Hero Cops Taser (and Kill) Unarmed Old Man

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

In re my rant the other day (here) about “Blue Lives” being elevated uber alles, see this video (and news story). A 62-year-old man fired three shots into his lawn (apparently, he was upset about something) but was unarmed and unthreatening when Hero Cops arrived at his house. The video shows the old man standing in a non-confrontational manner on his driveway pad when the Heroes show up and demand he get on the ground. The man replies that he can’t because he’s disabled. The Heroes then Tazer the old man, who falls, hits his head on the concrete and subsequently dies from the injuries he sustained.

This is a textbook case of egregious (because unnecessary) use of force. Can’t two “trained” Heroes handle one unarmed old man? Who wasn’t beign combative or threatening? Yeah, he shot his gun – into his lawn. But he wasn’t threatening to shoot the Heroes or anyone else.

When America was a sane country – and cops weren’t “Heroes” who used “safety” as an excuse to hurt people – the cops would have handled it without resorting to weapons.

Watch this and you tell me:


March 6, 2015, 62 year old James Sizer called 911 and stated that he had fired 3 shots into the ground in his backyard. While he admitted to this, he said he would not be armed while waiting for the police in his front yard. While on the phone with 911, Cpl. Salvator Reale showed up on the scene with his gun drawn, and demanded Sizer get on the ground.

Sizer stated that he couldn’t get on the ground, and when Reale asked why, Sizer exclaimed that he was disabled. About that time, Officer Martha Cameron showed up on the scene with her taser drawn. She too demanded that Sizer get on the ground. Sizer again exclaimed that he could not.

With a senior citizen before them shoeless, wearing jeans and a tshirt, and holding nothing but a phone in one of his clearly visible hands, Sizer was tased by Officer Cameron in short order. 62 year old Sizer fell backward, hitting his head on the cement, requiring a trip to the hospital. Days later, he died from apparent complications from the injury.

Fast forward one year, and Officer Martha Cameron is cleared by a grand jury of any wrong doing.hero worship

This wasn’t a person on the front lawn waving a firearm around. This wasn’t a response to someone making a sudden movement for his waistband.

Hell, this doesn’t appear to be a man capable of making any sudden movements.

It would appear that the police are buying their own hyperbole about anyone that comes into contact with the police is a cop killer. It appears that they have consolidated all citizenry to be exactly the same, and no variation of procedure can ever be given. Babies and senior citizens get treated exactly the same as crazed terrorists wearing a bomb vest and multiple AK47s.

Ask yourself, was this “reasonable and necessary” force? This man didn’t appear to pose any real threat. Was it completely out of the realm of human decency to try to work something out before risking his life after such a short time? Was enough time given to comply with an order to do something that may not be all that simple for a senior citizen before being tased?

Why was it necessary to Taze the old man? Tazsers are considered lethal force. Just because it doesn’t always kill, even the manufacturer has admitted the risk.

At what point does the “officer safety” line not hold water? It doesn’t look like we’ll find out any time soon. Even the police trainers support them no matter what.


  1. Hi Tor,

    Could I ask a favor? If you have a really long post that’s a copy/paste of something especially, please just post an excerpt and then a link to the original. Thanks!

  2. “At what point does the “officer safety” line not hold water? ”

    From the jump. Officer safety isn’t a valid consideration at all, because said officers are held up as “heroes”. Heroes must function with no regard to their own personal safety or they are not heroes at all.

    Fuck heroes; all heroes, everywhere.

    • Yes, I’ve said this before, but still bears repeating. The pheroes demand high salaries because they have dangerous jobs. Then they insist on mitigating the danger. Therefore they are no longer deserving of ‘hazardous duty pay.’ Pay them fish heads.

  3. I just carefully rescinded a dozen friend requests on Oberfläche
    Papiere Zuckerbergen like a was performing a life and death surgery. Childhood Friends and Family and Inlaws. Lot of emotive power there. I go on it maybe 3 times a year.

    Then I casually deposit all manner of halfbaked feces here, though I go on here 3 times or more a day. Go figger. Guess I’m not really my own man, but rather am a prisoner of mainstream matrices just like everyone else. Even so, it feels good to “be free” whatever that is. Besides being a blow hard I’m a blow aimless in a lot of ways. It’s all false bravado, I’m a bookworm loner to the core. Unlike Trump, I wouldn’t use violence against another. Who knows what dirty shit he’s given the okay to as a major amerKin bidness man.

    I may lie cheat and steal if there’s no chance of violence, but taking that gun out of my spare tire area and waving it around in someone else’s face, I’d like to hope I would never be able to do that, except in a defensive manner of course.

    Equis Hombres Apocalypto

  4. Doesn’t it feel good to have a refuge that helps shake off the false matrix of Marschstiefelfreude? Danke Freund Eric. können Sie jemals gedeihen.

    Want out of the time/space matrix that constrains you?

    “This guy is unique. He
    has certainly demonstrated in the past that he can be a real SOB, and yet he has his
    moments. Quite a few of them.

    Q: Where do we start today?
    A: I thought we already did. Okay. Let me get a few things off my chest. Most
    people think philosophy that goes deeper than a mild scratch on the surface of the
    skin is sheer crap. Most people believe that nothing comes from philosophy. Most
    people think that there is no reason to understand philosophy. If they only knew
    that propaganda is based on a kind of philosophy mixed with science, they would reevaluate
    their position.

    Q: What are you talking about?
    A: Just let me finish. As I was saying, if you can build a world inside a vacuum jar,
    then all the information inside the jar seems true because it is connected. Do you
    see? If there is no world known outside the jar, then nobody has a basis for doubt.

    Q: Connecting information is the key?
    A: Right. If you can hook up lots of discrete pieces of information, then people get it
    coming in at them from many places.
    Q: And then they think it’s true.
    A: Right. Like I was saying about 9/11, there is a world of information being built.
    We’ve got caves full of documents, we’ve videos of bin Laden, we’ve got this kid who is a dupe—Johnny Walker—who tells his American captors that he spoke with bin Laden and he knows that bin Laden planned and ordered 9/11—we’ve got the
    famous passport of the terrorist found near the WTC. We’ve got thousands of pieces
    of information that all hook up to tell the same basic story about who was behind
    Q: The selfcontained world inside the vacuum jar.
    A: Yes. Who would doubt it? You see?

    Q: It’s like the cosmology floated by the Vatican for centuries.
    A: Sure. You get far enough inside all that information and you lose sight of the fact
    that none of it is hooked to anything OUTSIDE. You’ve got entities from here to
    Pluto, you’ve got all these different classes of angels with names and titles and job
    descriptions—it’s so overwhelming that you swallow the whole thing.

    Q: What does this have to do with philosophy?
    A: It’s all about time. Time and emotion.
    Q: You’ve lost me.
    A: Think. How do you build time?
    Q: Build time?
    A: Yes. You need two things to build time. You need a constructed timeline of
    events. That’s the first thing. A chain of events which you tie together. It doesn’t
    matter if the events really connect, and it doesn’t matter whether the events are
    real. What matters is you have built that line, and it seems to make sense.
    Q: And this means?
    A: There is a fundamental human hunger for TIME.

    Q: What?
    A: It’s like dessert or sex or fresh air. People WANT TIME. They want that sense of it, that there is flow and the flow is real. People want SEQUENCE.
    Q: I see.
    A: I hope so. If you can give people time, they flock to you. You are giving them a cornerstone of what they consider to be EXISTENCE. They have to have it. And that
    is what good propaganda does. It suggests or marks out the flow of time in a

    Q: And it doesn’t matter whether that sequence is true.
    A: It doesn’t matter at all. More than half of all history is fiction. It’s a time line that is constructed to give people the sense that things happened in a certain way, in a
    certain order.

    Q: Yeah?
    A: Take evolution. Forget that the theory is full of holes. The PROPAGANDA which is said to be science suggests a flow of events. First came the amoeba, and then from that we got the multicelled organism, and you go on from there. It feels right
    because it has that chain of events from before to after, from day 1 to day 456789.
    Evolution is a very easy sell. You fill up museums with fossils and bones and labels,
    and everybody buys in, because there is that beautiful idea of a time line of history.

    Q: And all propaganda works the same way.
    A: It does. Now, you don’t really need a complete and tight time line. You just need the IMPRESSION of one. That fills the human need for TIME. That need plays right into the profession of propaganda. And the theorists of propaganda know this.
    They may talk about it in different ways, but they know it. It’s their bread and

    Q: You said time and emotion.
    A: Yes. Emotion is like a proof of time.
    Q: Proof?
    A: Look. In order to construct a time line, you need human response to it. You
    need human cement, so to speak, to give the sense that the time line is real.
    Otherwise, you just have factoids.
    Q: So you’re saying—
    A: I’m saying that the propagandist creates “a fact” that will result in a human
    emotion. I say fact X and the human being reacts with, say, outrage. Now we’re
    cooking. Now we have a fact that gets an emotion sprouting all over the place. The emotion is the closer, the convincer. Now the human being really believes in the fact because, after all, he just responded to it! What could be a better “proof” than that?
    The human being is so selfcentered that he believes his own emotion makes a fact
    real. He is saying, essentially, “This fact couldn’t be a lie. Because I just felt ABC.”

    Q: It must be true.
    A: Right. If I felt ABC, then the thing that made me feel that must be true.
    Q: What about a movie?
    A: Well, you walk into a theater and you paid eight dollars, and the screen is dark, and then actors you know come on the screen and do things. So you know that you are looking at fiction. But the New York Times is not that way. The New York Times may be doing the same thing that the movie is doing, but the citizen is not aware of

    Q: Okay. So we have a fact and we have an emotional response.
    A: These are the building blocks of reality, my boy. “The evildoer, Osama bin
    Laden, blew up the WTC.” That is the floated “fact.” Then you get the emotion from
    the audience. THEN the audience thinks this fact must be true, because it came from
    an official source AND because they, the audience, reacted to it with FEELING.
    Q: And it doesn’t matter whether the fact was true.
    A: It doesn’t matter.

    Q: What comes next?
    A: An invented chain of such facts and emotional responses. A whole thread. A
    storyline. History in the making. Reality in the making. This IS reality.
    Q: And this is calculated.
    A: I told you many years ago—and you used this—that if you can show the public
    other people dying all over the place, you can construct the name of a new disease
    around that image, and people will accept the “fact” of the new disease. Because they react. Because they FEEL. It works. That was and is AIDS in Africa. I helped build that time line. That was my job. You and I did at least one interview around

    Q: Yes.
    A: So this is PHILOSOPHY. The philosophy of what time IS.
    Q: Wait a minute. Are you saying that without such time lines TIME would cease to exist?
    A: Now you’re catching on.
    Q: Is that what you’re saying?
    A: Damn right.
    Q: Don’t you think that’s quite an adventurous idea?
    A: It sure as hell is. And it happens to be the truth.
    Q: If I may be so bold, what then would replace time?
    A: I’ll let you figure that out.
    Q: Oh no you don’t.
    A: (laughs) When I say things like this, people generally imagine that pure chaos
    would replace time and we would all devolve into a state of confusion and stupidity.
    But that’s not necessarily true at all.

    Q: Why isn’t it true?
    A: Because the unknown is not necessarily crazy. Maybe crazy is what we’ve got
    Q: Okay, let’s back up. You’re saying that a chain of facts and emotion make up
    A: I’m going to feed this to you in doses, okay? Let’s say you’re in ancient Greece, and you’re sitting in an amphitheater and they’re doing a production of Oedipus. The time line of events is unfolding, but the audience has no reaction. No emotion.
    The play as such ceases to exist. Now, what is there instead? People going through
    the motions. It’s not nothing. But it’s not time. It’s not history. It’s not art. It’s not
    the reality of Oedipus. It’s “leaves floating in the breeze.” Let’s start with that. Or
    how about this. People in Africa are dying. But it’s not AIDS. It’s not HIV. It’s not a
    virus. It’s not destruction by some monkey virus that crossed over into humans.
    The time line and the emotions about AIDS have been cancelled out. People are still
    dying, but the lie is subtracted.

    Q: Okay. And?
    A: Take it on this level. Let’s say that over the last year there have been 30 major
    news stories that have captured the attention of the public. But suppose instead,
    NONE of those stories produced the emotions that have been hoped for by the
    propagandists. Suppose the facts have been seen to be false. And now suppose that
    one layer below this, 50 MORE big news stories are suddenly seen to be based on
    fabricated facts. And 50 more and 50 more and 50 more. The “facts” no longer
    produce the emotional responses. What’s left?

    Q: You tell me.
    A: Suppose the whole history of this world is suddenly seen to be pretty much a
    fiction of invented “facts.” And suppose the thousands of psychiatric disorders listed
    in the DSM are suddenly not producing emotional response TO THE LIST in the
    public. And suppose the stock market is no longer viewed by the public as an
    accurate reflection of anything more than a list of horses at the gate in a race? And
    suppose that the last 10 big wars are now seen as NOT an unfolding of facts, but as
    the result of behind the scenes manipulations. AND SUPPOSE ALL THESE THINGS,
    EVERYWHERE. Do you think that our collective idea of time MIGHT BE CHANGED?
    Do you?
    Q: I’d have to think about that.
    A: You bet your ass you would.

    Q: So you’re saying—
    A: That time is just what I said it was. And that time can be overthrown like any
    empire. And that my job, when you strip away all the crap, was really the invention
    of time. And time gets you into philosophy, and if you’re unwilling or unable to get
    into philosophy, you’ll never see the possible far shore. And just because you may
    not know what would replace time, that doesn’t mean that time as we know it is

    Q: So this is what happens to a propagandist who really looks at his own
    Now, what if only part of what was said is true? Could a propagandist, convince you all is a lie, until you mind is so mixed up you can not tell you head from a hole in the ground.

    A: Propagandists are professional liars, they are hire to convince you to believe them, just like a salesmen hawking their wares, come over hear man, women bring you children with you they will be want to see these amazing products I have found, why you can call on the phone it answer for you, the thing does not need cords, I called and apple don’t you want to talk bite?

    Your child will need these thing in this dangerous world, see how bright and shiny it is, take a bite, not much right now, it will last a long time.

    That was an example there is many because those war kill people and people died and they are real, just like sacrifices to a war machine that lines the pockets of the ruling class with bloodmoney.

    • Tor, sounds like Jon Rappaport. By my perception, it is truth or at least the way I see reality or whatever passes for it. There was a time those not made just like everyone else were revered in their differentness. The Kiwash had no name for schizophrenia. The schizoid was considered special, a far seeing person, able to think differently from the “rest of the tribe” and so, was looked upon as someone with something extra, not less.

      And Johnny Walker was as much a construct of evil men using another, someone who may have had no evil in mind, someone who was manipulated into becoming another Manchurian candidate.

      Johnny Walker sat at a table in a bar, minding his own affairs, drinking his namesake over the rocks…..and drunk, too drunk to care……..

  5. That the police trainer considered the officers actions to be “pretty much textbook” should appall and terrify all decent people. No sane person could construe this sickly old man to be a threat. That a self-selected group of people, who constantly claim to “risk their lives” for us, is trained to employ potentially lethal force, in a non-dangerous situation, merely for the purpose of establishing control, should be enough to convince everyone that their job is not to “protect and serve”. Sickening


    • If the pheroes ‘primary responsibility’ is their own and each others’ saaaaaaafety, then there is no reason to pay them high salaries because of the ‘danger’ involved.
      Pay them fish heads. And if they don’t like that, find a different job.

  6. Unless your a victim of police misconduct, or know someone who has, or have witnessed it, most people don’t believe cops can commit crimes in uniform. Therefore they get way too much leeway.

    • Hi Rich,

      Every time a cop “busts” someone for committing a victimless “crime” he has just committed a real crime!

      Most cops commit real crimes several times every day. It’s what they do.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here