WARNING: there is technically a penis in this video
http://vimeo.com/ 4273363 (link broken on purpose; take out the space before the numbers)
The video is a man who is obviously intoxicated, and naked at a concert. It starts out fairly routine but ends with what is in my opinion some pretty excessive tasing.
Now, I’m not criticizing the officers here. They’re actually pretty reasonable, give the guy ample chances to comply, and are just following procedure as far as I can tell. It’s the policy I have a beef with.
Three exceptionally large, well-trained police officers should never have to shoot electricity into a naked (meaning it’s blindingly obvious that he’s unarmed), unaggressive, basically harmless person. His crime is not violent, and he’s no danger to himself or anyone else (naked at a rock concert, woo – welcome to 40 years ago.) Sure, he’s not complying so . . . sorry officers, keep trying. Cuff him, shackle him, bear hug him, even armlocks and the knee to the ribs are acceptable in my opinion, as long as they are practical and not recreational. Potentially deadly electricity, though? No.
Tasers should be reserved for when police are outnumbered or outmatched by violent, aggressive, or dangerous people who are not armed with deadly weapons.
I do criticise the officers here. There’s nothing reasonable about enforcing a policy which lets them shoot electricity into unarmed, unaggressive people without their consent.
I’m not a cop, and know very little about how they’re trained, but it seems to me that three very big dudes should be able to get a stoned naked person into cuffs a little easier than that. It just looked to me that they had absolutely no idea what to do with him after a certain point.
The best part of the video is the attractive hand-shaking woman’s rather devastating downward glance at around 0:47.
Agreed. I think that they just didn’t know what to do with him…and perhaps they didn’t want to try getting physical with a naked man (how might THAT have looked captured on video and splashed all over YouTube??)…and so resorted to their training.
I hate tasers. Hate them. It gives police far too much power to force compliance when it may not be warranted. Tasers, to me, should only be used in lieu of a gun and not used simply because someone’s pissing an officer off.
Tasers honestly freak me out–removing all power of the victim to do anything gives the police far too much power, and there appears to be no reprocussions for using one, thus there really is no limit to their abuse. At least if a police officer uses a gun, he had better have a damn good reason for it.
I believe that that’s the exact point. Compliance is obligated by law. Why should the police have to risk getting their eyes poked out, accidentally cutting the dude or breaking his finger or some other thing, when they can simply press the “pause” button? Just because they -can- subdue him physically, getting physical with someone is nearly always going to end up in at least minor injuries on the part of somebody. If it’s one of them, then they’re getting punished so that this asshole can break the law (the obligation to comply). If it’s the asshole, then he gets to sue them for a million dollars before they get booted from the force.
That wasn’t the case here–nor has it been in countless other examples. This guy was of no threat to anyone. I believe the amount of resistance the police use should be proportional to the risk posed by the individual. Tasering someone just because he’s naked? Seriously?
I am of the opinion that the police have far too much power, and now giving them the ability to ** immobilize ** anyone they see fit, without reproduction (or so it would seem) is a tool I’m not convinced they can handle responsible, and thusly, am not comfortable with them having. Honestly, it frightens the shit out of me that we’re giving the police so much power.
All he had to do was put on his clothes and trouble would have been averted but he instead decided to be an ass about it. Of course being an ass doesn’t exactly warrant a tasing. At least I hope it doesn’t warrant a tasing or I’m in trouble. Naked Wizard wasn’t tased until he physically resisted the officers.
Quite frankly I’m not sure if manhandling him would have been any better than tasing him. Though, I must fully admit, I am not an expert on the best ways to take down a suspect without severely hurting them. If I had a choice between being held down by three beefy men who are irritated with me and being tased I might just pick the taser.
Odesio
They didn’t tase him for being naked they tase him for resisting arrest.
The police have been carrying firearms for at least a century and a half by now. Your comfortable with that but a taser is uncomfortable? I’m not one of those people who thinks the cops are always right. In this case I just don’t see what they did wrong.
I’m sure it isn’t a pleasant experience but neither are contusions and broken bones. If it makes you feel any better the police officers are typically tased as part of their training. They know how it feels.
Because he was naked. I guess I have numerous issues with this incident.
No, I’m not “comfortable” with it, though I realize it’s something that has been needed. However, when it comes to the usage of a gun, it (as far as I know) is only supposed to be used when the individual in question poses a physical danger to someone. You can’t just shoot someone because they’re naked and resisting arrest, much as I believe should be the case for tasers.
We’ve had threads like this in the past, the consensus by people who had been taser as part of their training was that being tasered hurt more but caused far less damage than being roughly handled by cops does. People simply are completely missing the point that tasering is the safer alternative, more painful does not equal more dangerous. I see absolutely no reason why a cop should have to risk going into melee with someone when such a simple solution with zero risk towards them exists. So it hurts like a bitch, tough fucking shit, keep your clothes on and don’t act like a fucking asshole next time.
ETA Part 2: “Though Tasers are considered nonlethal weapons, Amnesty International reports there have been more than 330 deaths involving Tasers in America since 2001. Amnesty reports that in 40 of those cases the Taser was identified as a contributing factor in or cause of death.”
None of those quotes says “died as a result of a tasering”, I’d really like to know what they mean by “involving” and “contributing factor” before i change my opinion.
How else would you define a “contributing factor”? Also, the article opens with “a Michigan teenager died after being tasered by police”–sounds pretty definitive to me (unless the author is somehow mistaken).
ETA: " When Ryan took off running, officer John Harris pursued the 22-year-old for a half-mile and then shot him once with an X-26 Taser. Ryan fell to the ground and began to convulse. The officer attempted cardiopulmonary resuscitation, but Ryan died.
According to his family and friends, Ryan was in very good physical shape. The county coroner found no evidence of alcohol or drugs in his system and ruled that Ryan’s death could be attributed to the Taser shock, physical exertion from the chase and the fact that one of his heart arteries was unusually small." http://www.alternet.org/rights/44455/
Regardless of how you cut it, in this case, it seems clear the taser caused death.