Taser use still justified?

Great Debates
1

Recently we had a debate in this thread about whether or not police taser use was justified.

Many people, including myself, felt that the police were too quick to use the Taser in the situation presented in the OP, and perhaps too quick in general to rely on it.

Many felt that the Taser use was an appropriate use of force for the police to gain (some say “take”) control of a potentially dangerous situation, both in the situation described in the OP of that thread, and in general.

We now have this, from Jackson Hole, WY: (my thanks to Phnord Prephect for posting this in his thread in MPSIMS)

cite

I don’t feel that in this instance, the use of a taser justified. What say you all?

More about general taser use and policy:

Towards the end of our first debate, Magiver made the statement:

.
Here are other examples of what some may consider inappropriate use of a Taser.

Woman claims excessive force in Taser use

LESS-LETHAL FORCE: NLV police Taser use criticized: Witnesses warned officer that stunned woman was pregnant

Schools restrict use of Tasers

Police chief questions Taser use on suspected bomber

Panel Says Taser Use on Teen Library Patron Justified

Police Taser Disabled Teen at Traffic Stop

Police used Taser on pregnant driver

It is my feeling that police are now, and in the future will be, less and less likely to seek any other resolution than to simply taser a subject into helplessness, unless stricter guidelines and restrictions on the use of a taser are made now, since officers in the field have already begun to set their own precedents. It is my position that a taser should be a last resort, used before a bullet but not before, or in place of, taking someone into custody through simple physical means (grabbing an arm, placing handcuffs on a subject, etc).

I’m asking for others’ views, then, on when it is appropriate to use this instrument and this level of force.

I would also ask: are we placing the right tools in the right hands, or are we simply giving police a way to harm a subject which will leave little or no evidence of pain, suffering, and injury?

2

I wasn’t there, but if a naked man is attempting to spray my children with a fire extinguisher, I would appreciate someone putting a stop to it. If that involves a Taser, well, so be it. My idea of a relaxing afternoon with the family does not include nudity or CO[sub]2[/sub] foam.

Of course, it also does not include demolition derbies, so YMMV, but am I outraged that they Taser-ed a naked idiot? Not that much.

Regards,
Shodan

3

Well, for good or ill, I’m with **Shodan ** on this one.

I think that the alternatives in this case might have been worse, so the tazer use gets a cautious green light from me. Keeping in mind that this guy was also naked- I imagine that adds a degree of difficulty to apprehending him.

Unfortunately, there is a PR aspect to consider- I’d much rather see some crazy naked guy get ‘zapped’ and then taken away than have multiple officers wrestle him to the ground.

I’m not totally comfortable with the OP’s placement of the tazer in the hierarchy of force. While a good officer can diffuse a situation wthout any sort of physical violence, I don’t see why it is incumbent on them to close with the suspect and engage in hand to hand when there are other methods available, especially in a situation like the one described, where the officers are surrounded at close range by a group of spectators- unable to ontrol the actions of the crowd, they have to end this encounter as soon as humanly possible.

My two cents on it. And I am aware that, though a lefty, I am very pro-police. So take it for what it’s worth.

4

There’s no such thing as “CO[sub]2[/sub] foam”. :slight_smile: It’ll either be a dry chemical extinguisher (messy) or a CO[sub]2[/sub] extinguisher, which sprays harmless CO[sub]2[/sub] gas (it could cause frostburn if he was REALLY close to the fans though).

And, although I think Tasers should have a place in law enforcement (beats the hell out of getting beat), I think the use was unjustified in this situation. I think they should have just ignored him. Or pointed at his crotch and laughed, if they were feeling malicious.

5

Wait. So, at a crowded family affair, some guy is running naked in front of the crowd, spraying people with a fire extinguisher, and you feel police should have “just ignored him”?

Should they have continued on with the demolition derby, then, even though he was running through that area? I mean, if you delayed the events because he was out there, that wouldn’t be ignoring him, and the terrorists would then win, right?

6

I’m not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, using a taser on a naked man at a demolition derby does seem to be a bit much. Usually the on-hand cops or security just grab the threat to our decency and haul him off. On the other hand, they could have been sued for using too much force, or sexual harassment if they didn’t watch their hands.

I’m left wondering what police officers are supposed to do. The line marking excessive force keeps getting moved back farther with every “outrageous” incident. How long before excessive runs into ineffective?

7

Yup. It depends on what exactly he’s doing with the fire extinguisher–if he’s spraying a CO2 extinguisher at the crowd from 10 or 15 feet away it’s completely harmless. If he’s sticking it in their faces and actually hurting people he should certainly be forcefully stopped, but if he’s just streaking he’ll probably be finished pretty quick. If anything, chasing him and lavishing attention on him like just makes even more of a spectacle, which is exactly what the guy is looking for.

:confused:

8

Naked man, running around a demolition derby, spraying people with a fire extinguisher.

The appropriate police response is “ignore him?”

Umm… no.

What are my options, if I attend such an event but don’t want to be sprayed by a fire extinguisher?

9

Sure. And consider - you’re not sure what the right answer is, and you had several moments to thoughtfully consider the issue before you posted.

The officers had seconds to decide what to do.

10

As I’ve already said, it really depends on what is ment by “spraying people with a fire extinguisher”. If it was a CO2 extinguisher, and he wasn’t right up next to the crowd, it wouldn’t be so much a spray as a puff of harmless gas. If it was a dry chemical extinguisher, or a liquid based extinguisher, or he was close enough with the CO2 extinguisher to hurt people, he should be physically stopped. A taser would seem appropriate. Likewise, if it carried on for more then a few minutes he should probably be physically stopped.

But if he was just streaking with a fire extinguisher? Wait for him to stop, which probably won’t be very long. Eject him from the event, give him a ticket for disturbing the peace–whatever. My point is that there’s no reason to make a big deal out of it (unless the exception I just outlined were met). Streaking is basically trolling; they’re doing it for attention. Making a big deal out of it just gives them what they want.

I don’t really see how him being naked changes anything or makes it especially heinous.

11

Well, I realize that we’re all God’s chillun, and the human body is beautiful, yadda yadda ad nauseum; still, I feel we have indecent exposure laws for valid reasons, one of which is to prevent naked men from running about disrupting demolition derby fun.

If he were naked sans fire extinguisher, and merely walking quietly about, I would still want the police involved to remove him. Of course, absent any physical resistance from him, no taser would be required.

But I can’t agree that the nakedness is irrelevant. I don’t want naked men wandering around in public. Naked women, either, as a general proposition.

12

First off, the fire extinguishers I have used shoot out a fine powder (propelled by C02) that gets all over everything. I don’t think it’s particularly lethal, but I wouldn’t want to be shot in the face with the stuff, either. I’m not certain this is what he used, just that there are more types than foam or C02.

The guy was naked at a family oriented gathering. Now I don’t think that seeing a man naked is going to make little Jenny’s eyes melt out, but it’s not much different than a dirty old man flashing her on the subway. Just the context of a goofy guy streaking vs a dirty old man flashing kids on a subway. I’ll bet the dirty old man on the subway would be arrested and labled a sex offender.

So it seems like the streaker should be arrested. Except he was “eluding police”.

If he would have just surrendered, I doubt he would have been tasered.

13

Indeed. I think the taser use may have been unjustified, but not excessive. The man suffered no lasting harm aside from the announcers remarks and potentially exposing a small flaw in his physique to the dating pool.

Of course, if the police had done nothing the attendees would be railing about noone thinking of the children.

14

I don’t see how arresting him and taking him away is escalating how much attention he’s getting. He’s standing out in full view of thousands of people naked spraying a fire extinguisher, I think that just about maxes out the level of attention this guy is going to be getting at that point. Personally, I think the rough tackle / harsh handcuffing and arrest helps to dissuade people from coming onto the field. Generally, I think that is the right way to handle it, tasering is a bit over the top.

Letting him run around unopposed just encourages other attention seekers, who don’t see any downside to interrupting the event. I have a feeling that after this tasering, nobody else in the crowd had an urge to streak.

15

I disagree; the motivations of a guy flashing little girls on the subway are very different then a streaker. The guy flashing little girls on a subway is doing it for sexual gratification, he gets off on it because he knows he’s shocking and scaring little girls. It seems far more overtly sexual then streaking.

16

Streaking is expected at this event. It seems to me that the police should have known and taking measures to PREVENT it from even happening, but once it occured, they should have allowed to to run it’s course as it’s been doing for 3-4 years now.

The crowd expected it and clearly didn’t consider it a big deal. What did the police do last time? Why was this time different?

http://jhguide.com/Archives/SportsArchive/2004/040804-Sports.html

17

How about the man who died after being tasered?

Not enough deaths? How about another?

Or what about this man in Canada?

And then there’s the guy in San Diego who died after being tasered

And the one in San Francisco

And the one in Long Island

And the one in West Palm Beach

And Santa Rosa, California

Maybe it’s time we start to evaluate whether these things really are ‘less lethal’ alternatives, and not be so quick to rely on them when other means could be used. I tend to think that the streaker at the demolition derby could’ve been handled without resorting to a Taser.

18

What’s the percentage of deaths out of all of the times a taser has been used? Are there better alternatives available?

19

Considering how often the use of a Taser is proclaimed to be safe and non-lethal, and how quick cops are to pull out a Taser in situations where they know full well drawing their firearm wouldn’t be justified (because deadly force is not justified in all situations), I really think that any deaths from these devices should warrant a look into whether they should be quickly grabbed as a non-lethal way to subdue someone.

20

But even something as innocuous as a submission hold can be potentially lethal. There are questions about pepper spray. Something is always going to be lethal against somebody. Are there better alternatives to the taser and does the potential risk outweigh the benefits?