It doesn’t seem like it:
Please tell me how she was aggressive, hostile or eager to fight.
Yeah, actually, I think to some degree they should. But that’s based on my understanding of what a taser does, and of what a single punch from a small person usually does.
I’ve thus far heard three accounts of folks who have been tasered. The first was an MP who described it as the most excruciating pain he’d ever experienced in his entire life. The second was a radio reporter who voluntarily underwent a tasering, and who likewise described the pain as overwhelming. The third is Bear_Nenno’s, who blows it off as no big deal.
(Some links: “The Taser was the most excruciating pain he ever felt in his life,” said Joe Diaz, an attorney now representing Beck. 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.
Sorry, Bear. I don’t believe that your experience is typical. I believe the other folks I’ve heard, who describe it as agonizing.
As such, I think it needs to be recognized as a last-resort item, to be used only when there’s danger of even worse pain resulting from its non-use, or else serious injury or death resulting from its non-use.
Contrary to what Bricker has suggested, it MAY NOT ethically be used to save the police department time or money. If a person costs the police department time or money, the proper response is to fine them or otherwise add onto their sentence for doing so.
Hell, if you want to make a rule that officers are allowed to key the car of a noncompliant driver, I’ll be okay with that. Set up a rule that they can fire caltrops into the car’s tires, and that’s cool. But it is extremely unethical to inflict “unimaginable pain” on someone in response to their nonviolent noncooperation with the police.
Again: the appropriate standard for taser use is that a reasonable person would conclude that the use of less severe measures would be likely to result in death or in injuries or pain more serious than that caused by the taser. And Bear_Nenno’s dismissal of the taser is not the benchmark for judging the pain it causes.
Daniel
This is a distortion of the facts. 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 are very few cases where the taser is actually claimed to be the primary cause of death.
In the reading I’ve done I’ve seen blatent abuses. There’s some talk of delayed or long term physical injury which is yet unverified. Again we’re talking potential risk. How do we measure those conflicting reports against the violence avoided? How do we protect our officers who already put themselves at risk. There is no way to create the ideal situation in law enforcement. When you resist an officer there’s a risk involved.
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.
Your number is pretty much irrelevant. What pecentage of pepole taken down by taser suffered any lasting ill effects compared to all taser uses. 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.
Personally I would rather be tased than be maced/pepper sprayed, hit with a baton or manually wrestled down and cuffed. Then again I know everything is going to be much easier from second one of I just play nice and cooperate.
Thing is, while I will concede that the tazer is painful, in terms of long term effects, it beats the heck out of broken bones, contusions, cuts, etc. that would result from a physical struggle. As near as I can tell, pain is not the primary deterrent here- it’s the lockdown of muscle control so that a perp can no longer resist.
Again, what do you think would have been a better solution to resolve the situation within a manageable time frame? Once again, time is of the essence, especially given the suspect was in communication with unknown 3rd parties during the arrest. So, what do you do?
The “broken bones” bit coincides with what I said. The “contusions, cuts, etc.” bit doesn’t. There’s a difference between a boo-boo on your knee obtained while being dragged out of a car, and a slashed-open abdomen. I’d far rather get the knee boo-boo than get tasered; I’d far rather get tasered than get my belly opened. I don’t see that a reasonable person can conclude that it’s likely for anything worse than a few minor cuts and bruises to occur from this situation if her sorry ass had been dragged from the car.
Minty’s suggestion of dragging her sorry ass out of the car sounds fine to me. What did officers do in these situations before tasers came along?
Daniel
I think you make a good point that should be considered in evaluating the guidelines.
I’m not sure how realistic it is when consdering police budgets and staffing. I don’t these officers should be required to call other police away from their duties to handle this woman. It does make sense to inform her that every minute she delays will result in a more serious sentence if that option were open to them. What about that costs to our court system?
You’ll note that both officers say they’ve been tasered.
…it’s the lockdown of muscle control so that a perp can no longer resist.
Does that mean she really was unable to put her arms behind her back as commanded? If so, then didn’t the officer KNOW that? If he knew that, then why zap her again in order to have her comply with a command, she was now unable to do?
I think I see the second officer come over and put her arms behind her back for her. Was the second jolt, justified?
It’s not just Bear_Nenno. The Florida city’s PD has made it policy that the taser is preferred to physically forcing compliance. The sargeant interviewed said that the taser was lower (with gunshots being the highest) on the order of escalation that using a nightstick and other physical confrontation.
So now its Bear and the Florida city’s PD. Do we need to poll other police departments until we get enough of a consensus? Do you believe that PDs don’t study the effects of different measures of gaining compliance, and that they aren’t cognizant of the relative dangers and benefits?
Reading your first link, LHoD, I see at least one, possibly two or three cases where use of the taser was likely inappropriate. I especially dislike the last story. It’s what I hate about police and the way the laws are written, because it basically gives police a way to arrest someone who’s done nothing wrong (“ooh, my bad about the mistaken identity, but you resisted so we’re arresting you anyway.”) From the second article, however, is a quote of significance.
That does not happen if you’ve got a separated shoulder or even a mild concussion resulting from a physical confrontation.
[ul]
[li]She immediately (and falsely) accused the officer of illegally stopping her - that is both aggressive and hostile [/li][li]She was verbally abusive to the officer during the encounter - that is hostile[/li][li]The officer asked her three times to close her car door, which she had opened open the stop (this is a safety measure for the driver AND the officer) and she refused to comply[/li][li]She refused to supply her registration, driver’s license and proof of insurance when asked, instead aggressively demanding that officer first supply her with his name and “unit number”; almost a minute and a half elapsed between his request for her documents and her turning them over[/li][/ul]
Are we all watching the same video here?
The officer called for backup before any refusal took place and tasered the woman in question again when she was on the ground writhing in pain.
Pepper spray, baton, or just a physical battle. Do you see those as the better options in this case? If so why? Do you think the officers should risk a kick to the groin or some fingernails across the eyes or any other injury? There’s also a real possibility of the woman suffering a minor to serious injury during a physical battle. Add to that the unknown person on the phone. Should they drag her out only to discover she has a knife or some other dangerous object? Perhaps pepper spray of her own? They had no way of knowing what she would do next. They did know she had resisted arrest.
I am concerned about taser use being abused by trigger happy officers. I am also concerned about any officer risking injury when he or she doesn’t have to.
Do you think that a few moments of what can be severe pain with few lasting physical results is worse than a severe sprain, a concussion, an officer haveing to take several days off, or the other potential results?
Pain is irrelevant
Injury is relevant
Police use plenty of pain submission techniques to force compliance in cuffing a combative suspect, this is just capable of applying pain subission without the officer applying it directly to the suspect with his own hands.
treis, the second taser, I’ll grant, might have been gratuitous. It’s hard to tell, as she was moaning quite a bit, which one of the officers characterized as an act (I’m paraphrasing, not rewatching or reading a transcript).
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.
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.
Yeah the officer said she was a bit “melodramatic” about being tasered twice.
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.
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?
I also would note that you left out the important part of the definition of belligerent and that is “Inclined or eager to fight”.
I am not disputing that she had an attitude and was being difficult but that is not the same thing as belligerent nor is it justification to use a taser.
Err I messed up something during previewing and editing.
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.
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.
He asked her in the middle of her asking questions of the officer. When he stopped the conversation and repeated the request she closed the door. Seriously is this what we are basing her description of “intent or eager to fight, hostile and aggressive” on?
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?
I also would note that you left out the important part of the definition of belligerent and that is “Inclined or eager to fight”.
I am not disputing that she had an attitude and was being difficult but that is not the same thing as belligerent nor is it justification to use a taser.
Yeah the officer said she was a bit “melodramatic” about being tasered twice.
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.
Can we all least agree that if you have a problem with an officer, the proper place to address it is in court, and not on the side of the highway?
There are too many variables in play for anyone to be ‘cute,’ ‘hostile,’ or ‘agressive’ and not think there will be some serious repercussions. the courtroom is the time for explainations, mitigating circumstances, reports of bad conducts, etc.
No. The conditions in your definition were connected by ‘or’. Not all of them need apply. “Aggresive” alone is a synonym for belligerent.
on the video you can hear a clicking noise when the shocks are being applied, it only last for about five seconds. After that there is no real effect beyond probably a little sting from the probes still stuck in you.
After watching the video I felt the second jolt was a little more grey but we can’t see what she was doing on the ground. Onces shes out of the car, cuffing her is much easier.
Granted but aggressive in the sense of physically aggressive which you did not show.