09-16-2008, 06:21 PM
[quote Filliam H. Muffman][quote karsen]The Trooper at center of "Troopergate"admits he tasered his Stepson, poached a moose, had multiple reprimands and credible evidence says he drank in his patrol car. He has admitted to all of it but refuses to admit to drinking on the job.
I'm sorry, but tasing a child is enough reason to fire a police officer. If anyone here believes he was wrongfully fired please explain to me why it's okay to tase a child.
"Troopergate" is a load of BS to keep the media entertained. It's was an open and shut case the minute I heard the guy admit to tasering a kid.
Please read up on the story just a tiny bit more. A quick summary is his boss got fired for not firing the trooper.
I didn't read the article. If that's the summary then the guy deserved to be fired. How can anyone defend keeping a trooper on the police force when he admitted to tasing a child? The trooper should have been fired and if his superiors didn't do it then they need to take heat for it.
Please, someone tell me why tasing a child is defensible.
I'm sorry, but tasing a child is enough reason to fire a police officer. If anyone here believes he was wrongfully fired please explain to me why it's okay to tase a child.
"Troopergate" is a load of BS to keep the media entertained. It's was an open and shut case the minute I heard the guy admit to tasering a kid.
Please read up on the story just a tiny bit more. A quick summary is his boss got fired for not firing the trooper.
I didn't read the article. If that's the summary then the guy deserved to be fired. How can anyone defend keeping a trooper on the police force when he admitted to tasing a child? The trooper should have been fired and if his superiors didn't do it then they need to take heat for it.
Please, someone tell me why tasing a child is defensible.