A Taser discharge is more than enough to ignite petrol vapours if they were present.
While I have no problem with them detaining him by force in front of his child, the use of a taser is a little bit mental in that circumstance IMO. I would really like to think that the benchmark for using such a weapon would be higher.
I am curious whether there is a real threat of an explosion or fire when using a taser in a petrol station.
I'd have shot him. Less risk of a petrol pump going up.
Surely the taser should be there as a last resort rather than to make your job a bit quicker and easier? I think the reason why the kid was so traumatized by it is there didn't appear to be any serious attempt at an arrest prior to it so it was all rather sudden.
People (twitter) probably haven't even thought about how the kid has been brought up in such a poor uncaring atmosphere. Where normality is lack of care for others around you. Talk about child abuse.
Surely using a taser or any use of extreme force should only be used in extreme circumstances - ie a clear and present danger to either a third party, the police or even the perp (ie self harm). From what I can see in the video none of these were a factor in the decision making.
I think the covid link is fair to a degree but still don't believe that the desire to take him down from a distance wouldn't really cut it. Lets say he was known to have c19 and was spitting at them or something then it might be different but there is no evidence to suggest that.
Also those saying "yeah well he was a drink driver and the peeps condemning the coppers conveniently seem to forget this" really doesn't matter. The old adage applies here, two wrongs do not make a right. It shouldn't be a factor on deciding how to take him down. If they dont need to use extreme force then they shouldn't and there really isn't anything in the vid that convinces me otherwise.
Jumping to conclusions there mate.