Taser guns — should we outlaw them? Should we use them, but cautiously (“Taser use examined,” Jan. 9)?
Tough questions to answer, the police can use them carelessly and cause the death of an innocent man or he can save the life of an innocent man who’s been threatened.
There’s a decision by a federal appellate court that would establish legal precedents for the use of Tasers by officers. If it stands, that’s the law.
Tasers are generally used when an officer is confronted with a violent and threatening suspect after a warning has been given. The policy has been narrowly drawn to include active resisters, combative suspects and those who pose a deadly threat in most cases can be “Tased.”
If I was a police officer, I would feel that a Taser definitely is in my arsenal of weapons. If it’s me or him, and if I think he’s guilty, I have to protect myself. A Taser is certainly less dangerous than using a pistol.
Occasionally they will be misused, but regardless, somebody who comes at you aggressively and maybe threatens your life has to be dealt with in a severe manner.
WESLEY GREENE
Burbank
Legislator’s absence won’t have impact
I’m responding to Zain Shauk’s article from Jan. 6 titled “Area loses a legislative voice,” which states that as California lawmakers begin forming a plan to address an estimated $21-billion budget shortfall by mid-2011, city and school officials in Glendale and Burbank will have less of a voice. Due to California state legislator Paul Krekorian’s departure, our city and school district officials will have one less voice in the Legislature.
I strongly disagree that four months without a representative will have any impact on our city and school board. Even if Burbank and Glendale continues to lobby against the state proposal, or our educators want to heavily lobby legislators to oppose any plan that might involve cuts or deferred payments to schools, it won’t make any difference — there’s no money.
A perfect example of what is wrong with Sacramento and why our state is in this financial crisis: State legislators have revived a bill that reintroduces the single-payer health-care legislation that will cost California an estimated $210 billion in its first year.
