With all the complaints maybe next time the officer will just walk away. For which he will be criticized for not using his taser.

I never knew there was ever an age restriction on administering the taser. The taser is a much less invasive and safe way (for everyone involved) to subdue/control someone. 11 years old or not, the circumstances remain the same, danger + agression + weapon + already harmed someone + taser + controlling and minimizing any further dangers = smart decision.

So they are finding a way to get them off, and provide the cop with an excuse, before they interview him and he gives a story that they can't defend him on.

If I caused injury with motor vehicle, would the RCMP examine my driver training, the vehicle, and my medical history before interviewing me?

HAH! Interviewed, charged - and my lawyer would be responsible for the rest.

Once again - cops are above the law!

As usual, alot of people jumped to cruxify the RCMP, whom it may turn out saved a life.

I hope people, in the future, will not pass judgement so quickly.

I would think the officer,or officers involved would have written reports after the incident. I don't really think waiting to interview them would make any difference in the outcome.

There have been literally hundreds of stories in recent days and to date everyone has been "outraged", ready to string up the RCMP, ban tasers, throw all the coppers in the slammer, yada, yada. Oops, saved his little life. How about that! Let the hundreds of stories and retractions be issued.

Next time let him kill himself. Then all the bleeding hearts will be happy because precious wasn't harmed by a big bad police man.

I saw several kinds of posts about this and they are still there to check on:

1. we do not know what happened, so do not rush to judgement - probably the least number of posts fit into this category

2. the cop tasered a young kid and should not have - there were very few of those

3. the kid deserved getting tasered because he attempted to kill one of his caretakers .... most were in that category.

4. the kid was under 24/7 watch because he was suicidal - I think one person may have posted that or close to it.

5. the kid got a hold of a knife which he should not have, and when the caretaker tried to get it from him, the caretakerr was accidentally cut with the knife ... no posts like that at all.

6. something went wrong because protocol was not followed and that is the key area which has to be examined so thsat they will learn from mistakes made - one or two headed that way.

As I said, by far the majority felt the kid deserved it, and even in this current thread it rears its ugly head ...... and it is very ugly indeed!!!!

Pretty vulgar ... but certainly nowhere near being a sage .....

Gus - I agree completely but you missed one category... I said "maybe he was going to kill himself and the officer stopped him" a long time ago.

Or, he got the knife wanting to slit his own wrists and when the careworker tried to get it away from him, he stabbed the careworker. So, if the cop had tried the same thing, same results???
Taser still the good choice.

You are right interceptor, I did miss that one. Congrats for coming forward with the right and, I would say, most logical one as well. I think the suicide one is also the most common one if an individual is holding a weapon without taking a hostage.

Regardless of what happened or happens, the RCMP have given themselves a reputation that will be hard to reverse. Of course we pick on the RCMP because they are the "enforcers" and not "up-holders" of the law. They are always using the phrase: "we are simply enforcing the law". That is a bad choice of words if you are expecting respect from a free world democracy. The law cannot be enforced. Punishment is a result of breaking the law but "enforcement" suggests something physical which will not stop crime.

Too bad about the kid because he was born into a situation where "he never had a chance". There are thousands and thousands of those kids in BC and more and more of them are being born daily. Unfortunately, the bureaucracy grows with each birth and nothing is done to correct the problem.

Imorge. I do not think that is necessarily true. In doing as bit of research on this it came abundantly clear that someone in a personal association, such as a caretaker, quite frequently wants to get involved with a negotiation situation. The argument they are likely to present is that they know the individual and will be able to talk him down from their intended action.

However, a negotiator should not allow that because frequently that individual is part of the cause of the situation developing to the stage that it got to.

Based on that principle, the new person involved and trying to be the negotiator has a much better chance of success since they are not carrying the same "baggage".

This whole story is just sad. That young boy has probably been through so much in his short life. And the officer that tasered him may have just been trying to prevent the boy from harming himself. We must all remember that we don't have all the facts in this case yet, and jumping to any conclusions isn't fair to anyone involved. I will reserve my judgment of anyone until I know what happened. In the mean time, remember that this is a public forum and nasty comments about the officer or the boy are unnecessary. Who knows who is reading them. The boy doesn't need to hear the community screaming out that he deserved to be tasered (you don't know the details of why yet) and the officer shouldn't be judged for why he tasered him (again, you don't know the details.)

We all act all high and mighty but put yourself in their shoes for one minute. Your move might not have been so different. It saddens me to see few comments that show any empathy.

Good on you for showing so much compassion, although neither of us know the facts behind this report. The young man could very well be suffering from mental illness or he could just be the next up and coming gang member we will have to live with in our community?

It doesn't help matters when premptive reports are made based upon speculation and heresay.

Gus, You are over analysing the event. Usually the correct solution is the most simple.

I would rather the tasering than the big hand on the ass my dad would give me. And i would still love him because i deserved it.

I have to comment now cause tomorrow I could be banned...

So if there were no tazers the only other option would have been to shoot the boy...there`s also hand to hand in any case hand to hand or shooting the kid would have done more harm to either kid or cop...the outcome with tazer maybe not ideal with an 11 year old but definitely better then a broken arm or gun shot wound...

So, the officer used potentially lethal force against the boy to save him??? Okay, worked this time.

Were there really no other methods available?

Really?

And, how will we ever really be sure if that is what really happened?

BC needs to develop an independant investigative team - truly independant, and soon!

Generally a suicide threat from a young person is really a cry for help.

In certain parts of India some policemen have with them five foot sticks. Mostly for crowd control and such. I'm sure you have seen on TV where these cops wade into a crowd to disperse the mob. Looks to me like they work. Swatting anyone with these devices in a select area of the body could possibly distract that individual from his potential harmful train of thought. Hypothetically, if the cop hit a person wielding a knife on the hand carrying the knife from say five feet away, I am quite sure the individual would drop the knife, say "Ouch!" to himself and automatically raise his empty hand to his mouth in an effort to kiss it better. Voila! An unarmed individual. Select cases notwithstanding in this application. Too simple? A Taser vs a swat with a stick? Hmmmm?