# Taser Use Justified? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 6, 2005, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161 "2005-06-06T17:46:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/181 "2005-06-08T17:30:59Z")
> [@treis](#): > > What exactly did she say that was verbally abusive? She never raised her voice until she was tasered and never insulted the officer that I could decipher. I will have to review the video but wasn’t part of the initial exchange as to why she was pulled over I thought she said something like “probably to try and rape me” or something like that. I could be totally wrong, maybe a doper better at muffled voices can pick out her words better. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/182 "2005-06-08T17:33:39Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Granted but aggressive in the sense of physically aggressive which you did not show. I don’t agree. Belligerence certainly includes non-physical aggressiveness. There’s no rule that says the cops have to wait for someone to actually get physical before they may get physical. A combative attitude combined with a refusal to follow lawful directives is sufficient. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/183 "2005-06-08T17:44:41Z")
> [@drachillix](#): > > I will have to review the video but wasn’t part of the initial exchange as to why she was pulled over I thought she said something like “probably to try and rape me” or something like that. I could be totally wrong, maybe a doper better at muffled voices can pick out her words better. Hm, I went back and turned my speakers up and still couldn’t make out what she said. The best I could get was “mumble mumble mumble hard p or t sound me”. Its certainly possible that she said rape me but it would be quite odd if she did. > [@Bricker](#): > > There’s no rule that says the cops have to wait for someone to actually get physical before they may get physical. A combative attitude combined with a refusal to follow lawful directives is sufficient. Objection, assuming facts not in evidence She did not display a combative attitude all she displayed was an ‘attitude’. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/184 "2005-06-08T17:57:38Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Are we operating under the same definition of aggressive and hostile? She calmly albeit with quite a bit of attitude disagreed that the cop was justified in pulling her over. There is no hostile intent or aggressive behavior anywhere in that at all. She didn’t ask, she told the officer what was allowed. I’d say that qualifies. > [@](#): > > What exactly did she say that was verbally abusive? She never raised her voice until she was tasered and never insulted the officer that I could decipher. when he was at the rear of the vehicle she continuously interuppted him while he was on his radio demanding he answer her question. She raised her voice to do so. She also told him this was \*\*bullshit \*\* twice. That qualifies as verbal abuse. Everything about her attitude from the first word out of her mouth was hostile and combative. Not physically until later, but she set the hostile atmosphere not the officer. > [@](#): > > What exactly is the problem with that? He told her to get her registration out, she asked some questions, he answered and then she complied with the request. I would also note that it did not take a taser to get her to comply rather what 15 more seconds of cajoling? Certainly she is not required to be respectful and polite to an officer. He’s also not required to be patient in the face of her crappy attitude. > [@](#): > > I also would note that you left out the important part of the definition of belligerent and that is “Inclined or eager to fight”. She doesn’t have to fulfill all definitions of beligerent. One will do. In this case she was eager to fight in the argumentative sense as well. > [@](#): > > I am not disputing that she had an attitude and was being difficult but that is not the same thing as belligerent Yes it is. She obviously meets the definition of beligerent. > [@](#): > > nor is it justification to use a taser. he did not use the taser because she was mouthy. He used it because she physically resisted his efforts to remove her from the car. That moves it from verbal to physical. > [@](#): > > The officer asked her to close the door in the middle of them discussing why he pulled her over. Once he stopped the discussion and told her to close the door she did. This isn’t a military drill, not doing what the officer requests the instant after he requests it does not constitute beligerence. The instant?? He asked her several times to close her door and when she did she was still argueing “I don’t have to” Thats combative. You seem to define beligerent as right on the edge of physical confrontation. Thats not the technical or commonly unerstood definition. Being verbally combative and argumentative also qualifies. I’m sure you’ve heard the term a “hostile witness” in relation to court rooms. It’s attitude. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Odds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/d_odds/32/2882_2.png) [@D\_Odds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Odds)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/185 "2005-06-08T18:40:25Z")
[Officer shot 3 times](http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/brooklyn/nyc-nyshot024286887jun02,0,4660073.story) This is why, at a traffic stop, it is unwise to play games with a police officer, and why a police officer might not be willing to play games with you. This is why the officer isn’t going to ask ‘pretty please with sugar on top’. On the positive side, the officer was released from the hospital today, and should fully recover. His partner, however, fled the scene of the shooting, and will probably never patrol again. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/186 "2005-06-08T18:44:50Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > (Some links: [“The Taser was the most excruciating pain he ever felt in his life,” said Joe Diaz, an attorney now representing Beck.](http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/201661_taserrail30.html) and, from a reporter who underwent tasering, [You barely feel the half-inch-long barbed needles thump against your back as they bury themselves in your skin. The initial jolt is instantaneous, and for the next five seconds the pain is unimaginable . . . Resistance to the shock is impossible, and officers say one dose is enough to make even drug-crazed suspects beg for mercy.](http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/040925/taser.shtml) The notion that resisting after being Taser’ed is impossible is incorrect. Good ol’ Rodney King was Taser’ed, twice, and still managed to resist arrest. IANAPoliceOfficer. I have, however, taught come along and arrest techniques to a few. [ul][li]It is diifficult to subdue someone if you are unwilling to hurt them.[_]It is even more difficult to subdue someone if they know you are unwilling to hurt them.[_]Pain compliance holds also carry a non-zero risk of injury. The “drag her out and cuff her” tactic also carries a non-zero risk of injury.[/ul] The last thing is an opinion not based on personal experience. [/li] Some people are going to complain about being arrested no matter what you do. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/187 "2005-06-08T18:45:25Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Objection, assuming facts not in evidence > > She did not display a combative attitude all she displayed was an ‘attitude’. Res ipsa. Her attitude speaks for itself. You and I clearly have far different ideas about what constitutes a combative attitude. But I am willing to bet that if you showed this video to a sample of 100 randomly chosen American adults, more than 80 would agree with me, not you. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/188 "2005-06-08T18:50:53Z")
So what Bricker, let me randomly chose Americans living in East New York Brooklyn or Hollis Queens and see what happens to your 80. Then what? Is the officer no longer justified? ---
**Author:** ![Stonebow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Stonebow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stonebow)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/189 "2005-06-08T19:12:08Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > So what Bricker, let me randomly chose Americans living in East New York Brooklyn or Hollis Queens and see what happens to your 80. > > Then what? Is the officer no longer justified? Not to hijack, but this former native of East New York Brooklyn thought that she was lucky to not to have gotten dragged out of the car and smacked around just for her trouble. Poor minority urban dwellers enjoy watching COPS for the beat downs of dumb-asses too, you know. I think that \*\*Bricker’s \*\* point was that there is no objective sense of ‘excessive’- but the law needs to be able to count on a reasonable standard for many things. I find the officers’ actions here to be completely reasonable, and I think that most people would as well, given her actions. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/190 "2005-06-08T19:15:39Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > There are just over a hundred cases where the taser \*\*may \*\* have been a contributing factor. The other factors are drug or alcohol abuse or some preexisting health condition. There is no “may have been” about it. The people got tasered, and they died in the aftermath of being tasered. _But for_ the taser, they would not have died, even if drugs and alcohol and weak hearts made them unusually susceptible to death by taser. And given the demeanor of the mouthy pain in the ass in question, it would not seem unlikely to me that she was high on something or other. > [@drachillix](#): > > If estimates vary then you do not have a fact, you have a highly variable collection of violent encounters that resulted in the death of a suspect. All of which are tied together by the use of a taser on the deceased. Unless you’re suggesting it’s just a coincidence that they all died after being tasered? > [@](#): > > Your number is pretty much irrelevant. So the deadliness of a particular kind of force is irrelevant to when and whether its use is appropriate? Wow. > [@](#): > > What pecentage of pepole taken down by taser suffered any lasting ill effects compared to all taser uses. Dunno. I was talking about deaths. If there are folks with long-lasting health problems caused by tasers, that would also weigh against their use for the purpose of removing stubborn mouthy pains in the ass from their vehicles. > [@](#): > > Lets compare that to pepper spray or CS. People who are pepper sprayed still can fight and are in serious pain, tasers take that ability to fight away. What, you think I think pepper spray or tear gas would have been appropriate here? Surely you jest? Legal note: There is, if I recall correctly, a U.S. Supreme Court opinion that makes the eminently sensible point that police officers get paid to put up with verbal abuse that would ordinarily constitute prohibited “fighting words,” and that such verbal abuse directed at a police officer is not cause for the officer to use violence against the speaker. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/191 "2005-06-08T19:19:54Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > So what Bricker, let me randomly chose Americans living in East New York Brooklyn or Hollis Queens and see what happens to your 80. > > Then what? Is the officer no longer justified? We don’t derive our standards of reasonable conduct from one neighborhood. We derive them across a state, or across the country. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/192 "2005-06-08T19:41:02Z")
And, what’s your point? People in this country have different relationships with the police. They are not the majority, so when you do a state or countrywide “survey” for rightness, you will by the nature of the beast ignore people who by their lack of being the majority, are unable to input on those standards of reasonable conduct. \*\* cosmosdan’s\*\* expectation of what it means when a officer asks him to exit his car door and mine are different. If i react differently because of my region, does that make me unreasonable? Would my reaction, which is diffect than cosmosdan’s office expects, be enough to warrant suspicion? If an officer asked me to exit my car I would ask why. I would not instantly comply, because in my mind (let’s assume I’m not guilty) I’m being arrested. Now of course he won’t have to ask me a third time, but they’re won’t be the instant compliance that some of you guys seem is expected of me. He needs in my mind, to tell me what my crime is, BEFORE he removes me from my car. Now you may believe differently, which one of us is unreasonable according to statewide survey? ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/193 "2005-06-08T19:51:17Z")
> [@minty green](#): > > So the deadliness of a particular kind of force is irrelevant to when and whether its use is appropriate? > > Wow. Your number did not establish that. If that style of argument had merit the 741 people who died in California car accidents alone in 2003 should make cars at least 7 times as deadly as tasers. If 100 people died out of 1000 uses I would say 10%+ fatality rate is unacceptable. If 100 people died in 10,000 uses a 1% fatality rate is far more acceptable. I’d be willing to bet the fatality for taser hits is more in the .1% range. > [@](#): > > Dunno. I was talking about deaths. If there are folks with long-lasting health problems caused by tasers, that would also weigh against their use for the purpose of removing stubborn mouthy pains in the ass from their vehicles. So would I especially when they are under arrest. > [@](#): > > What, you think I think pepper spray or tear gas would have been appropriate here? Surely you jest? Actually without the option to use a taser I would say yes. Messier with different tactical problems but another minimally lethal form of applying force. > [@](#): > > Legal note: There is, if I recall correctly, a U.S. Supreme Court opinion that makes the eminently sensible point that police officers get paid to put up with verbal abuse that would ordinarily constitute prohibited “fighting words,” and that such verbal abuse directed at a police officer is not cause for the officer to use violence against the speaker. Resisting arrest OTOH does. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/194 "2005-06-08T19:56:21Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > And, what’s your point? People in this country have different relationships with the police. They are not the majority, so when you do a state or countrywide “survey” for rightness, you will by the nature of the beast ignore people who by their lack of being the majority, are unable to input on those standards of reasonable conduct. Are UNABLE? > [@](#): > > \*\* cosmosdan’s\*\* expectation of what it means when a officer asks him to exit his car door and mine are different. If i react differently because of my region, does that make me unreasonable? Would my reaction, which is diffect than cosmosdan’s office expects, be enough to warrant suspicion? Yes, because the standard is an OBJECTIVE one, not a subjective one. If someone honestly and truly believes it’s reasonable to stay in the car if they haven’t done anything REALLY wrong, that’s completely irrelevant. The standard we apply is an objective one, and the subjective expectations of an individual are meaningless. > [@](#): > > If an officer asked me to exit my car I would ask why. I would not instantly comply, because in my mind (let’s assume I’m not guilty) I’m being arrested. Now of course he won’t have to ask me a third time, but they’re won’t be the instant compliance that some of you guys seem is expected of me. Not one person in this thread has mandated instant compliance. I think every reader, and most every citizen, would not find a single, “What’s wrong; why am I being arrested?” to be unreasonable. At the same time, most every reader, and most every citizen, would find ignoring FOUR orders to be unreasonable. You may scoff at a state-wide survey, but we are talking here about society’s expectations – what conduct society is prepared to recognize as reasonable. State- and country-wide attitudes are dispositive of that question. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/195 "2005-06-08T20:09:56Z")
What’s with the UNABLE? If you survey 100 people and I am the lone naysayer, and you make standards based on the majority, I am unable to influence policy. Yes? I forgot you’re a majority rule, follow the law, until it’s changed kinda guy. I scoff at a state-wide survey’s and society expectations, because I know what they’re worth. I know, I know, my individual expections are meaningless and every standard is purely objective. It’s not like people ever placed self-interest, bias or greed into community standards… YMMV, of course. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/196 "2005-06-08T20:13:17Z")
> [@minty green](#): > > There is no “may have been” about it. The people got tasered, and they died in the aftermath of being tasered. _But for_ the taser, they would not have died, even if drugs and alcohol and weak hearts made them unusually susceptible to death by taser. And given the demeanor of the mouthy pain in the ass in question, it would not seem unlikely to me that she was high on something or other. Please post a link for this conclusion. I read several articles and **all** of them said the official medical conclusion was exactly what I posted. If a guy has a heart attack while resisting arrest was he killed by the police or by his bad heart? Does that mean the police should not use any force just in case that person has a condition they don’t know about? > [@](#): > > Legal note: There is, if I recall correctly, a U.S. Supreme Court opinion that makes the eminently sensible point that police officers get paid to put up with verbal abuse that would ordinarily constitute prohibited “fighting words,” and that such verbal abuse directed at a police officer is not cause for the officer to use violence against the speaker. Here I agree with you. That explains why she didn’t get backhanded right away for her bad attitude. The officer remained professional although he was obviously sick of her lip. He used the taser only after she physically resisted and the situation went from verbal to physical. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/197 "2005-06-08T20:23:09Z")
> [@drachillix](#): > > Your number did not establish that. If that style of argument had merit the 741 people who died in California car accidents alone in 2003 should make cars at least 7 times as deadly as tasers. Apples and oranges, a complete non sequitur. Unless you’re trying to establish that the cop should not have driven his car over the mouthy pain in the ass, a proposition with which I agree. > [@](#): > > If 100 people died out of 1000 uses I would say 10%+ fatality rate is unacceptable. If 100 people died in 10,000 uses a 1% fatality rate is far more acceptable. I’d be willing to bet the fatality for taser hits is more in the .1% range. So it’s okay with you for the police to use tasers to remove stubborn people from cars if it only kills one out of every thousand people? Wow. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/198 "2005-06-08T20:30:54Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Please post a link for this conclusion. I don’t post links for common bloody sense, amigo. Do you seriously dispute the notion that if a person is tasered and drops dead, it was because of the taser? Keep in mind that I’m not disputing that it was because of the taser _in combination_ with other factors unique to the deceased person, such as a weak heart. > [@](#): > > If a guy has a heart attack while resisting arrest was he killed by the police or by his bad heart? Both. > [@](#): > > Does that mean the police should not use any force just in case that person has a condition they don’t know about? Of course not. But it _does_ mean that they should tailor their level of force to the situation so as to appropriately minimize the risk of death and injury to the suspect. > [@](#): > > The officer remained professional although he was obviously sick of her lip. He used the taser only after she physically resisted and the situation went from verbal to physical. You keep saying that she physically resisted, but I simply do not see it before he tasered her sorry ass. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/199 "2005-06-08T20:34:30Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > And, what’s your point? People in this country have different relationships with the police. They are not the majority, so when you do a state or countrywide “survey” for rightness, you will by the nature of the beast ignore people who by their lack of being the majority, are unable to input on those standards of reasonable conduct. I agree that the area should be of some consideration when developing guidelines. Local police who know their area can make those judgements. In this case I have a hard time understanding how anyone can look at her behavior and think she was being rational and reasonable for any area. I seem to recall after the Rodney King thing judges did allow for black motorists who didn’t pull over in isolated locations and made the police pursue them to a more public place. > [@](#): > > If an officer asked me to exit my car I would ask why. I would not instantly comply, because in my mind (let’s assume I’m not guilty) I’m being arrested. Now of course he won’t have to ask me a third time, but they’re won’t be the instant compliance that some of you guys seem is expected of me. > > He needs in my mind, to tell me what my crime is, BEFORE he removes me from my car. Now you may believe differently, which one of us is unreasonable according to statewide survey? I tend to agree with you on officers telling you why if they’re arresting you. If you were cooperative instead of physically resisting {as she did} then chances are they’d tell you. I’ve been pulled dozens of times when I was on the road late at night after the bars closed. Some officers were very professional and polite in return. Some were a little rude and nasty and a few bit my head off if I had the nerve to ask a question. I remained polite and let them know that I meant no disrespect by asking. My question is , what is the law? Are officers required by law to explain if they ask you to exit the vehicle? From what I’ve read here the answer is no. Are they required to explain if they are arresting you? I hope the answer is yes but if it isn’t then my or your opinion doesn’t matter. If they tell me to turn around and put my hands on the car and I refuse until they explain I can anticipate an ass whuppin. ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2005, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161/200 "2005-06-08T20:54:38Z")
> [@minty green](#): > > So it’s okay with you for the police to use tasers to remove stubborn people from cars if it only kills one out of every thousand people? > > Wow. If they are resisting an otherwise lawful arrest…absolutely. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taser-use-justified/307161.md?page=11)