Sure it served a purpose. The purpose was:
“I am a cop and you must obey me. If you don’t obey me I will punish you.”
How so? The penalty for speeding is a ticket. Which she refused to sign for. If she had signed for it, I guarantee there would have been no tasing. She refused release and then resisted the very arrest that she demanded. The penalty for resisting arrest will be decided by a court of law in accordance with statute. She was subdued.
Of course, this still doesn’t explain how you have come to the conclusion that she was never a threat to anyone or herself. She was obviously and negligently a threat to herself and any other drivers or construction workers in the area she was speeding through. She was a threat to herself and the officer when she refused to follow his instructions that were, at least partially, specifically given to ensure both her safety and that of the officer (as well as anyone in the lane closest to the breakdown lane).
So, once again, I ask: at what point was she not a threat to anyone, including herself?
So, your issue is with the Texas statute, not the officer who was enforcing the very statute you seem to have a problem with. Right?
As cited above, apparently in Texas, you don’t get the option of refusing to appear.
See post #47.
I said she was never a threat to anyone, including herself, meaning she shouldn’t have been tased.
You said ah, but she was a threat, by speeding in a construction zone.
By that logic, everyone who speeds in a construction zone should be tased.
Either she was a threat as a speeder and deserved a tasing - in which case every speeder in a construction zone should be tased - or she wasn’t a threat. If that is not your argument, then your argument is missing a link and is irrelevant.
The old lady was a mouthy bitch, no question, but I really have a hard time believing this cop couldn’t have just forced the cuffs on her and put her in the car.
They’re trained to handle muscle heads wacked out on PCP after all.
Yeah…by tasing them.
Acknowledged.
So, what other categories of people get to laugh at the law? Can I do it when I’m 72? People in suits who look respectable?
Oh, I see, you said she was never a threat to anyone, including herself and I took issue with that generalization.
You’ve got some funny logic there, mister. How would tasing them eliminate the threat assuming you actually have to pull someone over to tase them? I never suggested she should have been tased for speeding. I am, however, disagreeing with your assessment that she was a harmless old lady who was never a threat to anyone. Clearly, from the get-go and at several points during the encounter, she was a threat.
Tasing is not punitive. Tasing is a compliance technique. Just like the knee to the chest. Just like physical subjugation, handcuffing, etc. When you resist arrest, you do pose a threat to yourself and the officer carrying out the arrest because people get hurt in those situations in the best of circumstances. As as been noted over and over again, tasing–as opposed to physically forcing compliance–minimizes risk of injury to law enforcement and *usually *to the arrestee, as well. Resisting arrest, however, is never going to be 100% safe, with or without tasers.
Why should law enforcement be expected to put themselves at physical risk if there is an alternative that does not result in anyone getting hurt? Why should a cop have to suffer from even a scratch because some mouthy jerk has decided they get to decide whether they get arrested or not?
The easy lesson here is not to escalate shit before it goes further than you are prepared to deal with. Old biddy’s got no room for complaint here.
If any cops are here maybe they know the answer.
This woman repeated ignored verbal commands from an officer, he warned her repeatedly he would use a taser if she did not comply, she did not, she was tased.
Is wrestling her to the ground to put the cuffs on against policy?
Sure. Laugh it up! 72, young old, dressed in a suit, dressed in a bunny costume.
You’re still on the hook for the ticket.
Tasering is a “compliance technique.” Yeah… that makes sense. Or it’s a cheap cop-out so they don’t have to risk anything.
This is bullshit. Yes, grandma was out of control. I have little sympathy for her.
However, the cop has absolutely no place in any police department in America. He was incredibly stupid, and clearly excalated the problem. He should never have gotten her out of the car unless he was prepared to immediately take her into custody. He should never have touched her unless he was prepared to go all the way, period. Moreover, dealing with a loudmouth by getting huffy and arresting her is rather dense. Yes, she verbally refused to sign. She then evidently thought the better of it and things could have simply gone from there. It also appears he did not adequately explain things not her. Yes, she’s whiny and jerkish. But it looks like he was damn well looking to start something and wag his dick around, metaphorically speaking.
This is reinforced by the fact that his excuses (from another article) are paper-thin and have little or nothing to do with the video.
What I see, not just here but in numerous other cases, is a growing reliance on police officers to merely obery the rules, and only the rules, and always obey exactly, particularly when it lets them use violence. This kind of nonsense does nothing useful. I will grant it is not entirely their fault, as bad leadership encourages this. But I would be much more willing to support a cop who uses judgement in an unclear situation in order to maintain public order (particularly when that means not using force), or uses nonstandard methods as a solution. It is for this reason, not simply rules-obediance, that we have and need policemen, and that they are endowed with so much power.
Bolding mine.
Does not result in anyone getting hurt? What?
The alternative to physical restraint DOES put people at risk for DEATH. Tasering KILLS PEOPLE.
Cisco,
The penalty for her speeding was a ticket. A ticket—signed—is an agreement to either pay it or show up in court. If you do not sign it, you get arrested. When someone is arrested, they need to be taken out of the car.
Okay. Now we’re out of the car.
The officer was telling her to stand where is was safest, in front of his car as far from the traffic as possible. He told her this REPEATEDLY. For what ever reason she was not complying. Also the further she moves away from the shoulder the closer HE has to move toward the traffic, to make sure she doesn’t wander into it. So, she was endangering both herself and the officer. He repeats himself again and again, even physically put hers where she needs to be. But she’ll have none of it. This has to stop, so he does what he feels is the safest thing: zap.
I certainly hope that clarifies things for you.
Wrestling her to the ground. C’mon they put cuffs on people who are standing up all the time. She was a serious threat to him, I am sure. But he could have cuffed her and taken her in if he felt the world would be safer with her in jail. The other cops would have ripped when he got there too.
An intense shock of sudden electricity, pain, adrenaline, and fear is no threat to anyone with a potential heart condition? Really? Could I get a neutral cite for this?
Such a nice old lady, he obviously could’ve disarmed her by asking to see pictures of her great-grandkids.
So does putting someone in physical restraint. Plus it breaks bones, dislocats joints, and causes all sorts of bruising. Nothing is perfectly safe, but something is going to happen to you when you resist arrest.