APNewsBreak: Racial disparities seen in police stun gun use (Connecticut)

Associated Press ^ | Jan 27, 2016 3:27 PM EST | Dave Collins

[econjack]

Exactly right. This article is trying to foster a conclusion that is likely a non sequitur. I’ve only seen two situations that might apply here, but in both cases the black teenagers were much more aggressive than I would have expected. Indeed, I’m surprised that the two incidents I saw didn’t end up with someone getting tazed. If I was a cop, I sure would have.

[jmaroneps37]

Connecticut? Connecticut, no that CAN’T be why Connecticut is a liberal people’s paradise where things like this just don’t happen. Connecticut? just don’tr believe it.

[Smokin' Joe]

Oh well. Go back to using the real thing, either that or wood shampoos. The whole purpose of stun guns was to have a non-lethal option. I guess some folks are never happy.

[Cyman]

Wanna bet the conclusion was written a year before the study even started

[Cyman]

“Some civil rights groups said the statistics confirm what they suspected for years”

OR the study shows that people of color are much more aggressive necessitating the use of the stun guns AND which also proves that police are MUCH more willing to use non-lethal force most probably to the detriment of their own safety

[driftless2]

In fairness to the police they're more likely to need a Taser when the person they encounter is black or Hispanic

If the episodes of "Cops" are to be believed, it seems the standard response of many blacks stopped for traffic infractions is that it was because they were black. Nothing to do with expired license plates, tail lights out, headlights out, speeding, driving erratically, et cetera.