Within an extremely short period of time, i have seen three cases of people being tasered by rowdy police officers. One, an autistic boy about to run into traffic. Another (and most rediculous if you ask me) 21 yr old in FL at a Kerry rally, gets tasered because in my opinion, he was too busy exercising his first amendment, which calls us completely legal to any words that come out of our mouth. Lastly, a woman tasered outside of a bar after being in a mini barfight. What has gotten into the law enforcement these days?
2007-09-23 04:04:19 · 13 answers · asked by >artifactsoftheblackrain< 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Over 97 percent of police contacts involve no use of force. Of course, a video of a police officer NOT tazering someone would be pretty boring and not newsworthy. Considering hundreds of thousands of police officers employed in the US, and only 4 videos on the news, that is pretty good.
It is all about choices:
An autistic boy running into traffic has a very high probability of getting hit. An officer chasing into traffic makes two persons likely to get hit. The tazer very well could have saved both from death.
The Florida student was well past his first amendment rights. Kerry was there for everyone, not just him. When the moderator determined the person was getting out of control, off went the mic, and the police attempted to escort him. If he would have just left, no tazer. He broke thier grip and ran towards stage. Now he is loud, and disorderly. Hardly fair to the other students, is it? They tried dragging him out, still not tazer. All he had to do was leave. He continues to flail his arms, risking injury to the officers, and to himself. Now he gets tazed. He had numerous opportunities to just walk away, he chose not to.
You need to brush up on your first ammendment, I don't see anything about "calls us completely legal for anything that comeour of our mouth".
Haven't seen the woman outside the bar yet, but I can tell you drunk people are the most unpredictable, and the fact she wsa already in a fight doesn't help. What you call a mini bar fight, the state calls disorderly conduct and assault.
2007-09-23 04:30:30 · answer #1 · answered by trooper3316 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps that's the way you see it, but some of us see those situations differently.
The autistic boy probably had his life saved by the cop who tasered him, he could have been run over.
The guy at the Kerry rally was told repeatedly to leave the room and refused. You say he was exercising his first amendment right but I say that's nonsense. You do not have the right to disrupt a public gathering; you do not have the right to refuse to respond to the policemans' request; you do not have the right to be a public nuisance.
The lady at the bar had already shown her violent side and once again, refused to obey the police's order. She was tasered, which is of course preferable to being hit over the head with a club. She was handcuffed and put into a car and kicked out the window. She was removed from the car and told to walk to another car, was told she'd get tasered for a 3rd time if she didn't obey and she STILL didn't get the message. Had there been no taser gun to rely upon, the woman would have ended up with broken bones at the least.
Before you start this "power" hunger rant, why don't you put yourself in the cops shoes for a moment and see if you'd do the same thing.
2007-09-23 07:09:46 · answer #2 · answered by Lisbeth 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
On the 3 examples you have given, you want to condemn all the police officers in the country. The autistic boy was probably life saved by the taser. The guy at the Kerry rally I have not heard of, but it does smell like it was a wrong thing to do. The drunk woman tasered, the police man has been put on leave and is being investigated for abuse of his position as a police officer.
I feel that the police are no different from the rest of society. There are super people who do the job. There are also the wrong people who do the job.
Never generalize. It shows how one sided you can be.
2007-09-23 04:15:40 · answer #3 · answered by ? 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You make a very good point, if our police are unapproachable then they cease to be of any use to the public who pay there wages, and for the most part give them the respect which allows them to do there job. I work with some police and most, fortunately aren't on a power trip. It is a sad state of affairs when a simple and polite question gets such a rude response. The same could be said of your question I note that a couple of the answers ( Not difficult to see who they are), clearly didn't read your entire question. Just put up with the un-educated while the rest of us have an intelligent debate Have just read the response from supersexy who claims to be a WPC, if her rude response is anything to go by then your point has just been well-proven, it seems we are not entitled to breath the same air has her. does she not realise she is a public servant not an emissary from god...,,,
2016-05-21 07:51:54 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The three examples given do not necessarily constitute abuse of power. In the Florida case, it was campus security guards and not police that used the taser. In all three cases the taser was used to restrain someone and caused no permanent damage. It is much better to use non-lethal force. It is at least encouraging that none of these"victims" was beaten with billy clubs either.
2007-09-23 04:24:53 · answer #5 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In all these cases, police were called to restore order.
Their job is to jump into often uncertain circumstances to detain/restrain/remove someone behaving in an erratic or violent manner, hopefully without getting themselves or anyone else hurt. They usually don't know the person, have no idea if he/she might be armed, psychotic, or ready to go violent.
Taser, while distressing and painful, generally does no harm unless the person has some underlying physical defect.
Put yourself in their shoes. If you think you could calmly talk some wild eyed, possibly drugged out maniac into leaving the scene peacefully, maybe you ought to apply to your local police force.
2007-09-23 04:20:42 · answer #6 · answered by silverbullet 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The switch from a probably lethal gun to a probably non-lethal taser technology is affecting the judgement of a great many officers; this is human nature at work.
Aside from that, too many police officers, although still a small minority, are not interested in enforcing the law, and they do anything they know they can get away with, this is human nature at work also.
We need administrative and courtroom guidelines and authority that make it safe for a good officer to be a good officer, and to make bad officers subject to honest peer review.
2007-09-23 04:28:16 · answer #7 · answered by Happy Camper 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
All three that you mentioned took a swing at the cops.
Guess what happens when you do that?
Getting tasered is much better than getting shot or clubbed over the head with a night stick.
2007-09-23 04:10:23 · answer #8 · answered by scottdman2003 5 · 7⤊ 1⤋
It's obvious it has, and it's also obvous their job is stressful from dealing with worse criminals than in the past. If officers can't control themselves, they should find other work. I think it's good so many people are using cell phones to video injustices the public would otherwise not know about, or that would be one person's word against the cops.
2007-09-23 04:46:05 · answer #9 · answered by beez 7 · 0⤊ 5⤋
So they saved a retarded boy from killing himself. Then you have a dumb a** kid, who just had to do as he was told. Lastly, that woman got everything she deserved.
2007-09-23 06:41:07 · answer #10 · answered by ♥ Leo ♥ 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋