# Tasing the deaf & disabled **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 28, 2009, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598 "2009-07-28T21:18:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/21 "2009-07-29T12:37:08Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > I thought I read the whole story, but did I miss something? I don’t recall anything about anyone hitting anyone. Batting at someone with an umbrella = Hitting I’m also still waiting for someone to come up with a solution towards causing immediate and peaceful cooperation in someone who is unwilling to comply, short of pointing a gun at them or mind control. Come, please, tell me what this magical method is that is always assumed to exist in these threads? ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/22 "2009-07-29T12:50:15Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > bolding mine > > I think you have umbrellas confused with bayonets. I supposed there’s a tiny chance of eye trouble, but I’m sure even cops can wear safety goggles if it’s that much of a risk. I guarantee you that if I was angry and on speed, carrying an umbrella, I could make you change your opinion on whether an umbrella can appear like a bayonet. It’s a metal poker at heart, and it will go through your body. But even discounting that, you’ve got a small operating space, between a doorway and a stall door, and an umbrella flailing between those and an angry person pushing at the doorway on the other side, resisting arrest and disobeying orders. Yes, you could go in and beat him down and cuff him, possibly getting hurt yourself, or you could use the advantage of the upper hand that you possess and render him harmless in a (admittedly painful) reliable and safe way, and go home that night to your wife and children without a single bruise or cut. _Any_ fight, regardless of whether the person is armed or not, pretty much guarantees minor injuries, and it’s very easy to get more significant injuries than that. The cop could rush in and before he knows it the perp has grabbed his head and slammed it down on the toilet, cracking his skull open. He could go in and get an umbrella rammed through his stomach. There’s no knowing what’s going to happen on the other side of that door unless you have a way to control it in a reliable manner. For someone who’s not making a million dollars a year, who has a wife and a kid that he has to go back home to every night, he’s just not going to expose himself to unnecessary risk. _You_ might choose to be the police officer who’s going to go in trusting to the good intentions of all the (probably bad) people you get called in to deal with on a day-to-day basis. But I’d venture to guess that most people with that job would be a little bit more worried about their own well-being than that of the person they have to, single-handedly, force into compliance. Why? Because they want to continue to live, and they don’t want to be bruised and battered every single day on the job. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/23 "2009-07-29T15:20:37Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Yeah yeah, he’s evil and awful for making assumptions totally in line with his experiences every single day. It’s not like Dopers would ever accuse their cow-orkers of stupidity, or clients at any sort of sales/customer service job as being stupid before proven intelligent. > > Yes, the cop was in the wrong in the end. But it’s silly to pretend like he wasn’t doing anything other than his job based on what he was legally obliged to do and based on real world experience. 999 times out of 1000 it would have been some dumb punk who’d been snorting glue, and not a person in the world would have cared that he got tasered. This cop just happened to win the anti-lottery. 999 out of 1000. Pretty good. You should not make statements like that. Making stuff up is poor form in debate. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/24 "2009-07-29T15:45:01Z")
Irony, thy name is **gonzomax**. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/25 "2009-07-29T17:20:49Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Batting at someone with an umbrella = Hitting Yes, obviously. When I said I didn’t read about anyone hitting anyone, that should have been understood to mean I also didn’t read about anyone batting anyone. Because I didn’t. Neither did you. Your post was predicated on the notion that as far as the officers knew, a “punk” had “hit” them. But I’ve re-read the story now, and can find no support for the idea that they guy “hit” them, “bat at” them, or in any way appeared to use any kind of weapon against them. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/26 "2009-07-29T17:21:53Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > umbrella flailing **Sage Rat** , where are you getting this shit? All the story says is that they “saw” and umbrella and that he “had” an umbrella. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/27 "2009-07-29T18:09:47Z")
It doesn’t even describe the umbrella. The one I keep in my truck is about 16" long and has a 2 blunt ends. It’s a pop-out kind, cost me like $4. It weighs like 10 ounces and isn’t very sturdy. I’m sure I could whack someone with it, but it would crumple like a cardboard tube. Hardly a serious concern as a weapon. Where did you read that he had a Penguin-style umbrella, with a big pointy end? In any case, although I find the quick fallback on tasing to be reprehensible, it’s really the fact that they arrested Mr. Love **after** ascertaining the facts that bothers me. This man had committed no crime, and had even suffered great pain at the hands of the police, yet they arrested him. IMO, they were trying to retro-actively justify their use of the taser thru the arrest. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/28 "2009-07-29T18:37:16Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > I guarantee you that if I was angry and on speed, carrying an umbrella, I could make you change your opinion on whether an umbrella can appear like a bayonet. It’s a metal poker at heart, and it will go through your body. Oh, bullshit. Even if you’ve got an umbrella with a pointy end (most of them look like [this](http://umbrella.co.uk/images/P/fulton_microslim_umbrella.jpg) these days), they’re still made of hollow aluminum rods that would break in half before they could do any serious damage to a human body. You might be able to break the skin if you stabbed someone straight on with one, but there is no way in hell you’ll get it to go “through” a body. ---
**Author:** ![NoJustice](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecb155/32.png) [@NoJustice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NoJustice)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/29 "2009-07-29T19:06:49Z")
**Sage Rat** is just trying to defend these officers the same way they usually defend themselves… by making shit up. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/30 "2009-07-29T19:19:36Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Irony, thy name is **gonzomax**. > > Regards, > Shodan I always supply cites. I am not to blame if you are unable to read them or understand them. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/31 "2009-07-29T22:43:21Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Your post was predicated on the notion that as far as the officers knew, a “punk” had “hit” them. No, my posts have very consistently said that the umbrella is beside the point: “The officers weren’t afraid of an umbrella.” “But even discounting [the existence of an umbrella]” I’ve said specifically that the danger is in a one-on-one, uncontrolled fight. And that unless someone can propose an alternative to pepper spray + tasering that is a reliable method of getting someone to comply without having to fight or point a gun at them, then I’m not seeing what the argument is. If there is no safe alternative for an officer going into a one-on-one situation where he has no way of controlling what’s going to happen on the other side of the door, then there is never going to be a good outcome. Even if everything turns out alright, it was a still a bad outcome because it entirely depended on the roll of a die. But, fortunately, he does have that alternative in the form of pepper spray + tasering. He can defuse a person in an other room and enter it safely, without doing harm (though admittedly still causing pain) to either of them before getting cuffs on. If there’s a better alternative than that, tell me. That’s all you have to do and I’m bowing at your feet. But if the only thing can occur to you to talk about is whether “punk” is an accurate descriptor for your 90th percentile trespasser being ejected from a building, or whether or not an aluminum pole can go through someone’s eye/neck/stomach, even when I’ve specifically said that it’s irrelevant and doesn’t matter one way or the other, then that’s rather signaling that you really have no better suggestion for what the officer should have done. Because that’s all it takes to get me to admit complete and total defeat. Yes, if the officer had been telepathic, he would have been able to realize that he _wasn’t_ dealing with a drugged up punk like the last several dozen he’d had to bust for trespassing, and realized he didn’t have to do anything at all. But telepathy just doesn’t exist. There’s no reason for an officer to think that someone who is not responding when asked to come out, and who is actively resisting when you go to try and get him is anything other than some punk who’s going to put up a fight. And no fight is worth having when there’s better alternatives. Or at least, that would be my understanding until such a point as someone can say what the better solution is. Please, inform me. > [@gonzomax](#): > > 999 out of 1000. Pretty good. You should not make statements like that. Making stuff up is poor form in debate. Yes, congratulations, you’ve discovered that it was a number pulled from my butt. But, unless you think it’s not in the ballpark, I’m not seeing your point. > [@Frylock](#): > > Sage Rat, where are you getting this shit? All the story says is that they “saw” and umbrella and that he “had” an umbrella. They saw an umbrella through a closed door? Woot, telepathic, x-ray vision police officers! Go Supermen! > [@Snowboarder Bo](#): > > Where did you read that he had a Penguin-style umbrella, with a big pointy end? Where did you read that it was not? Point in fact, it was an umbrella specifically noted to be fearsome. So I have to say that it seems like a lot smaller leap to take to assume it to be just that. Though, as I said at the beginning of this post and other posts, the umbrella is entirely a red herring. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/32 "2009-07-29T22:55:42Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > No, my posts have very consistently said that the umbrella is beside the point: > > “The officers weren’t afraid of an umbrella.” > > “But even discounting [the existence of an umbrella]” But the post I was responding to, the one I refer to in what you quoted above, is post number 10, which is very clearly and explicitly predicated on the notion that the punk in question “hit” the officers. If you’ve changed your mind since then, that’s fine. But you can’t claim consistency on this point. > [@](#): > > I’ve said specifically that the danger is in a one-on-one, uncontrolled fight. And that unless someone can propose an alternative to pepper spray + tasering that is a reliable method of getting someone to comply without having to fight or point a gun at them, then I’m not seeing what the argument is. I could walk up to you right now and spray you and taser you. That gurantees you’re not going to fight against me for a while. Does that mean that’s what I should do? No, since I have no reason to think you want to fight with me at all. In your post number 10, you explained why you thought the officers reasonable in expecting the guy was going to put up a fight. Key to that list of circumstances was the notion that someone had been "hit"ting them. Given that no one was in fact hitting them, what good reasons did they have to think he was going to put up a fight? Just the fact that he refused to come out? That hardly means “I’m going to fight you.” I don’t know what the rules are for the police in these situations. I’d actually _prefer_ that they went in with guns drawn, rather than with a predecided intention to use a taser. At least that would have given them, in their own minds, the opportunity (and duty) to assess the situation before using force. > [@](#): > > They saw an umbrella through a closed door? No, they saw it while the door was open. > [@](#): > > Though, as I said at the beginning of this post and other posts, the umbrella is entirely a red herring. The officers in question seem to think otherwise. They are explicit in the story in saying that the umbrella was the _reason_ they used the taser. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/33 "2009-07-29T23:05:13Z")
The internet has taught me that some people are just going to support tasing no matter what. They say they won’t, but no matter how absurd the case, and how obviously unnecessary the tasing was, they support it. Their own sweet grandmother could get tased in the butthole while making cookies for a police benevolent bakesale and singing hymnals in the privacy of her own kitchen, and they’d say, “bitch should’a known better.” ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/34 "2009-07-29T23:06:28Z")
Why was the guy in the bathroom for over an hour? ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/35 "2009-07-29T23:19:43Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > Why was the guy in the bathroom for over an hour? That’s a really good question. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/36 "2009-07-29T23:30:20Z")
> [@Cisco](#): > > The internet has taught me that some people are just going to support tasing no matter what. They say they won’t, but no matter how absurd the case, and how obviously unnecessary the tasing was, they support it. Their own sweet grandmother could get tased in the butthole while making cookies for a police benevolent bakesale and singing hymnals in the privacy of her own kitchen, and they’d say, “bitch should’a known better.” And there are some people who will assume the cops are psycho, evil nazis no matter what. Ted Bundy could be cutting the throat of a 6-year old girl in the middle of Main street and someone would yell at the cops for interfering with his Constitutional rights. Luckily those outliers really are not much more than internet strawmen in a decent debate. Most of the positive research on Tasers can be found on their website. Their advertising emphasizes that use of their devices reduces officer and civilian permanent injury and death rates (I would link, but Websense considers their site to be “weapons” and is blocked at work.) This makes logical sense, since the Taser is designed to incapacitate from a distance without causing injury - unlike a gun which kills from a distance instead. A club requires that you get in close which risks the officer, it also can be used as a club (it is also used as a restraining device). I do think the Taser can be, and is, probably abused at times. If we had Star Trek stunners, we would probably just stun first and ask questions later. That is a lot easier than trying to subdue someone who does not want to be subdued (naked wizards, rambling students, or deaf guys locked in a private bathroom). However, absent counter-evidence, the numbers that Taser shows appear to indicate that the Taser keeps skulls from being cracked, people from being shot, and officers from being hurt. I believe that it is a net positive. ---
**Author:** ![NoJustice](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecb155/32.png) [@NoJustice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NoJustice)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/37 "2009-07-29T23:34:56Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > No, my posts have very consistently said that the umbrella is beside the point You do know that we can still read what you wrote earlier… right? > [@](#): > > I’ve said specifically that the danger is in a one-on-one, uncontrolled fight. and when the question was, quite rightly, raised, what relevance that has to a man who has been in the bathroom for a long time… you compared the victim to “_a punk_”. You then defended this characterization with a reference to him supposedly hitting someone. When this, uhh, _inaccuracy_ was pointed out, you said “_Batting at someone with an umbrella = Hitting_”. Who do you think you’re fooling? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/38 "2009-07-29T23:50:55Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Batting at someone with an umbrella = Hitting > > I’m also still waiting for someone to come up with a solution towards causing immediate and peaceful cooperation in someone who is unwilling to comply, short of pointing a gun at them or mind control. Come, please, tell me what this magical method is that is always assumed to exist in these threads? What threads have you been reading, and on what message board, where there is a “magical method is that is always assumed to exist in these threads”? I’ve started a couple of threads about tasers, and I don’t recall ever seeing anyone claiming that such a thing existed. Since it _always_ pops up in taser threads, I’m sure you can provide some cites for us. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/39 "2009-07-29T23:57:17Z")
My apologies, **Algher** , but I’m not going to accept research and conclusions made by the manufacturer of the item in question. The list of manufacturers who have lied about their product in order to sell it is simply too long for this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598/40 "2009-07-30T00:07:38Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > My apologies, **Algher** , but I’m not going to accept research and conclusions made by the manufacturer of the item in question. > > The list of manufacturers who have lied about their product in order to sell it is simply too long for this thread. Understandable, which is why I did point out that they are the ones hosting the data. I do think that some of the research that they host has been done by others, but again I can’t hit the site right now. However - where is the counter-evidence that Tasers cause more harm than good? The Taser falls in a continuum: 1. No officer involvement necessary. 2. Talking to the person, convincing them to change their behavior. 3. Physically stopping the person’s behavior with hands. 4. Physically stopping the person’s behavior with a non-lethal device: A) Club (close in) B) Pepper Spray / Tear Gas (crowd control) C) Taser (distance weapon) 5. Brandishing firearm and threatening. 6. Shoot to kill This might be slightly out of order, I admit. Tasers take down people from a distance without killing them (absent outliers of people with heart conditions or other health conditions that don’t lend themselves to electrical shock). When the police have to incapacitate, physical force leads to bruises, broken bones, and sometimes death. Guns obviously lead to death. Having tools in the midrange helps. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tasing-the-deaf-disabled/504598.md?page=3)