# Yet another unjustified tasering by idiot cop **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 2, 2010, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359 "2010-09-02T07:33:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/61 "2010-09-02T20:18:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@Alessan](#): > > > > Because it’s their job - to protect and to serve. The public isn’t the enemy, it’s the people they’re supposed to be protecting and serving. > > It’s not their job to get hurt of they don’t have to. You’re quite simply wrong. > > Their job is laid out in the guidelines and the laws. Nothing they did violated the law; I have yet to see any proof that it violated any guidelines. But those two things define their job, not your infantile imagination of how many bruises a cop is supposed to take before he can use a taser. Their job is to act with forethought and moderation and to avoid inflicting harm or pain unless absolutely neccessary. That’s their job not only as police officers, but as human beings. ---
**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:** [September 2, 2010, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/62 "2010-09-02T20:22:44Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does the officer have some kind of training to weigh the seriousness of a suicide threat? Are you asking just for the information, or are you implying that anything an officer does not have explicit training on, he should use force? Or he should… what? ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/63 "2010-09-02T20:22:51Z")
Do you people realize how dangerous an upset, 64 year old man with a heart condition and a sprained ankle can be? I’m just shocked they didn’t call in back-up. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/64 "2010-09-02T20:27:32Z")
My 2 cents: People are too afraid of risk, that’s the problem. That’s why the cops were afraid, that’s why people would sue them if the opposite nightmare scenario happened like Bricker is saying. As for me, I’d tell them to just go ahead and take that risk. Leave the guy, so what if he talked about killing himself? If he does and they get questioned, they should just say they thought he was joking and everyone should be fine with that answer. Or do the opposite and tackle him. Sure the guy may secretly be a killer ninja and have knives all over his body, but the cops should take that risk. There’s 2 of them and he’s a 64 year old man in pain. In 99% of situations, they could hog tie up and wouldn’t get a scratch. If the chances are that much in your favor, then you go for it, take the damn risk and stop being a pussy. Personally, I would have just left. And made a crack about cleaning up the blood on my way out. If he does it, hey, I thought he was joking. WTF do I look like, a comedian? It was funny to me 😉 ---
**Author:** ![SmellMyWort](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea5d25/32.png) [@SmellMyWort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmellMyWort)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/65 "2010-09-02T20:49:51Z")
A couple things I heard on Good Morning America yesterday that I think were missing from this report and may or may not be important: –the guy was drunk (gee, I’ve never heard of a drunk saying something he doesn’t mean:rolleyes:) –cops entered his house without permission –it was the paramedics who heard him say the thing about shooting himself and so I guess maybe they called the cops Watching the video again it really is pretty disgusting what they did. The wife tells them that he has a heart condition and they blast him right in the left torso. And shaking around on the floor must look a lot like “resisting” since that’s what the one cops keeps saying as he shocks the hell out of him. How exactly are you supposed to put your hands behind you when you’re convulsing on the floor or clutching at the spot where you were just tased. Plus, they could have easily just shocked him once and moved in to put on the cuffs, but they just keep shocking him. Regarding the argument that they couldn’t just leave him: Yes, they could. His wife was there. They could just leave and tell her to call back if he begins acting serious about the suicide threat. Nope, it’s either comply or face the taser. ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/66 "2010-09-02T21:21:47Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@Tranquilis](#): > > > > Emphatically disagree. > > > > It’s probable cause to _investigate further_, **not** to torture and deprive him of liberty on the spot. _IF_ he had stated his intent to immediately go locate a weapon, _then_ - maybe - there’d have been cause to detain him on the spot, or possibly even taser him if he actually started to get moving and wouldn’t listen. > > As a matter of law, this statement does not appear to be correct. > > > [@People v. Triplett](#): > > > > The Legislature, by necessity, has subordinated the liberty interests of persons described in the LPS Act to the benefits that may accrue to such persons by immediate therapeutic intervention. > > . > > . > > . > > Peace officers, among others, have been entrusted with the duty, on probable cause, to take into custody any person who, “as a result of mental disorder, is a danger to others, or to himself or herself, or gravely disabled,” and to place such a person in a county-designated facility for the initial 72-hour treatment and evaluation. > > . > > . > > . > > To constitute probable cause to detain a person pursuant to section 5150, a state of facts must be known to the peace officer (or other authorized person) that would lead a person of ordinary care and prudence to believe, or to entertain a strong suspicion, that the person detained is mentally disordered and is a danger to himself… As a statement of experience, I stand by my assesment. The officers in question did _not_, to my satisfaction, based on the evidence presented, adequately determine that the victim in question was _in fact or reasonable suspicion_ a threat to themselves or anyone else, nor did they determine, based upon evidence presented, that this man was gravely disturbed. Like I said: I’ve _been_ there. Not often, but often enough to determine that based upon evidence presented and my experience that I am deeply suspicious of their conduct and feel that it is highly probable that they failed in the execution of their duties. **Snowboarder** , thank you, but probably not. I tend to get too disturbed, after the fact, by the stupid shit people do to each other. Makes it hard to maintain the necessary state of mind for very long - IOW, I would have suffered burn out fairly quickly, if that had been a primary duty. ---
**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:** [September 2, 2010, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/67 "2010-09-02T21:28:21Z")
> [@Tranquilis](#): > > **Snowboarder** , thank you, but probably not. I tend to get too disturbed, after the fact, by the stupid shit people do to each other. Makes it hard to maintain the necessary state of mind for very long - IOW, I would have suffered burn out fairly quickly, if that had been a primary duty. I’m sorry to hear that, but glad you were able to recognize that about yourself before it was a problem. Is there a court date listed anywhere? Do we know when we need to start paying attention to new stuff here? ---
**Author:** ![\_Undecided\_Adrian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/_/eada6e/32.png) [@\_Undecided\_Adrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/_Undecided_Adrian)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/68 "2010-09-02T21:32:48Z")
Hearing all of the talk about rights and small government, I find it crazy that absolute obedience to cops seems to be the default position in the US. Police behavior like this would never fly here in Germany; in protests, civil disobedience is used all the time, currently against such innocuous things like a new train station in the Stuttgart city center (in that case even by older middle-class people, not your typical college-student protesters). Perhaps it’s because violence _against_ cops and the chance that the suspect carries a weapon is so much lower here, but I sure like it better this way. ---
**Author:** ![Ferret\_Herder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e47774/32.png) [@Ferret\_Herder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ferret_Herder)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/69 "2010-09-02T21:44:43Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > I must say the the risk from an injured and unarmed 64 year old dude to two (presumably) hale and heathly cops doesn’t seem all that high. You might think so, but when my late 70s mother-in-law, suffering from dementia and in the hospital to have a couple stents put in around her heart due to severe blockages, decided she didn’t really feel like sticking around that strange place - it took 4 orderlies to subdue her and strap her down to a hospital bed. Even allowing that they were probably more concerned about her physical state than cops would be, you really cannot underestimate someone who is motivated to cause harm. ---
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/70 "2010-09-02T21:52:39Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@Giles](#): > > > > My guess is that the immediate danger of suicide was negligible, but the immediate danger of death from tasering was significant, so I’d have tried to use other means. > > Such as? > [@Bricker](#): > > > [@Giles](#): > > > > Well, a variety have been suggested in this thread, including further questioning of the person and his wife to see how immediate the danger of suicide was, handcuffing the person so that he was no immediate danger to anyone, and getting a mental health professional to the site if the threat of suicide was serious. > > Handcuff? How? The deputy orders him to stand up, several times, but he does not. > > Are you saying the deputy should have waded in, risking his own physical safety, to force the guy to stand up or to get handcuffed? > > Does this county have mental health professionals ready to roll out to calls like that? > > Does the officer have some kind of training to weigh the seriousness of a suicide threat? > > I suspect, if they had done that and the guy killed himself, there’d be plenty of people on board for the lawsuit against the slothful cops who had a clear duty under § 5150 to transport the guy for eval but didn’t do it. Unbelievable. A 64 year old guy, in pain from an injury. The cops order him to stand, which seems difficult for him to do. And I can imagine him not really believing that they’re serious about ordering him around in his own living room, over a joke. Then, when he does try to stand and uses his hands to help himself up off the couch, the cop tases him for not putting his arms behind his back. Then they keep on tasing him as he writhes around on the ground, ostensibly because he isn’t putting his hands behind his back yet. Gee, maybe that has something to do with the writhing and all? I guess it really would be too much to ask of a couple of young, hale and hearty public servants to maybe help the old guy to his feet, engage him in conversation without demands for compliance, and assess (within their semi-professional abilities) his mental state. But no, let’s characterize that instead as “wad[ing] in, risking his own physical safety”. Nobody is suggesting that the cops were capable of performing a full psychiatric evaluation, nor that such was necessary. But cops do have rather wide latitude in their application of discretion (all that “probable cause” and “reasonable suspicion” stuff) and typically rather extensive interpersonal experience as well. The guy wasn’t going anywhere, and nothing in the video suggests any ability on his part to immediately discorporate himself. A non-confrontational discussion with the guy and his wife would almost certainly have cleared up any misunderstanding about suicidal intent, and would have been the better course of action. How that can be even slightly controversial, and how anybody would jump to defend the cops’ actions based entirely on “might have, could have” is beyond me. Yes, their actions were probably within the letter of the law. But were they the best, most appropriate actions, the actions we would want the cops who come to our house to take? Assuredly not. And that is the point of after-the-fact discussions like this. To discuss, as citizens, what we expect from those empowered to “serve and protect” 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:** [September 2, 2010, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/71 "2010-09-02T21:58:23Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > As a matter of law, this statement does not appear to be correct. > > > [@People v. Triplett](#): > > > > The Legislature, by necessity, has subordinated the liberty interests of persons described in the LPS Act to the benefits that may accrue to such persons by immediate therapeutic intervention. > > . > > . > > . > > Peace officers, among others, have been entrusted with the duty, on probable cause, to take into custody any person who, “as a result of mental disorder, is a danger to others, or to himself or herself, or gravely disabled,” and to place such a person in a county-designated facility for the initial 72-hour treatment and evaluation. > > . > > . > > . > > To constitute probable cause to detain a person pursuant to section 5150, a state of facts must be known to the peace officer (or other authorized person) that would lead a person of ordinary care and prudence to believe, or to entertain a strong suspicion, that the person detained is mentally disordered and is a danger to himself… I, for one, do not think that the last part there, bolded in blue, was met. I think a court of law will find that standard was not met, based on the video and the article linked in the OP. And I don’t think that any defense of the officers’ actions with respect to that bolded part will meet with approval, once questioning of the officers begins. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/72 "2010-09-02T22:00:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I suspect, if they had done that and the guy killed himself, there’d be plenty of people on board for the lawsuit against the slothful cops who had a clear duty under § 5150 to transport the guy for eval but didn’t do it. Name one. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/73 "2010-09-02T22:00:56Z")
> [@Ferret\_Herder](#): > > > [@Malthus](#): > > > > I must say the the risk from an injured and unarmed 64 year old dude to two (presumably) hale and heathly cops doesn’t seem all that high. > > You might think so, but when my late 70s mother-in-law, suffering from dementia and in the hospital to have a couple stents put in around her heart due to severe blockages, decided she didn’t really feel like sticking around that strange place - it took 4 orderlies to subdue her and strap her down to a hospital bed. Even allowing that they were probably more concerned about her physical state than cops would be, you really cannot underestimate someone who is motivated to cause harm. Well, saying that the risk isn’t all that high isn’t the same thing as saying there is no risk. If some cops claimed they had to taze your late 70s mom-in-law (dementia, heart stents) because, see, they couldn’t be sure she wouldn’t get a hysterical burst of strength and claw their eyes out when she didn’t obey them - well yeah it’s a _possibility_. Just not terribly probable. Me, I’m all for the cops generally. Tough job they have, and I mean it. But not when they are acting like bullies or pussies. Claming they had to taze a hurt, elderly person because there was a _possibility_ they may get hurt otherwise seems to fall into one category or the other, unless there are some facts here we don’t know. Watching that tape, there seems to have been no earthly reason for the tazing - the man was cranky and refuses to stand, but eventually they get him to stand up - and _then_ taze him. Then, they keep doing it while (bizzarely) shouting “stop resisting!” while he writhes on the ground in pain. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/74 "2010-09-02T22:05:58Z")
This just in: The LAPD is officially changing its motto. It was formerly “To Protect and to Serve.” The new motto is “We’ll Treat You Like a King.” ---
**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:** [September 2, 2010, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/75 "2010-09-02T22:08:08Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Watching that tape, there seems to have been no earthly reason for the tazing - the man was cranky and refuses to stand, but eventually they get him to stand up - and _then_ taze him. Then, they keep doing it while (bizzarely) shouting “stop resisting!” while he writhes on the ground in pain. This comes up a lot in tasing cases. The taser is used to what? What does it do? It incapacitates a person. What des that mean? It means “to deprive of ability”. If you are depriving me of ability to comply, while demanding I comply or you will continue to deprive me of the ability comply, how can I possibly not continue to get tased? Also, resisting requires action. Many times merely not complying is called “resisting” by an officer, thus validating their choice to torture a person. And yes, this looks like it was torture. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/76 "2010-09-02T22:11:57Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > This just in: The LAPD is officially changing its motto. It was formerly “To Protect and to Serve.” The new motto is “We’ll Treat You Like a King.” Heh. Rodney, yes? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/77 "2010-09-02T22:25:09Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s not their job to get hurt of they don’t have to. And no reasonable person would think they had to. > [@](#): > > You’re quite simply wrong. You’re quite simply a sick fuck. > [@](#): > > Nothing they did violated the law; I have yet to see any proof that it violated any guidelines. Then watch the damn thing and you might be able to think of something, perhaps along the lines of aggravated assault, or abuse under color of authority. Do you really value your credibility _at all_ anymore? Too late, it’s all gone anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/78 "2010-09-02T22:55:45Z")
> [@Tranquilis](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > As a matter of law, this statement does not appear to be correct. > > As a statement of experience, I stand by my assesment. Do you agree they had the legal authority to detain him under 5150? It’s crystal clear to me that they did: _Triplett_ lays out the standard: > [@](#): > > When enacted in 1967, section 5150 of the LPS Act required only “reasonable cause” for detention. This section was amended in 1975 to require “probable cause” for detention, which suggests that the Legislature intended a standard similar to that for a warrantless arrest for a Penal Code violation. (See Stats. 1975, ch. 960, § 2, p. 2243.) We therefore adapt the test for probable cause for a warrantless arrest for a section 5150 detention. So now it’s simply straightforward law. Man says to paramedics, “If I had a gun, I’d shoot myself.” Paramedics report threat to cops. That’s legally probable cause, right there. You might be arguing that it wasn’t good police work, that even though they had the legal authority, they should have done more checking, or something. Maybe so. I have no way to judge that. But I am absolutely certain they were within their legal authority. If you’re saying they did not, perhaps you might identify where I’m wrong, with citation to relevant law. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/79 "2010-09-02T23:02:56Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > As a matter of law, this statement does not appear to be correct. > > I, for one, do not think that the last part there, bolded in blue, was met. I think a court of law will find that standard was not met, based on the video and the article linked in the OP. > > And I don’t think that any defense of the officers’ actions with respect to that bolded part will meet with approval, once questioning of the officers begins. Are you kidding me?!? Paramedics report to cops, “That man says he’d shoot himself if he had a gun.” How is that not probable cause? ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359/80 "2010-09-02T23:03:18Z")
I’m usually defending cops in this forum. I’m not going to do that in this instance. I did not see the entire video, but the small portion I did see is enough to at least question whether this was an appropriate use of force. What I see is an elderly guy trying to get up from a couch. Looks like he’s struggling a little bit to get up, possibly due to pain/soreness from his recent injury. I also see what appears to be a refusal to comply with an arguably lawful order. I do not see a legitimate threat to an officer’s safety. I do not see any resisting anything while the guy is on the ground screaming in pain and convulsing from the electricity, despite the repeated command to “stop resisting”. I am curious about what happened to the dog during the tasing. Unless the dog was somehow restrained, I would have expected it to come to the aid of its master. I am also curious about what authority, if any, the officers had to enter a private home without a warrant. Not really sure they can legitimately claim an emergency situation on the facts presented. Ought to be a very interesting trial, if the case doesn’t settle… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-unjustified-tasering-by-idiot-cop/552359.md?page=5)