ABORIGINES are particularly vulnerable to the effects of taser guns

[Sliverfern]

What a load of bull, Oooops should we say sorry for Tasering their arse :rofl:

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23193062-29277,00.html

ABORIGINES are particularly vulnerable to the effects of taser guns, says a Northern Territory health body that is warning against using the weapon in remote communities.

Northern Territory police have purchased 74 tasers and are currently training officers how to use them before rolling them out across the region.

But Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance Northern Territory CEO, John Paterson, is calling on the police to reconsider the weapon.

He said the United Nations had condemned taser guns as a form of torture that causes acute pain.

The US Justice Department had also documented about 200 deaths related to the use of the taser gun since the year 2000, he said.

"Many of the people killed by taser guns in the US were fit and healthy young men.

"Clearly there's a great potential for these weapons to cause severe injury or death."

Given Aboriginal health standards, Mr Paterson said they would be the most likely to suffer from its side effects.

"Aboriginal people have three times the rate of heart disease and heart attacks compared to other Australians, and we typically have more contact with the police force," he said.

"If fit and healthy young men are being killed by the taser guns at such alarming rates in the US, what chance will our mob have if they are shot by police?"

[Sliverfern]

Should the police just shoot them like they used to before the introduction of the Taser?

I don't think they went around shooting them for no reason, but I think its beyond all reason, using the race as a get out of jail free card or in this case, get of being tasered free card.

But lets play the poor Abbo card :deadhorse:

It is getting a little old. Afterall they have milked that dry for 200 years. :indifferent:

[Ahknaton]

But lets play the poor Abbo card :deadhorse:

It is getting a little old. Afterall they have milked that dry for 200 years. :indifferent:
Aboriginal rights in Australia have only really existed since the late 1960s.

[Jimbo Gomez]

Of course they could try obeying the law so that they won't get tasered too...

[Warka]

There may be something to this. After all, there are proven physiological differences between races. We see it in medicine, for example.

Furthermore, as a racist (or racialist, whatever you prefer), Sliverfern, you should be exploiting news of physiological differences between races, not crying foul. ;)

[shanemac]

Of course they could try obeying the law so that they won't get tasered too...

Imagine going back in time to Ice-Age Europe and coming across a tribe of Neanderthal man. Then imagine giving the Neanderthals a list of rules (like they're not allowed to hunt, fight, rape or kill), and at the same time giving them unlimited access to all kinds of drugs and alcohol and not really punishing them when they did break the rules.

How long do you think they'd keep obeying your rules?

[Jimbo Gomez]

Imagine going back in time to Ice-Age Europe and coming across a tribe of Neanderthal man. Then imagine giving the Neanderthals a list of rules (like they're not allowed to hunt, fight, rape or kill), and at the same time giving them unlimited access to all kinds of drugs and alcohol and not really punishing them when they did break the rules.

How long do you think they'd keep obeying your rules?


I bet it would be easier to condition a Neandertahl with a taser than it would be to condition a donk (provided the Neandertahl doesn't decide to rip off your arm and club you to death with it of course).

[whydoyouwanttoknow]

Aboriginal rights in Australia have only really existed since the late 1960s.

So completely wrong.

[Ahknaton]

So completely wrong.
How so?

Here's a section from Wikipedia on human rights in Australia:

Indigenous Australians

1967 is often recalled as the year that the Aboriginal people of Australia gained the right to vote, however this is an incorrect date, and an over-simplification of the processes involved. When the state constitutions of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania were framed in 1850s, voting rights were granted to all male British subjects over the age of 21, which included Aboriginal men. However, few Aborigines were aware of their rights and hence very few participated in elections.

The situation became murkier when the Commonwealth Franchise Act was passed in 1902. The Act gave women a vote in federal elections but Aboriginal people and people from Asia, Africa or the Pacific Islands (except for Māori) were excluded unless entitled under Section 41 of the Australian Constitution. Section 41 states that any individual who has gained a right to vote at a state level, must also have the right to vote in federal elections. The Solicitor-General, Sir Robert Garran, interpreted it to mean that Commonwealth rights were granted only to people who were already State voters in 1902. What transpired was a situation where Aboriginals who had already enrolled to vote were able to continue to do so, whereas those who had not were denied the right. This interpretation was challenged in Victoria in 1924 by an Indian migrant, where the magistrate ruled that Section 41 meant that people who acquired State votes at any date were entitled to a Commonwealth vote. The Commonwealth government instead passed laws giving Indians the vote (There were only about 2300 in Australia at the time), but continued to deny other non-white applicants.

In the 1940s, groups began to lobby the Commonwealth government to grant Aboriginal suffrage, and in 1949 the Chifley Labor government passed an Act to confirm that all those who could vote in their States could vote in the Commonwealth. However, little was done to publicise the changes, and many Aboriginal Australians remained unaware of their rights.

In the 1960s, reflecting the strong Civil rights movements in the United States and South Africa, many changes in Aborigines’ rights and treatment followed, including finally full voting rights. The Menzies Liberal and Country Party government gave the Commonwealth vote to all Aborigines in 1962. Western Australia gave them State votes in the same year, and Queensland followed in 1965.
The idea that Aborigines have been "playing the race card" for 200 years is what is ridiculous. Native Title wasn't recognized until 1992.

[Sliverfern]

There may be something to this. After all, there are proven physiological differences between races. We see it in medicine, for example.

Furthermore, as a racist (or racialist, whatever you prefer), Sliverfern, you should be exploiting news of physiological differences between races, not crying foul. ;)

I am a Separatist, so people call me racist, because they don't understand the term.

I believe everyone has their place as long as the stay in it. This cross breeding and multi-culturalism is the death of many people.

Abbos have a place, out in the sticks, whites have there place in the city, and crying foul is the Abbo. Always with their grabby little hands out, going take take take..........

The don't like living under white fella laws, tough :bbbat:

There is plenty of outback they can go walk about in.

Don't want our laws, DON'T take your culture, our money, our medicine, our housing, our education, our lifestyle, OUR BEER!

[Sliverfern]

How so?

Here's a section from Wikipedia on human rights in Australia:


The idea that Aborigines have been "playing the race card" for 200 years is what is ridiculous. Native Title wasn't recognized until 1992.

Wikipedia Pfft any peanut can edit that site.

They have played their black card for more than 200 years. The Dutch sealers before the Brits came, fell into their trap, of of believing they are do gooders.

Throw a few women at the passing sealers, doing a bit of pimping, getting goods for services ;)

And Acting all native, so when the white Fellas came many sold out their enemies for rum and favours.

Yeah good old darkies always know how to make a quick quid.

Then selling the crap we are Black and the best trackers, and become the first bushtroopers.

Did you know these charming individuals hunted down their own tribes and presented them to the British, oh no of course not, thats too nasty to remember. :(

Yeah right Poor Blacks :rofl: :rofl:

[whydoyouwanttoknow]

How so?

Here's a section from Wikipedia on human rights in Australia:


The idea that Aborigines have been "playing the race card" for 200 years is what is ridiculous. Native Title wasn't recognized until 1992.

What you posted contradicts your own claim.

[Ahknaton]

What you posted contradicts your own claim.
No it doesn't. I said "aboriginal rights" have only really existed since the 1960s. That means rights as aborigines. It doesn't mean that aborigines had no rights whatsoever prior to that. "Aboriginal rights have only really existed since the 1960s" doesn't mean the same as "Aborigines have only had rights since the 1960s".

Another example:

Land and property rights fueled an important civil rights movement in the 1970s. Aborigines spoke out for equal rights, and specifically for land rights for property that had been forcibly taken by British settlers. The Aboriginal Land Rights Act, passed in 1976, became instrumental in territories with tribal associations. The 1990s witnessed further rights milestones, including government legislation that returned a great degree of autonomy, and increased wages and welfare benefits to aboriginal people.

[MrRS]

Tasers should be banned. Full stop.

[Sliverfern]

Tasers should be banned. Full stop.
Why should they, its only used on people that break the law. I have never been tasered. I am sure 95% of this forum has not been either.

The remaining 5% takes into account accidental tasering, police tasering and any sexual act tasering.

[Warka]

Why should they, its only used on people that break the law. I have never been tasered. I am sure 95% of this forum has not been either.

The remaining 5% takes into account accidental tasering, police tasering and any sexual act tasering.

Incorrect. Do a search on this very forum for police abuse involving tasers.

[John Abney-Hastings]

sexual act tasering.

....what the fuck?

[Sliverfern]

....what the fuck?

Yes that exactly why they do it. Recently a man killed his wife after the attached her to a electric cord and flicked the switch on and off. He must of misjudged the voltage :rofl:

[Basil Fawlty]

I see the spirit of Ned Kelly is not in evidence here, must be the Melbourne set.

[Ahknaton]

I see the spirit of Ned Kelly is not in evidence here, must be the Melbourne set.
Pffft. You don't hear me supporting taser-wielding cops, and I live in Melbourne.

[Basil Fawlty]

Pffft. You don't hear me supporting taser-wielding cops, and I live in Melbourne.That's true, and I should have exempted you :irish: from that comment. As for living in Melbourne, you are in it but not of it. :)

[Ahknaton]

That's true, and I should have exempted you :irish: from that comment. As for living in Melbourne, you are in it but not of it. :)
Melbourne is full of liberal lefty types who would be aghast at the notion of heavy-handed policemen subduing rowdy aborigines (or anyone else) with tasers. C***s that they mostly are, I agree with them on that point. Sydney is the more right-leaning yuppie-tropolis. They also have more aborigines (e.g. Redfern) which might have something to do with it.

[Basil Fawlty]

Melbourne is full of liberal lefty types who would be aghast at the notion of heavy-handed policemen subduing rowdy aborigines (or anyone else) with tasers. C***s that they mostly are, I agree with them on that point. Sydney is the more right-leaning yuppie-tropolis. They also have more aborigines (e.g. Redfern) which might have something to do with it.I was more thinking of Melbourne's original non-convict status and the resulting social milieu that Dame Edna lampooned and focussing on the uncritical attitude towards the forces of the law displayed by some on this thread. Perhaps that's all changed.

[Warka]

They were Tasered because they refused to comply with an officer of the law.

Which isn't necessarily criminal. You'll have to do better than that.

[Jimbo Gomez]

Which isn't necessarily criminal. You'll have to do better than that.


Some drunken subhumans got a taste of law and order. How can you be against that?

[Warka]

Some drunken subhumans got a taste of law and order. How can you be against that?

Who said I was? What I'm against is the increasingly indiscriminate use of tasers by law enforcement.

[Sliverfern]

Pffft. You don't hear me supporting taser-wielding cops, and I live in Melbourne.

Why not? cops should carry tasers, I really don't see an issue here if you live in Melbourne or not.

Cops are cops, tasering, pepper spraying shooting Pfft all the bloody same.

If you are not a arsehole you don't get any of they above list, so why should it matter to you, if a few Abbos get sparked?

[Warka]

If you are not a arsehole you don't get any of they above list, so why should it matter to you, if a few Abbos get sparked?

Do you plan to just keep mindlessly repeating the same nonsense- cops don't harm innocent people- despite all contrary evidence?

[Sliverfern]

Do you plan to just keep mindlessly repeating the same nonsense- cops don't harm innocent people- despite all contrary evidence?

I was married to a cop, I know what they do.

What evidence you have presented nothing, but I don't like the mean copper routine???

Show me a tasered crim, I will show you the reason why :)