I’m aware of the debate. But keep in mind that it doesn’t matter a tinker’s dam what our personal opinions of the matter are; the fact is that the state - the licensing authority - considers it a privilege and operates from that basis.
That’s ridiculous. Pain is surely relevant, under both International Treaties against torture and the eighth amendment. Pain is relevant, unless you advocate beginning all traffic stops with a jolt of the taser in order to protect the police.
The question at hand is whether the use of overwhelming pain is, in this circumstance, justified. I say no, for the reasons above.
Daniel
Non-cooperation on the part of the suspect does not compensate for crappy performance on the part of the officer. “She started it” should be dropped sometime around 6th grade. They both screwed up.
What that woman deserved was for the hammer of Thor to be crammed up her a**. Doesn’t mean the cop should just go and get to that as close as he can.
That’s why the Rodney King trial was about, “did you whup him and lie about it?” and not, “man, wasn’t he a jerk?” Heck, I think he deserved it for risking the officers lives like that, but doesn’t mean it was okay for the officers to act that way.
You posed the question to me, and Bear_Nenno answered it.
quote: Well, between 1990 and 1999 there were 111 LAPD officers found liable for excessive assault and battery. The average payout per officer was over $100,000. I still don’t understand your answer.
Your question implied that you don’t think there are claims against Police Officers for black eyes that exceed $500. Is Bear_Nenno’s information wrong?
Nobody, including yourself, seems to understand your question.
minty green Quote: minty green I hear Rodndey Kind got several million dollars, after all. I’m sure he had a black eye.
Where does a black eye fit into the discussion and why such a low figure of $500?
I don’t think anyone understands your question.
As far as I can tell, the only way the state actually operates on that basis is by using the word “privilege” in driver’s education manuals. In practice, driving is every bit as much a right as voting is.
Quote Magiver
I understand the question. He’s trying to find a technicality that he can cling to to be “right” after he’s been proven wrong. It’s a reoccuring pattern.
Actually **minty green
** you didn’t specificly mention broken noses and black eyes when you first issued your challenge. Your words were.
I think thats been done.
What Magiver was refering too when he mentioned broken noses and black eyes was the injuries caused by tasers vs. the injuries caused by the alternative of physical confrontation and the lawsuit that follows those injuries. In that cite you were given, {did you bother to read it?} It said 66.2 million was paid out in damages from 1990 to 1999 for excessive force cases. I think it’s pretty reasonable to assume that some of those were less severe than the Ridney King case and involved a black eye or broken nose. 111 were excessive assault and battery and another 59 were other excessive force and misconduct. Do you suppose there might have been a broken nose or two in there?
If you’re looking for absurdity feel free to review your own posts. It’s abundant.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
I think it’s pretty reasonable to assume that some of those were less severe than the Ridney King case and involved a black eye or broken nose. 111 were excessive assault and battery and another 59 were other excessive force and misconduct. Do you suppose there might have been a broken nose or two in there?
[QUOTE]
It’s also reasonable to assume that the Earth is flat- it’s plain as day to see if you just look.
Why don’t you dig through your sources and provide evidence to back up your claim that millions of dollars have been awarded to people that had no injury other than a black eye (i.e., nothing requiring medical attention)?
What do you consider crappy performance? My point wasn’t a juvenile, “she started it” I was responding to other posters who said the officer was a dick or had a bad attitude. My point was that an officer is not required to be friendly and/or extra patient with this woman. He started out as professional and courteous. When she gave him lip he dropped the courteous and became just professional. Thats all thats required of him and doesn’t constitute a crappy performance. When she physically resisted arrrest she took it to the next level. Again, he’s not required to treat her like a five year old and coax her out of the car, while hoping she doesn’t kick him in the nads. She’s an adult person choosing to resist an officer of the law when she knows she’s wrong. It’s unfortuante that it came to that but it did…as a result of her choices, starting with driving with a suspended license.
I think it’s because I never made such a claim. The meaning is clearly there. If you’d like to nit pick to find an argument take it someplace else. I’m not interested.
It was a crappy performance because he wasn’t able to diffuse the situation peacefully through non-violent ends. I refuse to believe that he was left with tasing her in 30 seconds as his best option.
Yes, I agree that being courteous or what have you is not required. But my point isn’t to be nice to her. My point is to use whatever non-violent means you can to resolve the problem. It doesn’t just give you a warm fuzzy feeling, more importantly, it’s the most efficient. Or atleast the most cost-effective I suppose. Words can hurt, but they aren’t going to give you scrapes and blackeyes.
Baseball players aren’t required to hit a homerun on every at-bat. But I’m still going to call that baseball player with a .087 average a crappy batter. I’ll try to find a cite (man I love this board), but I’ve been told by an officer that civilian discipline boards hearing complaints are usually even more lenient on officers than boards that are made up of other officers.
Good god, don’t they teach math in grade school anymore?
Look, guys, I don’t give a damn if a lawsuit requires some P.D. to pay out substantial sums for major injuries in brutality cases. In fact, I’m not even talking about those cases.
I am talking only about those cases where some dumbass got popped by the cops in an exceedingly minor for third degree dumbassery, yet managed to collect a nontrivial amount of money in a lawsuit against the cops. That is, after all, what one or the other of you claimed above was, like, some sort of major league problem that is best addressed by tasering more people.
In short, I could give a shit if the average LAPD payout for police brutality laswuits is $100K. Find me one damn lawsuit where the plaintiff was awarded $500 or more for a black eye. Just one. It shouldn’t be so hard if you’re right, should it? Or, in the alternative, you could just admit that you’re making it up for dramatic effect.
Best I can find for now (yeah, I’m lazy 
). Sorry they’re not direct links to studies.
http://byronik.com/ed071902.html
http://www.ellerman.org/PolicePolicy/Civilian%20Review%20of%20Police%20Urged%20Article.htm
I get it. Keep in ming that tasing her is considered a better alternative to wrestling her out of the car physically. Could another officer avoid tasing this woman and any physical confrontation? Maybe. He would have to stay close enough to make sure she doesn’t start her vehicle and try to flee. That puts him within reach of her. We just don’t know what might have happened if he choce another tact. You may have missed the discussion that his partner had reached in to get her or her phone and she took a swing at him. Does that warrent a taseing? Once the decision is made to arrest her their job is to do that as quickly as possible with the least physical threat to them,her, and any bystanders.
In review his superior might suggest a calmer voice and a few more warnings.
“Maam, I don’t want to hurt you but if you don’t obey my requests I will be forced to tase you.” Or maybe a direct question that warrents her answer. “Maam do you want me to tase you? I’m asking you to cooperate. If you don’t I will have to tase you” It might have worked but we have no way of knowing.
The OP question is was it justified, not was is the ideal option.
Under the circumstances I’d say it was.
No offense, but do you have any law enforcement experience? I usually try not to go deeply into analyze specific tactics like how close he would have to stay away from the suspect too keep her from driving away and such. And I really mean this with all due respect, but what you’re saying is the kind of quarter-backing that the officer objected to when the woman told her how to do his job 
. I’m just saying I’ve seen worse situations that were handled much than this, and I think this (well these two apparently) officers didn’t perform very well which lead to what was probably an avoidable tasering.
I’m sorry but this thread has just gone all over the place and the only times I’ve heard this is when someone (specifically me, hehe) have brought up the fact that while justifiable, it was still avoidable. Come on, it’s even been allowed to go to why cops should or should not exist to what you think about unmarked units. I points are more relevant.
I think the question of whether this was legally justified has been pretty much resolved, no? Heck, I’m guessing Bricker is a lawyer and can easily look up the outcome of this case (did it lead to one?). I figured we were debating about whether this was justifiable on a ‘moral’ level. I happen to think it wasn’t. I mean really, can you imagine this being legally justifiable for long if every officer handled their traffic-stop arrests this way? I imagine the departments themselves would get rid of the tasers just to avoid this kind of thing.
Now you’re changeing the details of your original post and the meaning of the post you responded to. The point wasn’t about only minor injuries and you know it. None the less, Excessive assault and other excessive force can range from a several punches to the head or head trauma due to being thrown to the ground or up against something, {the kind that causes black eyes and broken noses} to a Ridney King type ass kicking. Nothing in the report indicates the excessive force is only major injuries. Thats an incorrect assumption that you are making in a feeble attempt to salvage something out of an arguement you already lost.
It’s sad really. 
Why would you expect to see a cite regarding a low-dollar payout for a minor beating? If my original opinion is correct (Tasers are seen as a replacement for night sticks) then the lack of evidence would support that. Why would a Municipality fear $500 settlements? The financial fear would be the Rodney King settlements (which would not have happened with a Tasing). Low-dollar settlements would never make the paper. You’re asking a non-question to prove a point that doesn’t exist.
After a quick timeline Google I found this:
snip
1960s
Beginning in the late 1960s, there are many attempts to develop riot control technologies and use-of-force alternatives to the police service revolver and baton. Tried and abandoned or not widely adopted are wooden, rubber and plastic bullets; dart guns adapted from the veterinarian’s tranquilizer gun that inject a drug when fired; an electrified water jet; a baton that carries a 6,000-volt shock; chemicals that make streets extremely slippery; strobe lights that cause giddiness, fainting and nausea; and the stun gun that, when pressed to the body, delivers a 50,000-volt shock that disables its victim for several minutes. One of the few technologies to successfully emerge is the TASER which shoots two wire-controlled, tiny darts into its victim or the victim’s clothes and delivers a 50,000-volt shock. By 1985, police in every state have used the TASER, but its popularity is restricted owing to its limited range and limitations in affecting the drug- and alcohol-intoxicated. Some agencies adopt bean bag rounds for crowd control purposes.
The alternative to Tasing someone is either pepper spray or an ass whoopin with a night stick (or worse). Neither are particularly pleasant. Ask Rodney.
Actually, King had been tased, twice, yet continued to pose a real or apparant thread.
Err, threat.
Interesting. One of the problems with Tasers is that they don’t work as well on people under the influence of certain drugs. I’ve heard suggestions that the voltage be raised. I don’t think that would be a good idea because someone on an addrenalin rush is not going to respond to much of anything and it will probably result in more deaths. A better product needs to be developed that physically restrains a person’s movement. It wouldn’t suprise me to see a Spider Man type of web gun make it into production. The idea of a deployable net has been around since I was a kid.
I was going to comment on the nature of baton use (from personal experience). It really doesn’t do anything other than cause pain to whack someone across a muscle. It hurts but it doesn’t subdue a person intent on harming the user. Poking a muscle is a better use of a baton but that is not easy to do. It also requires the user to get close to the person (as does pepper spray). Tasers and beanbags are the only practical stand-off deterents that I can think of in widespread use today.
Oh, and I stand corrected that the Rodney beating would have been prevented by the use of a Taser. I trust Bryan Ekers is properly informed.