Taser use still justified?

[Shodan]

@Metacom

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.

Obviously I don’t know the motivations of the streaker. Maybe it was harmless fun; maybe it was sexually motivated and he was using the squirting fire extinguisher as a penis substitute.

The nudity part does bother me. That is mostly because it seems to me to be an indication that the streaker was more likely to be drunk, drugged, or crazy. Maybe he wasn’t; maybe he was just stupid. We can’t tell at this remove.

But just as I don’t want naked men showing up in my neighborhood, I also don’t want them at events that I pay to attend. And if they start disrupting the event, or squirting stuff around, then I would very much prefer that the police not ignore them.

And catsix - you realize, of course, that people have also died from being taken down and subdued, or choked, or pretty much any other form of restraint? There is always a risk to someone who does not respond to the commands of the police. And it seems that, below a certain point, that risk is irreducible.

Regards,
Shodan

[D_Odds]

Let’s take away all weapons from all police officers at every level. Let’s arm them with nothing more lethal than a Bic pen. That way we can ensure that no officer ever uses their weapon wrongly.

We know that won’t work. So now we have to define what weapons are appropriate and when they should be used. The argument that I’m seeing is that before the taser, a gentleman such as this would either have been talked down or tackled, rather than electrocuted. Personally, I’m for faster resolution. The taser is safer for the officers than tackling and faster than negotiation. If a streaker, who knows what he is doing is wrong, does not comply immediately to police commands, I’m not going to shed a single tear over his tasering.

Do people die from taser use? Yes. It’s a non-lethal solution, in that death is not a common nor an expected outcome, but it is a possible outcome. Same could be said from someone being hit with a police baton, or even being gang-tackled by police.

Police are trained (and hopefully the training is ongoing) in the escalation of force. This is supposedly designed to protect bystanders, the police, and to the greatest degree possible, the target of the police. These rules should be constantly reviewed and tweaked. But in no way, shape, or form will I advocate removing a proven, non-lethal, non-injuring (in most cases) weapon from the policeman’s arsenal.

[Ike_Witt]

@D_Odds

Do people die from taser use? Yes. It’s a non-lethal solution, in that death is not a common nor an expected outcome, but it is a possible outcome. Same could be said from someone being hit with a police baton, or even being gang-tackled by police.

True, tasers are generally not lethal but that is probably why we see some deaths from it. I think that the device is leading to the police becoming lazy. If a cop is thinking that I have this non-lethal wepon, I might as well use it- it may be used too much. I thought that the idea of a non-lethal weapon was to replace shooting somebody. Would a cop pull a gun on a streaker? I doubt it. So why should he pull a taser? Back in the 70’s when streaking was popular, tasers weren’t around so how did those cops deal with them?

For whatever reason, the taser seems to have evolved from a non-lethal tool into a crutch that is being overused by police not doing the things that they used to do.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

I noticed that no one seems to have looked at the other 6 articles I linked, and thus we’ve heard no opinions on the 13 year old girl tasered in the library, the pregnant woman who was tasered twice despite being on the ground after being tasered once, or the school children who were tasered.

Let me ask y’all this: In the same situations, 20 years ago, would you have defended the police if they had hit each of the people with their nightstick, just once, but hard enough to knock them out? Or do you find that causing pain and suffering, as long as it causes little or no lasting physical damage, is acceptable?

Since the other 6 articles I linked to have thus far been ignored, let me describe this scenario:

A group of protesters is practicing civil disobedience by refusing to stand up and walk to the paddy wagon. Police begin tasering them for failing to comply with police demands. People hold fast and still do not get up and walk under their own power to the paddy wagons. Police continue to taser them. At what point would you say police should stop tasering them and begin carrying them? Or do you think that police should simply continue to taser them indefinitely?

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@adam yax

True, tasers are generally not lethal but that is probably why we see some deaths from it. I think that the device is leading to the police becoming lazy. If a cop is thinking that I have this non-lethal wepon, I might as well use it- it may be used too much. I thought that the idea of a non-lethal weapon was to replace shooting somebody. Would a cop pull a gun on a streaker? I doubt it. So why should he pull a taser? Back in the 70’s when streaking was popular, tasers weren’t around so how did those cops deal with them?

For whatever reason, the taser seems to have evolved from a non-lethal tool into a crutch that is being overused by police not doing the things that they used to do.

I think that is a fine summation of my feelings as well, Adam. From what I’m seeing, tho, it seems that we are in the minority thus far.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Zap the naked freak. Then zap 'im again!

I’ve as much sympathy as he has beltloops.

[Harborwolf]

@Snowboarder Bo

A group of protesters is practicing civil disobedience by refusing to stand up and walk to the paddy wagon. Police begin tasering them for failing to comply with police demands. People hold fast and still do not get up and walk under their own power to the paddy wagons. Police continue to taser them. At what point would you say police should stop tasering them and begin carrying them? Or do you think that police should simply continue to taser them indefinitely?

I am not an expert, but you usually go down when hit by a taser. This would allow the police to haul them off to the paddy wagon. That is typically why you use a taser: to incapacitate. Perchance you are mistaking it for a cattle prod.

Repeated use of a taser on a suspect once they are down is abuse plain and simple. So that’s a no to your protester example. They should not taser them indefinitely. You expected another answer?

The rest of your linked articles are the fault of the officers and not due to any problem with the taser. I think better training and punishment for those caught abusing them are much better than removing a very useful tool from the police.

[Tristan]

There’s a lot of feeling in this issue, as it involves the police.

The fact that Taser deaths makes headlines is a good thing. The relative rarity of it warrants headlines… much like you never see breaking news that yesterday 7000 flights landed without crashing.

I am willing to bet that thousands of people are tazed every day.

I am also willing to bet that if they were not an option, we would be seeing more headlines of cops being hurt, or being forced to shoot someone.

If you do not listen to the cops you will be tazed. It’s a pretty well known fact these days. Pepper spray, then tazing, then a physical grapple (possibly with stick) and then shooting, if I recall my levels of force correctly.

I have little sympathy for people that are tased for not following the directions of the police. Those that die, it is sad, but…

A man suspected of assaulting a police officer died Tuesday after being shocked multiple times with Taser stun guns during a struggle with police, authorities said.

Don’t fight the cops.

MIAMI - A man died Friday after struggling with police and being hit with a Taser stun gun, authorities said. …

Police used stun guns to subdue Wilson when he resisted arrest and attempted to strike the two officers, Fonticiella said.

Really don’t fight the cops.

Those are taken from the first 2 of the list of links provided by catsix. I’m running out of time, so I’m going to go on the assumption, as most of these situations seem to be, that the subjects involved were fleeing from crimes, assaulting police, or becoming beliggerent that officers believed was leading to violence.

The choice to use pepper spray, tasers, etc. is not the choice of the officers alone. If you get up and swing at a cop, you are making the choice to get sprayed, zapped, and possibly shot.

[silenus]

Maybe** Bricker** can answer this one: Isn’t spraying a crowd with an extinguisher technically “assault?” In which case the cops were reacting to prevent multiple assaults from occuring, as well as apprehending a naked guy who was eluding them.

I’ve been stun-gunned. Not pleasant, but preferable to the alternatives.

[D_Odds]

@Harborwolf

The rest of your linked articles are the fault of the officers and not due to any problem with the taser. I think better training and punishment for those caught abusing them are much better than removing a very useful tool from the police.

Agreed (with the caveat that I don’t have time at work to read every article that gets posted to the forum). Don’t blame the hammer, blame the person who crushed your skull with the hammer.

Prior to tasers, the streaker would likely have been tackled/gang-tackled. The taser reduces the risk to the police officers. I have absolutely no problem with that. He knowingly broke the law and knowingly refused to comply with lawful orders from the police. There’s no reason to complain he was tasered versus tackled. The latter is arguably as risky as the taser to the tacklee, and also risky to the tackler. Tasers significantly reduce the risk to the tackler.

Will there be lazy police officers who reach for a taser before they should? Will there be police officers who abuse the use of the taser? Of course. But the same holds true for the nightstick and the pistol. So in order to stop all potential misuse and/or abuse, police officers will have to do their jobs completely unarmed.

Or perhaps police departments can work to refine the use of the taser, and any other tools in their arsenal. When the use is abused, then let the legal system remedy the situation. Police Departments don’t want lawsuits nor bad publicity. Don’t, however, take the tool away. I’m not convinced it is an overused crutch; at this point I see it as a new tool allow for quicker resolution of engagements, reducing risk to officers, at times when lethal force is not called for. It will take more than a few dozen incidents of abuse to convince me otherwise (unless you can show that a great proportion of taserings are abusive).

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@Tristan

The fact that Taser deaths makes headlines is a good thing. The relative rarity of it warrants headlines… much like you never see breaking news that yesterday 7000 flights landed without crashing.

Thanks, that actually made me LOL.

@Tristan

I have little sympathy for people that are tased for not following the directions of the police. Those that die, it is sad, but…

In general, I agree that officers should use a taser on a physically combative person. In general.

It’s the “noncompliance” issue that starts to make me uncomfortable. A protester practicing civil disobedience is failing to follow police directions, and police could even make the argument that said person might have weapons on him which would be used when police came into close proximity. Rather than possibly endanger a police officers life, they therefore just continue to taser him.

I know that a lot of y’all will think that it is a highly unlikely scenario, etc. but you need to know that I live in a state that actually condones an officer shooting an unarmed man in the back, despite the fact that he had been following police directions to the letter, and was on his knees surrendering. cite

I think I am justifiably worried that police might cause unwarranted pain, suffering, injury and even death, and I worry that a taser, without strict guidelines for use, will eventually become a lazy cops solution, and not merely a tool for specific situations.

[Ravenman]

@catsix

How about the man who died after being tasered?

“PHOENIX – A man suspected of assaulting a police officer died Tuesday after being shocked multiple times with Taser stun guns during a struggle with police, authorities said.”

Not enough deaths? How about another?

" MIAMI - A man died Friday after struggling with police and being hit with a Taser stun gun, authorities said… Police used stun guns to subdue Wilson when he resisted arrest and attempted to strike the two officers, Fonticiella said."

Or what about this man in Canada?

“Police say 54-year-old Robert Bagnell was high on drugs when they stunned him in a hotel room on the city’s Granville Street.”

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

“Camba threw things at the officers and kicked them, according to San Diego police Lt. Mike Hurley. An officer shot Camba with a Taser gun, but he continued to struggle after police handcuffed him.”

And the one in San Francisco

“A man who fought with police despite being pepper-sprayed and shot twice with a stun gun abruptly collapsed and later died in the hospital, authorities said Monday.”

And the one in Long Island

The link does not work.

And the one in West Palm Beach

" “He was grabbing residents and throwing them against the wall and throwing furniture around,” said police Lt. Charles Reed. Residents fought back and he fled the facility. Police corned him, but he fought back and an officer used a Taser to subdue him, Reed said. "

And Santa Rosa, California

“Authorities are awaiting the results of an autopsy after a Santa Rosa man died after struggling with police officers Saturday. Thirty-one-year-old Carlos Fernandez died at Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital Saturday after being shot with Taser guns and hit with pepper spray.”

I certainly don’t think that any of these individuals deserved to die because of their crimes, but violently struggling with police is a much different situation than someone running naked and harassing peaceful spectators or the hypothetical situation about civil disobedience. Perhaps you could find some cites of peaceful, non-hopped up individuals who were unjustifiably tasered and killed?

Perhaps the cops had read of this event in which someone killed themselves by breathing the fumes from a fire extinguisher, and felt they needed to take action before one of the pacific patrons of the demo derby was sent to the hospital because of the knucklehead’s actions.

Finally…

@Snowboarder Bo

I live in a state that actually condones an officer shooting an unarmed man in the back…

I must be missing something. That article says that the LVPD has their internal affairs bureau investigating the shooting, that the officer was suspended, and that the FBI was also investigating. Another article says that the officer in question later resigned from the force, and that the investigation was continuing, but I can’t find anything on the final resolution of the case. I don’t get what constitutes “condoning” that shooting, because it certainly is not in the article posted.

It’s always good to read the cites provided, folks.

[Odesio]

@Snowboarder Bo

Let me ask y’all this: In the same situations, 20 years ago, would you have defended the police if they had hit each of the people with their nightstick, just once, but hard enough to knock them out? Or do you find that causing pain and suffering, as long as it causes little or no lasting physical damage, is acceptable?

Well, yeah. One of the great things about a taser is that there aren’t generally any lingering affects. It’s a damn sight better then resorting to physically grabbing someone or hitting them. I’m glad the police force have the taser in their arsenal but I do think it’s possible that they are being overused. Any situation where an officer is authorized to use force I don’t see why they shouldn’t use a taser. Either the officer was authorized to use force or they weren’t.

At what point would you say police should stop tasering them and begin carrying them? Or do you think that police should simply continue to taser them indefinitely?

This is less a taser problem and more of a crowd control issue.

Marc

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@Ravenman

Finally… I must be missing something. That article says that the LVPD has their internal affairs bureau investigating the shooting, that the officer was suspended, and that the FBI was also investigating. Another article says that the officer in question later resigned from the force, and that the investigation was continuing, but I can’t find anything on the final resolution of the case. I don’t get what constitutes “condoning” that shooting, because it certainly is not in the article posted.

It’s always good to read the cites provided, folks.

It is always good to read the cites provided.

The coroner’s jury found Barlow’s death was excusable, a result of actions not entirely acceptable, but not egregious enough to be considered criminal.

cite This is midway down the page.

I was unable to find the original story about the coroner’s inquest, or about the shooting.

In Nevada, when we have an officer-involved shooting, the case does not go to trial. A hearing is held in the form of a coroner’s inquest, where there is no cross-examination of people involved or of witnesses. Instead, the coroner asks questions, answers are given, and a conclusion is then reached. To date, since the system was adopted in the 1970s, not a single officer involved shooting has ever been found to be inexcusable, let alone criminal.

The one death (that I can find) that was caused by a taser in Nevada was also condoned.

The seven-member jury ruled that Officer Matthew Ruiz and Sgt. Cindy Rodriguez were justified when they applied a Taser to Walker several times in front of the Western hotel on June 6.

cite

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@Snowboarder Bo

The one death (that I can find) that was caused by a taser in Nevada was also condoned. cite

Whoops, hit the wrong button.

I meant to add that the taser death was ruled justified, despite the fact that the use of the taser violated Metro Police policy on their use.

[D_Odds]

Snowboarder, I’m not sure condones is the right word. It said that a coroner’s jury (whatever that is) found the actions to be egregious but not criminal, yet there is an ongoing investigation (including the FBI looking into possible civil rights violations). IMO, that article is more applicable to another facet of police life found coast-to-coast, border-to-boarder. The “blue wall of silence” does more harm to police than weapon misuse (as opposed to abuse). Assuming the sharpshooter’s statement is false, I would much prefer that the police truly police their own, and get the guy off the force and if warranted, into a prison.

I don’t blindly support police, but I also don’t blindly line up with every person who says “I wasn’t doin’ nuthin’ when the cop just came up and tasered me.” It plays well to a news camera and a sympathetic audience, but I’m more apt not to believe, absent other witnesses (and not just the dude’s best friend), either source, and rather that the truth is somewhere in the middle.

[D_Odds]

Bah, it’s good to have the cite (and site) in front of you when typing:

“found the actions to be egregious but not criminal” should read as Snowboarder posted in post 34.

[D_Odds]

Snowboarder, I can’t say much in favor of Nevada’s inquiry system for officer-involved deaths. Sounds like a case of police protecting police to me. I’m not fond of that, as the ones most protected are usually the ones who shouldn’t be police officers to begin with.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@D_Odds

Snowboarder, I’m not sure condones is the right word.

“condone” means to overlook, forgive, or disregard (an offense) without protest or censure.cite That’s what happened here, and in every other coroner’s inquest in the state of Nevada.

@D_Odds

Snowboarder, I can’t say much in favor of Nevada’s inquiry system for officer-involved deaths. Sounds like a case of police protecting police to me. I’m not fond of that, as the ones most protected are usually the ones who shouldn’t be police officers to begin with.

Obviously I don’t like it either. And that’s why I hold the position that police can, do, and will continue to misuse tasers (as well as other types of force), and why I argue for strict rules governing their appropriateness. I don’t believe a taser should be used as a first means of force, or in place of physical restraint when a person is already in custody, or as a means of gaining compliance with a subject who is not physically combative.

[Shodan]

@Snowboarder Bo

I noticed that no one seems to have looked at the other 6 articles I linked, and thus we’ve heard no opinions on the 13 year old girl tasered in the library, the pregnant woman who was tasered twice despite being on the ground after being tasered once, or the school children who were tasered.

Well, I only read the article about the pregnant woman being Tasered when she wouldn’t sign her ticket (or exit her car).

She claims to have suffered some burns and a lump on her neck. Which is too bad, no doubt, especially for a pregnant woman, but it doesn’t strike me as all that excessive.

At one point, I taught close combat and come-along holds. They, too, can cause damage and/or even death. If you grant for the sake of the argument the necessity of using force to bring the woman out of the car, is a Taser that much worse than a wristlock? I have never been Tasered, but I have been wristlocked, and it is not pleasant. Would a sprained wrist be an argument not to use come-along holds on a pregnant woman? Or are you proposing that Tasers are worse?

@Snowboarder Bo

Let me ask y’all this: In the same situations, 20 years ago, would you have defended the police if they had hit each of the people with their nightstick, just once, but hard enough to knock them out? Or do you find that causing pain and suffering, as long as it causes little or no lasting physical damage, is acceptable?

Well, no, but that is not how you use a nightstick to bring a person out of a car. Knocking someone out with a nightstick is a bit further along the continuum of force than Tasers. IMO. I am sure police policy varies by jurisdiction, but all the other options that occur to me - pepper spray,come-along holds, dragging her out by her hair - all carry a non-zero risk of injury, just like a Taser.

@Snowboarder Bo

Since the other 6 articles I linked to have thus far been ignored, let me describe this scenario:

A group of protesters is practicing civil disobedience by refusing to stand up and walk to the paddy wagon. Police begin tasering them for failing to comply with police demands. People hold fast and still do not get up and walk under their own power to the paddy wagons. Police continue to taser them. At what point would you say police should stop tasering them and begin carrying them? Or do you think that police should simply continue to taser them indefinitely?

No, I don’t think they should be Tasered indefinitely. I would say give them one or two shots, if that many, and then start carrying them.

You said the arrestees “hold fast”. Do you mean they are hanging onto something and won’t let go? Or do you mean they just go limp, as protesters were advised to do in my student days?

FWIW, in my younger days, I trained with a local police chief, who showed me his pain compliance holds using handcuffs. This were definitely unpleasant. I also learned an old-style taiho-jutsu technique used by the Japanese police before WWII. This involves using the edge of the forearm under a subject’s nose to get him to come to his feet and walk along with you. It involves a risk of breaking the subject’s nose. Plus it hurts like hell. Would you say that was better. or worse, than Tasers?

Regards,
Shodan