Honestly, the issue here is not tasers. The issue is efficiency in cost and time.?

Question

Here is what I mean by efficiency. Todays society favors efficiency and rationalism over compassion and wisdom. Those who say that it comes down to either using a gun or a taser completely miss the point. Where is the middle ground in the issue? Have we come to the point where we think of things in such extremes?
It seems to me that we have lost something of our own humanity in this debate. We all know that we shouldnt be cruel to others but at the same time we favor using cruelty. Come on people...........50, 000 volts....

Answer 1

The biggest problem I see with the things is the police policy. They should treat the taser like they are suppose to treat a hand gun. Don't use it unless it represents the least amount of force required to uphold the law or protect themselves.
I have no objection to a police officer using a taser on a fleeing suspect or in self defense or on a unarmed but violent and dangerous suspect.
I object to using it on a prostrate woman who is already to drunk to stand (they did) or a small child (9 year old in Florida) or a bound and bedridden patient in a hospital (they did that too)
The policy that a taser may be used if a person does not immediately comply with any order is the problem. It means they are no longer required to even attempt to talk to a suspect. They simply taser them into submission if they hesitate in the slightest or voice an argument. It makes the police into bullies plain and simple.

Answer 2

I think the issue re taser guns is whether or not they provide a safer alternative to guns and/or batons when it comes to subduing an individual who refuses to cooperate with the police and is a danger to himself, the police, and/or bystanders. It is not the job of the police to allow themselves to be assaulted and/or injured in the performance of their duties. Properly used, in the majority of situations, the taser can subdue/incapacitate a violent individual without significant injury. This is not true in the use of batons and/or guns.

That being said, even though it is better than guns or batons, the taser is not a perfect weapon. There have been a number of deaths following tasering, but I strongly suggest that the majority of these cases involve other factors, which have not been sufficiently documented or investigated. In some, death occurred some time after the tasering, and must have been due to other causes. In others, the individual had drugs in his system, or was in a highly intense emotional state, which could have led to a reaction to the taser much more serious than normal.

More thorough research into the use of tasers is needed, and proper training put in place, so that police officers can more easily recognize when an individual might react too strongly to a taser.

Answer 3

I'm sorry, but where are "compassion and wisdom" supposed to come into a situation where a belligerent person is willfully refusing to obey a legal order from an officer empowered by us, the people, to uphold the law and make such orders?

Your question implies that people who do that are acting in a rational manner, and are able to respond to wisdom or rational argument. They're not.

In the history of mankind, the normal response by the vested authorities was to use physical violence against the person, resulting in injury and even death. Now they use a non-lethal (well, it is supposed to be) weapon, in order to incapacitate the miscreant and achieve compliance.

Are you proposing that the police argue philosophically with these people? That's simply absurd.

Personally, I'd rather the police just start beating them with a night-stick or flashlight. But I'm old-fashioned. :)