Should police officers be allowed to put 50,000 volts of electricity through a person using a taser?

Question

More and more often, police officers are using tasers on citizens for minor reasons.

Here is 1 videoclip of a citizen getting tasered for a minor reason.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/video/taser_video3a.html

Answer 1

Omg... that officer should go to jail. She wasn't obeying him quickly, but there was NO way that was justifyed, tasers are ONLY justifyed as a means of self defence, not as a damn incentive.

Answer 2

The TASER is a tool, like a baton or pepper spray, that gives a police officer the chance to stop a potentially violent or deadly situation before it ever gets to the point that deadly force is merited. The question of whether or not police should carry this less-lethal weapon can be answered in one word; yes. In the video clip listed, the femal subject was speaking on her cellular phone, giving her exact location and directions to the receiver of the phone call. For all the police officer knew, the receiver of the phone call was going to come out and kill both him and the other officer. A police officer is charged with making life-and-death decisions in a split second, and the TASER allows an officer the opportunity to abate having to use deadly force, in some instances. Police follow what is known as the use of force continum, a policy of sorts, that tells them when different types of force are appropriate. This ranges from talking to a person, to discharging a firearm. In my opinion, the TASER is the best alternative to deadly force, because it is the only weapon that does not rely on pain compliance to gain cooperation. For example, if an officer uses pepper spray, the desired effect is that the person stop resisting or fighting because they are overpowered by the pain caused by the spray. Some people, especially those under the influence of amphetamines and other super-stimulant drugs, can ignore the pain, some don't even feel pain, and continue to fight. The TASER uses electrical impulses fired at a high rate, to imobilize the body by creating temporary paralysis of the voluntary muscles. Basically, it becomes impossible to throw a punch, or even walk, because the TASER locks up your muscles. While I am sure it cannot be a pleasant experience for the receiver, I am sure it is better than a gunshot.

Answer 3

A taser is considered a less lethal weapon because the possibility of it actually killing someone are slim. Now there are circumstances.........
The officer has to fill out a report after dispatching the taser that explains in detail what, where, when and why.
Don't mess with the police, do as your told at the time of the encounter and if you're being treated unfairly take care of it after the fact.
It's not easy for an officer to protect himself and the life of his fellow officers out there sometimes.
Of course there is the occasional ***** that just enjoys it a bit too much, but he'll get his, I'm sure. What goes around comes around.
What's a minor reason?
The officers in question had no way of knowing if the woman was armed and/or on any kind of drug at the time and I'm wondering about the latter myself, just based on the way she handled the situation before and after the tasing. All he knew was that she was a traffic violator who was refusing to follow his verbal commands for reasons unknown.
She was warned not once, twice but THREE times before the officer actually administered the taser. Was he supposed to wait until she went ape on him? Anyhow, I don't see where she has a case here.
And bass........the word is "pain compliance", look into it. Has nothing to do with self-defense AT ALL. The officer on duty is not at the local mall buying sneakers, he's dealing with a lot of people that do not like him, because he caught them violating one rule or another. It is his duty to protect the public, his fellow officers, himself and lastly even the person he is dealing with from harm. If it takes a few volts of juice to get that accomplished, so be it.

Answer 4

I actual ought to totally believe Kenora. For various months I actual were monitoring taser use (or extra acceptable placed abuse) and the outcome of being tasered and performance found that being tased is as risky as a shot from a police issued sidearm for those in probability. everyone with a neurological or heart difficulty could not be struck with a taser. everyone on various prescription drugs or intense on lots of the accessible highway/leisure drugs could not be tasered. Pregnant women persons, everyone less than 19 y/o or over 60 could not be tasered. So why with such various those that are in probability from being tasered could an places of artwork have one of those weapon? With such various exclusions to who would nicely be tasered (in straightforward words about 20% of the inhabitants can 'properly' be tasered), how can an adrenaline intense officer ascertain if taser use is suited??? i do not learn about the police with the taser of their fingers, yet i can not see a heart difficulty, neurological difficulty, 1st time period being pregnant, or understand what pharmaceuticals someone is on.... possibly they're implanted with some type of detection equipment on the academy?!?!? For some reason many police officials do not keep in mind that they are not the regulation; the courtroom is. Many police seem to imagine they're choose and jury and prefer the video confirmed if one would not do because the 'choose' orders then you will be assaulted earlier to arrest.... and earlier to a genuine trial with a genuine choose...

Answer 5

Nice how you leave out the pertinent part.

She a) was going 16 miles over the speed limit, b) took a long time to pull over, c) sounded drunk, d) refused to comply with his direct orders, e) was combative, f) was warned 3 times that she was going to get tased if she didn't and g) tried to hit him when he finally (like 5 minutes later) opened her door and tried to take her phone from her.

Minor? I've seen people going 16 mph over the speed limit in my neighborhood. Knowing that anyone of those people could kill my child in an *instant* because they're "too important" to follow the rules of the road limits my compassion for them. The officer was completely professional and she behaved in a way that would lead any reasonable person to assume that she wasn't rational - and that could very easily mean she's a threat. She was calling someone to come to the site of the problem - if I were a cop, I'd be worried that whoever showed up would cause more problems and possibly even be armed.

So how about next time not making it seem like it was just a tiny little thing - thank goodness not everyone's a sheep and people like me can point out basic things like this.

OH, AND GUESS WHAT! TURNS OUT HER FRIGGIN' LICENSE WAS SUSPENDED! Yeah, she was just some innocent civilian, huh?

Answer 6

That's not right for minor offence's and everybody know's it.
But some of those people they have to deal with, need that taser thang, stuck to there xxx and turned on for good. Hope I didn't offend, there's two thing's going on need's watching:
1. Power corrupt's
2. A few bad, spoil it for the rest

Answer 7

I heard another news report a while back tht said the police used it on a 6 yr. old. The child was holding a piece of glass in a school and wouldn't give it up so they tazered him. All the kids had been cleared out of the room by then. I was going to send money to some police fund, I cancelled my pledge.

Answer 8

Minor reasons? That nut was speeding, TALKING ON A CELL PHONE WHILE DRIVING, and refusing to comply with an officer's directive. What else was the guy to do? He has no clue whether or not she has a gun or anything, so his options are limited. Does he.....

1. risk being charged with cruelty for BLINDING her with pepper spray?


2. risk having another "Rodney King" incident on his hands after beating her with a baton?

3. risk being charged with excessive force by physically overpowering her and potentially injuring her or himself?

4. safely and immediately subdue the suspect by use of a couple of quick bursts of "knock that butt in the dirt" electricity that will keep him from potentially being shot, stabbed or anything else like that? Think about that the next time you want to bad mouth these hard-working, UNDERPAID GOOD COPS (not the buttholes who BRAZENLY abuse their station) who put their LIVES ON THE LINE each and every day for our protection!

Answer 9

Yes. A police office should be allowed to put 50,000 volts of electricity through anyone who resisits arrest and swings at the officer.

Answer 10

I didnt watch the video but I can say that I dont think it is right.Unless maybe they are trying to catch,,lets say,,a child preditor/kidnapper or something that serious.