Casper Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 http://www.kens5.com/news/local/SAPD-Man-tazed-for-attempting-to-save-his-infant-son-from-a-house-fire--209843161.htmlFor his own safety... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rawlins87 Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmutt Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 (edited) What a crock, if the father wanted to risk his own life for his child then so be it. I can't understand why the police should be allowed to stop him when others that do this very thing are deemed heroic even if they die trying Edited June 6, 2013 by Hellmutt 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baptizo Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 And to add to the tragedy, the police are suspecting arson because the stories don't add up. WTF? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMMW Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 This will come to light, or it won't. RIP lil one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapphy Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 In Communist America, fire start you. Just one more thing that proves we are no longer free. RIP little one 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester_ Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Just one more thing that proves we are no longer free. This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DerekClouser Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Sickening. That would be an absolute real life nightmare. Trying to rush in to save your kid and cops holding you back... It makes me sick just thinking about how mad and desperate I would have been in that situation. The thing that confuses me is that the grandparents got the one kid out then realized the other kid was in there? The kid is 8months old, how did you expect the baby to get out if you didn't help him. I just don't get how you realize after you get out of the house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revelstoker Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 More to this story, I am sure. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connie14 Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.....,(unless it involves saving your infant son's life). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medina Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 I'd be on suicide watch once the tasering wore off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigd Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 no one would prohibit me from saving one of my kids. bar none.this story is all thats wrong with america. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gixxus Christ! Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 911 call was for fire so the fd was there. I'm guessing by the time they got there the structure was fully involved. If it was safe to enter and rescue we must assume fd would have. Dad couldn't accept that and the cops probably saved his life.At least nobody can say he didn't try. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevysoldier Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 Flip side: what if they let him go back on and he died? The FD/PD would be getting sued for allowing him into an unsafe situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 No answers, just questions: How involved was the fire when they stopped him? Was there any hope of saving the child? Why are people making assumptions that (after the police and fire department deemed it too dangerous for firefighters in safety gear and oxygen to go in ) it was safe for the father to go in? If the police let him go in and he died then would the police be vilified for that also? In this situation, was there any combination of action that the police could have done to successfully tiptoe around the inevitable minefield of public criticism? (damned if you do, damned if you don't). Is it possible that the police and firefighters used their judgement and experience to make a logical decision that was for the best? Are people suggesting that the police caused the child's death? Do people envisage a house with wisps of smoke coming out of it and the father being barred entry - or was the fire a raging inferno that would have killed the father the second he set foot inside? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 no one would prohibit me from saving one of my kids. bar none.this story is all thats wrong with america. You are assuming two things: 1) The child was still alive at the time the police stopped the father2) That there was any hope at all of saving the child, even if still alive. Could you accept that it's possible the police saved the father from a vain attempt to rescue an already-dead child that could only have lead to his own death? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 (edited) In Communist America, fire start you. Just one more thing that proves we are no longer free. RIP little one You're doing the same thing. You're assuming there was any hope of saving the child. Is there any information that would help us understand if there was any chance at all of saving him? Might the police have saved the father from himself, knowing there was 100% chance of him dying and 0% chance of him saving the boy? Or do you assert that the police should always allow a rescue attempt even if it is doomed to lead to even more loss of life? (I don't know if a rescue attempt would have been in vain, but you seem pretty sure that a rescue would have been possible. What information are you basing that on?) Edited June 8, 2013 by Scruit 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KTMRIDER Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 Remember when cops first got tasers. They claimed it was only to avoid shooting someone. Now if you do so much as question or disrespect a cop your ass is getting zapped for payback and punishment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jporter12 Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 You're doing the same thing. You're assuming there was any hope of saving the child. Is there any information that would help us understand if there was any chance at all of saving him? Might the police have saved the father from himself, knowing there was 100% chance of him dying and 0% chance of him saving the boy? Or do you assert that the police should always allow a rescue attempt even if it is doomed to lead to even more loss of life? (I don't know if a rescue attempt would have been in vain, but you seem pretty sure that a rescue would have been possible. What information are you basing that on?) I hate you right now for making sense. I WANT to believe that the father was just running in while the firefighters were donning their gear and finding out where to go. I WANT to believe that the father knew exactly where to go and could have saved the child. There are just too many unknowns to make a call on this one. I can bet that the father is destroyed right now, thinking that he could have done something, and was prevented from doing so. This is a sad one any way you look at it. I bet I would have tried to go in as well, if it was one of our kids in there. I really don't want to think about it any more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jporter12 Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 BTW... Scruit asked all the right questions, and +rep to him for doing so. My head now hurts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevysoldier Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 This is why its so difficult to assess a situation based on only what's in a news article. You have no idea what else was going on then and we should all know how biased the news is just to get ratings. Controversy sells. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baptizo Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 You're doing the same thing. You're assuming there was any hope of saving the child. Is there any information that would help us understand if there was any chance at all of saving him? Might the police have saved the father from himself, knowing there was 100% chance of him dying and 0% chance of him saving the boy? Or do you assert that the police should always allow a rescue attempt even if it is doomed to lead to even more loss of life? (I don't know if a rescue attempt would have been in vain, but you seem pretty sure that a rescue would have been possible. What information are you basing that on?) You're being a fucktard, shut the fuck up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapphy Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 You're doing the same thing. You're assuming there was any hope of saving the child. Is there any information that would help us understand if there was any chance at all of saving him? Might the police have saved the father from himself, knowing there was 100% chance of him dying and 0% chance of him saving the boy? Or do you assert that the police should always allow a rescue attempt even if it is doomed to lead to even more loss of life? (I don't know if a rescue attempt would have been in vain, but you seem pretty sure that a rescue would have been possible. What information are you basing that on?) You make valid points. You are right that we don't have enough info. But given my experience growing up in a LEO home, when i lack all the information I will assume the LEO is being a lazy fucktard on a power trip until the fact prove otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 You're being a fucktard, shut the fuck up. You're being judgemental and irrational, although I value your right to your opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 You make valid points. You are right that we don't have enough info. But given my experience growing up in a LEO home, when i lack all the information I will assume the LEO is being a lazy fucktard on a power trip until the fact prove otherwise. Fair enough. I choose to reserve judgement until the facts are known. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.