I just wanted clarification. Someone told me that they can use a taser if someone is resisting arrest despite being held on the ground by 4 or 5 officers. That just does not seem like appropriate use of deadly force to me.
2007-09-18 09:56:25 · 18 answers · asked by Tom 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
The families of 80 people that are killed by tasers every year in the USA might call them deadly force even if the police department does not...
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/201827_taser01.html
2007-09-18 10:46:02 · update #1
Since a taser is not considered deadly force, yes they are. Pinning a suspect and subduing him are two different things. Using a taser is far better than continuing a fight where more injury is likely.
2007-09-18 10:03:14 · answer #1 · answered by davidmi711 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
First off I didn't know that the Tazer was deadly force. On my use of force scale it defined as less lethal...He was still resisting. He was given "drive stuns" which is pain compliance. Much like pressure points. However, with pressure points there is a chance of injury to both the recipient and the administrator. This person did not get "shot" with the Tazer. The cartridge was removed and the X26 was placed in direct contact with him... Many people think that he was administered a 5 second discharge. The "drive" is used until compliance is gained. Do you guys/gals think that it would have been more appropriate for "distracting blows" to be given until compliance was gained?
EDIT-People say 80 individuals have been "killed" (I use that term loosely) with the Tazer. How many lives have been saved? How many injuries have been reduced? How many of those "so called" deaths were a byproduct od the following...resistance, drug usage, alcohol usage, or/and the combination of the three? If those people want officer to get rid of Tazers...I'm down...I'm 6'5" 270 I can swing an ASP like no-body's business. However, I would rather not hurt people, just place them into custody...The ball, or baton, is in your court.
2007-09-18 12:37:07 · answer #2 · answered by wfsgymwear 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You have a clear lack of understanding and vocabulary. "Deadly force" refers to any for that is likely to cause serious physical injury or death. A Taser just hurts real bad then it stops nearly immediately. A Taser is used (department policies vary) when a subject who is under arrest is actively resisting but not assaulting the officers. A Taser is far less likely to cause injury than forcefully yanking the arms from under the subject who is pinned to the ground (tendon, muscle injuries or broken bones).
There is a large difference between "pinned to the ground by 4 or 5 officers" and "in custody" as anyone who has been there will tell you. The longer you mess around with some guy who is resisting arrest the more likely that someone will get hurt. You end the fight as fast as you can and sometimes that looks bad to all the "sheep" out there watching but keep this wisdom in mind:
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
-George Orwell
We "sheepdogs" do not look for situations in which to hurt people and we keep our emotions under control and respond rationally. It is difficult for many people to believe but we act professionally in nearly all the cases that are not publicized on the national news.
2007-09-18 10:40:47 · answer #3 · answered by elamontc 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
If they were using deadly force they would have pulled guns, not a taser. They were trying to subdue the guy. The "victim" has a history of filming pranks and being a loud mouth. That was the only outcome possible after the "victim" became agitated. Just because someone says they will stop doesn't mean they will.
2007-09-18 10:01:56 · answer #4 · answered by only p 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Regardless of what you read, not one single person has died from being tazed. They die AFTER being tazed. Electricity does not remain in the body. If the tazer caused the death, it would be while they were being shocked, not after.
In the article you refer to, and almost every other death, the death is a result of cocaine psychosis. Basically, the person already ingested a deadly overdose of cocaine. They act irrational while there body is literally dying. Death is not instant, it takes a while. Meanwhile, this person is a hazard to anyone he comes in contact with until his body shuts down. You can not reason with these people, as they have no conscious control of their body. The tazer is the best option.
As far as the Florida student, the officers used progressive force until he was under control. Let me explain.
First, they tried verbalizing with him. Uf he would have complied, end of story. But he didn't.
Then they tried passively escorting him out of the area. Had he complied, end of story. But he didn't.
At this point, he is being loud and disruptive, and tried to charge the stage. That is called disorderly conduct, and is a crime. He then flailed his arms while the officers attempted to remove him. That is called resisting, another crime. Still, the officers only attempted to remove him. Had he complied, end of story. He didn't.
Then the decentralized him, attempted to control him, Gave his several orders to stop resisting, but he still refused. At this point, there is a very good chance someone is going to get hurt, either him or the officers. He could have stopped resisitng. But he didn't.
Then, and only then, did they taze him. The student could have stopped this, but chose not to. It was his choice, and no no one got hurt.
The officers are not paid to fight one on one they are paid to control the situation without anyone getting hurt. They did an excellent job.
2007-09-18 11:06:39 · answer #5 · answered by trooper3316 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I agree with you. This was also a student. He did not have a weapon, so should never have had a weapon used on him. I thought the tazers were brought in to use instead of a gun. So does this mean if they didn't have a tazer they would have shot him!! I also find it odd that as a society we would allow this, as the officers clearly were not in danger. Maybe the officers were told beforehand to shut anyone up if they mentioned the skull and bones club? This was a college student and if he had a history of being a troublemaker like some say then he should have been spanked years ago(oh ya I don't think they can do that) well then the strap (oh ya can't do that) well what does a society do (oh ya... wait til they are 18 or so...and then Tazer them)
2007-09-18 10:18:51 · answer #6 · answered by knowitall 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Concerning Andrew Meyer, had he just complied there'd be no problems. I saw the video, I support the authority's actions. The police are lucky that videotapes of this exist to exonerate them, because when I read what happened I was shocked, but when I saw what happened it told a completely different story.
If I told you to go into a campus event, get control of the microphone, dominate it with ridiculous questions and then refuse to stop when asked... what would you expect to happen? Some are arguing "what about freedom of speech?" What about freedom of speech? Is not John Kerry and the rest of the audience entitled to its speech? Apparently Mr. Meyer didn't think so.
2007-09-18 10:14:14 · answer #7 · answered by Pfo 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
If he would have just STFU and calmed down when they told him to, this would never have happened.
A tazer is not deadly force. It does get the message through, however.
2007-09-18 10:17:49 · answer #8 · answered by TedEx 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The "Police" who tasered that kid was the university rent a cop, not real police. No, they should not have done it, and they are now suspended from what I hear. It wasn't deadly force since they didn't use a firearm, but it was brute force.
2007-09-18 10:04:27 · answer #9 · answered by Rosebee 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes, he can be tazed if he continues to resist, and a tazer is NOT deadly force. A handgun is.
2007-09-18 10:14:45 · answer #10 · answered by chuck_junior 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋