Errr… no. They are not issued to officers to “calm down” resisting suspects, nor to allow them to make a point. They are issued to officers to replace guns whenever possible, in order to hopefully not risk killing or maiming a suspect. They aren’t issued for use outside of situations where shooting a gun would be required. They certainly aren’t issued for officers to shoot them at prone and already restrained suspects.
Never minding the numerous safety issues, have you ever taken a taser hit by any chance ? Do you know how it feels ? Lemme enlighten you : it feels like a serious and very methodical beating, minus the marks and broken bones. Just the pain. 5 seconds of the worst pain you could ever feel as every pain-bearing nerve in your body lights up like a christmas tree (longer if the asshole keeps the trigger depressed). I cannot possibly overstate how painfull it is. It is not a toy, and it is not something to be used casually. Shooting them at unarmed, non-threatening people is serious police brutality and very much akin to torture.
That’s pretty much putting words in my mouth. Show me where I said that tasers are issued to “calm down” resisting suspects? Tell me where I said they are issued to be used against “prone and already restrained suspects.”
Then explain to me how “already restrained” is not a judgment you’ve made based on an unclear, poor quality video. Tell me with complete certainty, based on facts that you are personally aware of because you were there and a part of the incident, that the suspect was completely restrained.
Now, go back and read what I did say.
I don’t need to know what it feels like to take a taser hit to know that it’s a less-than-lethal weapon used by the police to subdue a non-compliant suspect. What’s your point?
This is the SECOND TIME you’ve mentioned capitalism in this thread. It has nothing to do with the subject at all. There isn’t a political system on this planet that doesn’t have a police force so it makes me wonder where you’re from?
He prone, on the ground, with a bruiser who looks like he weighs over 200 pounds kneeling on his neck and shoulders, pinned to the ground. His hands are clearly behind his back, and stay there for the duration. Prior to the shooting, the cop is sitting on his back and clearly preventing him for moving. What more “restraint” do you need, carbonite ?
And again, tasers are not intended to restrain squat, but to incapacitate and subdue. Even if we accept the idea that he made a mistake choosing weapons, which is far fetched in the first place, the guy has already been subdued, there is no need to draw, stand back up and tase except to inflict gratuitous pain in order to make the suspect more compliant, i.e. calm him down.
That is not what they have tasers for.
Furthermore, arguing that a taser shot could have been justified is the same thing as arguing the pistol shot could have been, because they’re supposed to fill the exact same niche in a cop’s arsenal.
That doesn’t make sense. If a taser filled the same niche as a gun then they wouldn’t need the taser. It was appropriate for the officer to remove the taser for possible use on a struggling suspect. You can’t tell from the video what is going on or how combative the suspect was. Clearly a scuffle took place that led to the take-down. I have no idea if the suspect said “thank you sir, may I have another” or “get off me pig or I’ll fucking kill you”. The latter would get you a date with a taser for any sign of continued struggle.
It doesn’t APPEAR that a taser was necessary at this point (let alone a gun) but that is what an investigation is for. I’m disturbed that all parties involved weren’t immediately questioned separately so nobody had a chance to fabricate a story.
Errr, the aim of cops is to preserve life. That includes the suspect’s.
But assuming you meant “they wouldn’t need the gun”, range is the most obvious issue. Also stopping power, use against armored suspects… lots of cases where a taser wouldn’t work. Heck, if the suspect was armed and threatening someone, I’d probably go for the gun because taser-induced spasms might cause his finger to contract uncontrollably and discharge his weapon at random.
No. That’s what police hand to hand techniques are for. That’s what controlling your suspect is about. That’s also why there are two and a half (the third appears distracted by the onlookers) cops controlling the single suspect. At this point you don’t need a taser, esp. if you know the perp to be unarmed (one assumes the group was at least patted down before they were handcuffed and made to sit against the wall).
And yes, the guy is flailing around and probably cursing. But in the circumstances, would you say hitting him repeatedly with a baton until he stops moving appropriate ? Spraying him with mace ? Cause tasing him is the same thing. Disproportionate use of force, on a defenseless man. Arrest suspects are by definition non-cooperative, that doesn’t warrant the use of excessive force *after *a takedown.
Especially considering that, from the admitedly blurry video, it really looks like Grant was handcuffed by the time the officer stands back up (a move which to me points to him feeling the suspect is under control, btw). Not beyond a doubt, I completely agree there, but I don’t understand why he’d keep his hands crossed behind his back otherwise. If that’s the case, that would strongly argue against the idea he presented any kind of danger to himself or the LEOs. Being a pain in the ass ? Probably. That ain’t a crime, nor does it warrant the painbuzzer.
Kobal2, though you mistaken wrt to taser usage, further discussion along these lines would only continue the hijacking of this thread. The use of tasers has been debated previously (I’d link, but can’t search for another 5 minutes).
Second-guessing the judgment of the participants involved also isn’t reliable, or even an appropriate, means of coming to a definitive answer as to what happened.
If I shoot somebody, even accidentally, I’m not going to be sent home and asked to swing by the station sometime the following week after they’re done locating and interviewing all the witnesses and reviewing the films. I’m going to be put in a cell while things are sorted out. Especially if there is video of my actions and especially if the video appears to show me unjustifiably shooting somebody in the back.
Now maybe the video doesn’t show some critical detail, something that justifies what I’ve done, but until that something is determined there is no way I’m getting out anytime soon.
Why should the cop get to go home? He’s less of a risk just because he’s a cop? There is no way to know that without investigating the matter. For all you know this guy has just snapped mentally. But because he’s a cop his presumption of innocence is greater than that of a regular citizen. And that really, really pisses some people off. There shouldn’t be two different legal systems depending on who you are.
I understand that police have a tough job. It’s dangerous and stressful and there’s little thanks for it. Do I think I could do it? I don’t know, and so I’ve never tried to be a cop. These guys aren’t drafted into the job, they volunteer, and they do so knowing what they were getting into. If they fuck up they shouldn’t be treated any differently than anybody else.
This. This. And this again. Mehserle fucked up, and he’s basically skipped out on the internal investigation. And as of now he’s answering to no one for his actions. I would be glad to see him on trial for it but I’m not holding my breath.
Holy shit, I just found out about this. I’ve met the officer in question. I would have never guessed he’d be responsible for something like this. Boggles the mind.
Okay, after a day or two of pondering the situation, I’m coming down on the side of “this officer fucked up big-time”, rather than “this officer is a racist, evil murderer”. That doesn’t absolve him of anything other than intent, though. He still, well, fucked up big-time. Any mistake that leaves someone dead who shouldn’t be dead is more significant by several orders of magnitude than something like accidentally dinging a car while parallel parking.
I’m not arguing from the latter position either - though I do believe Mehserle is guilty of manslaughter at the least and believe something ought to be done to address that.
Yeah, I think that’s the most probable answer at this point.
As a citizen he’s entitled to not have to incriminate himself, and since he has a job that requires him to take the risk of being in positions where he has to decide to use deadly force, he’s entitled to some leeway… but he has to justify that leeway by explaining himself. Since he has chosen not to, as is his right, the system should go forward and treat this case as it appears to be: a negligent discharge that caused death. The cop needs to be indicted.
The shooting is infuckingexcusable. He was down and subdued. He had no reason to taser or shoot him. How can you confuse a taser and a gun anyway? I do not buy it . I hope they prosecute to the max.
It’s amazing how much leeway and benefit of the doubt people are willing to give someone just becase they have a blue uniform and a badge. There’s a video of a cop shooting a pinned down suspect in the back, and some people are waving it away by saying the victim had a criminal record and had it coming to him, the cop meant to merely tazer him and pulled out his gun instead. The human capacity to rationalize away horrible behavior is amazing.
Don’t mistake my willingness to give the benefit of the doubt as to his intent with a willingness to smooth the whole thing over and throw out any charges against Mehserle. I still think he should be at least charged with manslaughter. Depending on what the investigation uncovers, my preferred charge could elevate. I’m not saying that he gets a pass on pulling his gun, I’m saying that pulling the gun could have been part of the fuck-up here rather than a deliberate, planned action. If so, I’m glad he resigned, because I wouldn’t want a policeman who can become flustered enough during a routine interaction with a restrained suspect to pull a gun.
I’m only saying that I don’t necessarily believe that the officer actually intended to shoot the deceased when he pulled that gun. I still think it was a major error to pull the gun at all, but I’ve shifted from being suspended between “meant to do it” and “didn’t mean to do it” to the latter.
Well, it appears right now it’s involuntary manslaughter, that the cop made a horrible mistake. Yes, the cop should be charged. If is was just a horrible error, then the Judge and Jury should decide fitting punishment.
But, before he’s charged with that crime, they have to make sure it’s not Homicide instead. If he drew his gun and shot in anger, as opposed to thinking he drew his taser, then more serious charges should be considered.
I am not sure the DA knows enough to bring the right charges at this point in time. Right now, if they bring charges, it’d only be because of the riots and violence breaking out. Should they rush to bring charges? Or bring the right charges?
Oh, and it appears Grant had a record, he has served a few months. That doesn’t mean he should have been killed of course, but perhaps his actions did call for a taser. He apparently was under the impression he was going to be tasered. Perhaps he had been tasered before.
He was facedown on the ground with the knee of a large officer planted in his back. There was another officer above him to deal with his hands. Unless he pulled a weapon, which I’m pretty sure we would have heard about by now (what with the minor rioting and all) what could he have possibly done that called for a taser? I don’t think you’re supposed to tase somebody because they’re lying on the ground being squirmy or because they’re begging you “Please don’t tase me.”
On a related note, if he was trying to tase the guy, wouldn’t the jolt have incapacitated the other officer as well, since he was in contact with the guy on the ground? Or do they not work like that?