kid is a little punk, and I TOTALLY agree that he has to accept the risk that when you commit a crime, things might get out of hand. That doesn’t absolve police officers of their own personal responsibility, and it’s a fucked up world when we EXPECT a 17 yr old brat to have more personal responsibility than a trained civil servant.

      1. That doesn’t absolve police officers of their own personal responsibility, and it’s a fucked up world when we EXPECT a 17 yr old brat to have more personal responsibility than a trained civil servant.

        How else will he learn? A stern talking to or perhaps a slap on the wrist. Maybe even a spanking and grounding? He may even be ridiculed on a late night talk show, but your society celebrates idiocy and he would probably be made a sidekick. We notice that you humans, and Americans in particular reward the behavior of imbeciles, like your politicians for example.

        We Lawn Gnomes chuckle at you humans and your bumbling and stumbling attempts to raise your offspring and rationalize their behavior. Our children are seen and not heard, as we are a stoic people capable or remarkable discipline.

        1. But clearly not incapable of typos.

          1. An errant “f” is easier to correct than an errant and self-centered seventeen year-old with questionable common sense.

            1. While we’re at it, what’s the deal with Gnome Alaska?

      2. This cop was TOO LAZY, and TOO FAT, and UNFIT to do his job.

        Apparently not. He seemed to put and end to the situation quite effectively.

        1. In the laziest way an unfit fat person could do.

          1. That’s not true. You don’t have to hold down and cuff a corpse, and the officer did have a sidearm.

            1. Ya, but that would have resulted in more paperwork.

      3. I could not agree with you more.

    2. Naked people running around on the field should be tased on their genitalia. Repeatedly. With a slow motion replay afterwards.

      1. The dungeon called, Your 4pm appointment has arrived.

  14. Another question I have is. What harm was this goof doing? I mean it’s not like he was holding up a fire truck from saving a baby from dingos… he was wasting peoples time during their leisure time… should shot that fucker with bullets not volts. Wat?

    1. Wondering why you chose dingos for your allegory?

  15. The risk to the kid was minimal from the tasering and the alternative of chasing him down and tackling him has similar risks to the kid and the authorities. If the cop had a heart attack chasing him, would that be preferable. There is also a very good chance of broken bones by both parties. I don’t believe the authorities should be required to assume much risk to protect the asshole from getting hurt from his purposeful stupidity.

    1. Bullshit. Certainly there was much more a risk of the kid going into cardiac arrest when the cop shot him full of electricity than there was a risk of the cop having a heart attack for doin a little cardio. If you are a police officer, you’ve assumed risk. To protect ppl. Even assholes.

      1. I would say when you purposefully tresspass you’ve assumed risk as well.

        If there is no consequence for your actions there will be no behavior modification.

        Maybe the next guy to consider it will think twice.

        1. Fans running onto the field or court during a sporting event may not always be as “harmless” as you assume.

          1. So.

            Drilling for oil in the ocean isn’t always as harmless as one assumes. That doesn’t mean we should stop.

        2. “If there is no consequence for your actions there will be no behavior modification.”

          The consequences of trespassing are getting arrested and removed from the stadium, not severe physical pain. This is a cop tasering someone who is no threat to anyone. People have been running out on the field in baseball games forever. It’s not a big deal.

          1. People have been shoplifting forever its not a big deal.

            People have been murdering other people forever its not a big deal.

            People have been cheating on their taxes forever its not a big deal.

            People have been embezzeling money forever its not a big deal.

            Hmm… I don’t quite follow your logic.
            How do you know he’s not a threat?

        3. “”If there is no consequence for your actions there will be no behavior modification.

          Maybe the next guy to consider it will think twice.””

          Some one did it at the next game, so maybe not. No one was tased that time

    2. Herr Baghoh writes: “If the cop had a heart attack chasing him, would that be preferable.”

      Yes, Yes it would. As would shooting back at the power-tripping juice-monkeys.

  16. Consider the source, then, move on to important issues.

  17. “If the cop had a heart attack chasing him, would that be preferable[?]”

    Yes. That is actually always preferable.

    1. Indeed. If fat cop cannot chase a criminal without dying, fat cop needs a new job. How is this not obvious?

  18. If the runner was a suicide bomber, could tasering actually cause detonation?

  19. I hope the cop loses his job.

    1. I hope you get tazed during your next traffic stop.

      1. I hope you get tazed when you lose your job.

      2. Then you are a fucking piece of shit.

      3. I’m hoping you get Tasered walking through your front door.

  20. these pranks aren’t harmless and they should be dealt with with extreme force.…..ed-by-cop/

    these scofflaws undermine societal order and make all our lives worse because of it. Or something like that.

    fucking cops.

  21. Try this, pro-taser gang:

    Getting tased is pretty much like getting whacked with a night-stick, several times. Both tasers and night-sticks are supposed to be last-resort non-lethal force.

    Would you still be cheering the fat cop if he had subdued the fan by beating him with a club?

    1. Well, it would at mean that the cop had enough closing speed and/or the correct angle to catch up with him

      And, really, maybe it’s on overreation, but this is rather the least sympathetic taser victim ever. I would ask Monica Seles and that third base coach on the harmlessness of people who run onto the fields of sporting events.

      1. Dumbasses have run out onto baseball fields thousands of times and exactly once harmed someone. I think that their harmlessness is a fairly safe bet.

        1. Thousands of wells have been drilled in the Gulf of Mexico and exaclty one has caused widespread environmental impact.

          Therefore they are safe then right?

          1. Just come out and declare your Luddite tendencies, Xiver.

          2. Thousands of wells have been drilled in the Gulf of Mexico and exaclty one has caused widespread environmental impact.

            Therefore they are safe then right?

            Correct, jackass.

    2. “Would you still be cheering the fat cop if he had subdued the fan by beating him with a club?”

      uh, yes, but i agree both are an inappropriate use of force

    3. “Getting tased is pretty much like getting whacked with a night-stick, several times.”

      Utterly false. The latter can cause broken bones far more often than the former can cause a heart attack. By your ‘logic,’ Saturn is pretty much like Mercury, because they’re both planets.

      “Would you still be cheering the fat cop if he had subdued the fan by beating him with a club?”

      No, because it would have meant the officer had caught the kid and then applied excessive force. In this case the officer (and the rest of the security staff) weren’t able to pin the kid down right away, so instead of prolonging a chase he ended it at range with a device specifically designed to be less than lethal and then calmly and professionally secured the suspect and led him into custody.

      If the cop had tackled the kid and accidentally broken his neck, would we be wailing and wringing our hands about excessive force? People seem to think cops need to be Olympic decathletes who can somehow gently cuddle even the most combative suspects into submission.

      1. Except that Taser International’s products are often lethal.
        Which you continue to overlook in your support for your brown-shirted friends.

        1. Define ‘often’ in the context you’re using it. Out of the tens of thousands of times a Taser has been used by police since 2001, there have been around 50 deaths in which it was determined that Taser use may have been a contributing factor, and none in which the Taser was listed conclusively as the cause of death. Is zero conclusive evidence ‘often’ to you?

          Any use of force can have unintended consequences.

          1. They have good lawyers. And even then:

  22. H.L. Mencken said it pithier:

    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.

  23. If, by some chance, the kid had had a heart attack – which Tasers have been known to induce – the city of Philadelphia could be facing a multi-million dollar lawsuit.

    Maybe the cop should spend more time in the gym and less time at Dunkin Donuts.

  24. Sorry, I’m less sympathetic issue for three reasons . . .

    1) The people who do these things typically do fight off cops to get away and put security officials at risk with the physicality required to subdue them.

    2) When you trespass onto a baseball field, you’re are making the choice to expose yourself to a number of possibilities, which include potential bodily harm and arrest.

    3) He was a Philadelphia sports fan, c’mon.

    Also, did he really shoot him with 50,000 volts? Don’t they have various levels of voltage that can be selected like in Star Trek? The kid went down, but he wasn’t twitching and got up to walk right after they handcuffed him. It didn’t seem to me like he got the full treatment.

  25. The fact that anyone would write this article is further testament to the fact that America has become a nation of wimps–Mamby pamby, bleeding heart wimps.

    The kid got what he deserved. So did the courtroom skank, and the AZ law is not nearly as “draconian” as people make it out to be.

    1. Thank you, Francisco Franco.

  26. The worst thing about the Nazi comparison is the ammo it gives the Arizona law’s supporters.

    Tell me someone, is there a name for that fallacy? I.e., of addressing the stupidest argument made by a member of one’s opposition?

    Seems like it’s close to ad hominen but not quite (since you’re addressing an actual argument, albeit made by an idiot) and seems like it’s close to strawman but not quite (since the person whose argument you’re addressing really exists, although better arguments do, too). But addressing the worst argument or rhetoric of one’s opposition sure seems like it oughtta have a name.

    1. Since the Latin word for “scarecrow” is formido, perhaps Ad Formido?

      1. Ad Formido –
        An argument that only can’t be refuted by birdbrains.
        A weak argument that is put forth by birdbrains.

        Either way, I like it.

        1. Birdbrain is wishing someone would get tased at a traffic stop.

  27. I think it’s called ad idiotum. I may be wrong.

    1. Awwww, ed. You remembered our safe-word. I’m touched, you betcha! Now you get your britches off and touch me some more! Oh yah!

  28. Goddamnit Reason
    Chapman is a giant douche.

  29. I have a question:
    If someone trespassed in your house and you tazed him, would that be excessive force? Isn’t a ballpark private property? Normally I am against the wanton use of tazers but this situation doesn’t exactly make me feel for the “victim”.

    1. What, he didn’t buy a ticket and get admitted by the owner?

      1. You invite someone into your house and they start pissing on your carpet, then running around like a lunatic, do you remove them? And how do you do?

        Mind, I’m on the fence about this incident (dude, lose some weight and make a proper chase), but your argument doesn’t hold water.

        1. Though you are RACIST against Lawn Gnomes (we are a forgiving people), I like the cut of your jib! I would be interested in subscribing to your newsletter.

    2. If he had run into the dugout that might be a fair comparison. Then you could make the case he was endagering someone, similar to the implication of someone trespassing in your house.

      This is more like tazing someone for being on your lawn. I think it’s likely a private citizen would be held liable for such an action.

      1. That baseball park might have been paid in part by the taxpayer, maybe the guy wanted to run on the nice lawn he helped pay for.

    3. So you decide whether or not to support violent aggression depending on the likeability of the victim?
      Is this Reason or the online version of Limbaugh’s show?

  30. Actually, some other a-hole did the same think the next night, and was not tased. He was brilliant enough, however to have weed in his pocket.…..54099.html

    1. DOH!!!!!

  31. Why are we not contemplating option #3. The riddleing with bullets optin has it’s share of charm.

  32. The use of tasers has seen an abundance of bad press, likely deserved in some cases. Where are the headlines on where taser use was critical to survival ?
    Recall citizens can carry and use them in all the states. Just never use one on a Police officer or Federal agent…
    Before critsizing the Judge on the T Shirt event. Do This…
    Take a few hours out of your obviously way too busy with yourselves lives and
    go sit in a courtroom as an observer.
    An eye opener it is. Had to do that in High School and write essays on it.
    Something about responsibilties
    and results to personal actions not taught today.
    On a closer to home note, the wife had fits when I went downstairs to confront
    bad guys breaking into the house….
    With a 12 gauge. Reply ?
    Clean the carpet, repaint…

    1. The use of tasers has seen an abundance of bad press, likely deserved in some cases. Where are the headlines on where taser use was critical to survival ?
      Recall citizens can carry and use them in all the states. Just never use one on a Police officer or Federal agent…

      Is Michigan still a state? (insert economic/government joke here)

      Possession of tasers is expressly verboten here.

      1. Byron, My apologies.
        Lumped Tasers in with the smaller self protection electronic devices.
        Rule of Thumb was the understanding…
        Thanks, would never want to stand before a Judge and have him or her say,
        Ignorance of the Law is no excuse…
        Does beg a question on the whole,
        what does your state allow you to do to defend your life, liberty and property ?
        Presented with life threating situations, Heaven forbid..
        Are you limited to Calling Ghost Busters..?

        1. I have a concealed pistol license, so there’s that. We can carry pepper spray up to a certain % strength (‘Michigan formula’). We can carry pocketknives for ‘legal purposes’ (which doesn’t technically include self-defense, oddly). All this is to defend against death or great bodily harm. When it comes to property, it’s pretty much call Ghost Busters…

          1. Pretty clear then. When all states have agreements to honor each others CCW permit holders, there is an impovement.
            Save that is off track here.
            Have had occasion to call Ghost Busters for property crimes in the past.
            Seems they were more disheartened than the victims. The system fails cops and the public alike as it stands.
            Ghost Busters were not opposed to the idea of a citizen protecting their domain with force. However, the invader
            must be in the house, not in the back yard or on the front lawn….
            And most certainly not in any condition to sue the homeowner…

            1. ” When all states have agreements to honor each others CCW permit holders, there is an impovement.”

              Reciprocity has largely arrived:


          2. You shouldn’t complain. In the UK we’re not even allowed to carry pepper spray. There are some legal alternatives, one of which consists of a spray squirting a red, fowl smelling red paint on the aggressor.

            1. “In the UK we’re not even allowed to carry pepper spray”.

              You should have considered the ramifications that eons ago. But then, you have all those nifty cameras to identify the pud that assaults in your sorry ass. Here we still must trek on down to the inquest and identify the body.

              1. Reciprocity has largely arrived ?
                Perhaps that is why this is called the
                United States ? Albeit uniformity is a slow process.
                To the folk Across the Pond. For all the CCTV promises of enhanced safety…
                The return, and it is documented, seems minimal.
                Admit to being short on UK law.
                How does it come about that a miscreant,
                or YOB as they are called.
                Can attack you and yours, pillage your house, inflick injury.
                Then sue, and win, should someone have the temerity to defend themselves ?

  33. Is it just me, or does anyone else look at that photo and think, they are going to shoot the guy from scrubs!

    1. Ha! I thought the same thing- why is Zach Braff at the Phillies game?

  34. A second page for three sentences? Are you serious?

  35. Water is bad for electrical fires, and I think some metal fires. It can also help spread grease/oil fires.

  36. ‘Stupidity can be met and defeated with sensible, proportionate measures’

    I really don’t think this is true.

  37. “Hitting a delinquent with a potentially fatal 50,000-volt burst of electricity…”

    I’m sure Mr. Chapman got a little erect thinking of the shocked expressions this phrase might evoke, but he should know that amperage matters far more than voltage when it comes to how an electrical current will affect a human being. People have been known to survive twice that amount of voltage and more, or die from a very small fraction of it, depending upon the amperage of the current.

    But damn reality! Large (and largely) irrelevant numbers are so much more sexy!

  38. I think every 17-year-old should be tased regularly, in order to instill the proper fear and hatred of all representatives of the statist machine. Or just kick in their doors and shoot their family pets.

  39. I would like to thank Steve Chapman for the deference he has shown to the sensibilities of this gang of rugged individualists by refusing to call a cunt a cunt, but it seems to me that if it’s OK to display the word on the street and it’s really not so bad to display it in a court of law then perhaps such deference is unwarranted. Instead, maybe he could devote some effort to acquaint (pun intended) the young lady involved with the meaning of the word decorum.

    But I do agree that responding to a harmless prank with potentially deadly force is a stupid overreaction.

  40. Check out this new political forum! It has a great community of people from both sides of the isle. There are also alot of other great features on the website including political news from multiple sources, political cartoons, – and the best of all : The Hot Seat. Cast your vote for or against government officials! Come check it out!

  41. Does anyone remember the “kissing bandit” (Morganna maybe??) who routinely entered the field of play to kiss MLB players in the ’70’s/’80’s? Should she have been tased or beaten?IIRC she was somewhat of a celebrity. The cops are out of control.

  42. If the comments on this board are any indication, the use of Taser International’s lethal arsenal is becoming normalized.
    If we don’t start killing kids who drunkenly run on the field, wasting valuable seconds of time for baseball fans, the terrorists will have won.

  43. It is very easy to not run onto the field and delay the game. This simple task is not asking too much of attendees.
    Security should use REASON and pop a taser into anybody’s ass that can’t perform this task.

  44. It is very easy to not wear an offensive tshirt. This simple task is not asking too much of criminals.
    Judges should use REASON and throw anybody’s ass that can’t perform this task into jail.

    1. Fact is, the judge is the sole arbiter of what constitutes “contempt of proceedings” in his/her courtroom. Had the “lady” in question ripped a fart during proceedings the judge could have likewise vacumed her off to the slammer just as she did with the offending garment.

  45. Call it a civics lesson.

  46. In democratic societies like the United States, the voting process is a means by which citizens hold their government accountable, conflicts are channeled into resolutions, and power transfers peacefully. Our system of representative government works only when honest ballots are not diluted by fraudulent ballots. When elections become corrupted, democracy becomes threatened.
    The FBI has a limited role in ensuring fair and free elections in the United States. Election crimes become federal cases when:
    The ballot includes one or more federal candidates;
    The crime involves an election official abusing his duties;
    The crime pertains to fraudulent voter registration;
    Voters are not U.S. citizens.
    First Name: kenyan born at the white house
    Last Name: TRUTH
    Address: AMERICA
    Address: INPEACH OBAMA
    City: USA
    State: usa THE END OF AMERICA
    NPR archive describes Obama as ‘Kenyan-born’
    Michelle say Barack born in Kenya
    Obama’s grandmother say he was born in Kenya
    Subject: OBAMA SAID approval ratings are still very high in the country of my birth.
    obama people have no idea of the extent to which they have to be gulled in order to be led.” “The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of the nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies but would be ashamed to tell a big one.” “All propaganda must be so popular and on such an intellectual level, that even the most stupid of those towards whom it is directed will understand it. Therefore, the intellectual level of the propaganda must be lower the larger the number of people who are to be influenced by it.” “Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise. “pelosi don’t see much future for the Americans … it’s a decayed country. And they have their racial problem, and the problem of social &^% …obama feelings against Americanism are feelings of hatred and deep repugnance … everything about the behaviour of American society reveals that it’s half &^%, and the other half &^& How can one expect a State like that to hold TOGTHER.They include the angry left wing bloggers who spread vicious lies and half-truths about their political adversaries… Those lies are then repeated by the duplicitous left wing media outlets who “discuss” the nonsense on air as if it has merit? The media’s justification is apparently “because it’s out there”, truth be damned. State: *usa Obama chuckles at America*

  47. deration is a fatal thing.” Stupidity can be met and defeated wit

  48. who said, “Moderation is a fatal thing.” Stupidity can be met an

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.