Tasered: One incident on video

[tkmorris]

"The Aug. 6, 2004 incident began as a normal traffic stop but took an ominous turn when the driver refused to get out of her SUV. It ended with a Boynton Beach Police officer hitting the 22-year-old woman twice with his Taser during her arrest."

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/video/taser_video2b.html

This video doesn't portray a particularly egregious example of Taser use. This is how Tasers are used everyday to subdue "uncooperative" people. The woman being arrested is not being nearly as cooperative as she should be, and in fact has a bit of an attitude. Nonetheless, this situation was not even remotely dangerous to the police officers and I do not feel that violent measures were called for to resolve it. It seems to be more of an exercise of power than a necessary usage of non-lethal force. Tell me what you think.

[DELUSIONAL]

1. Personally I believe that Tasers should be connected to cop's balls

and if they use the Taser -- they get zapped also.

[Swamp Rat]

2. Amen!

[liberalnurse]

7. Your are indeed a bit

delusional.......Apparently you live a very sheltered life having been safe, secure without any experience of threat to self and family. I'm pleased that you have had such bliss.

[foreigncorrespondent]

18. Ya know...

...I can understand what you are saying to a point.

The job I have can turn violent at the drop of a pin. I learned this recently when my partner and I had no option but to make an arrest (I am in the security industry) of a couple of junkies who had been seen by staff stealing some stuff. Once my partner informed them that they were in fact being arrested things went from a bad situation to an even worse situation. My partner was hit in the face with a cell phone. He had his face scratched near his eyes. Lucky I just received an elbow wack into my boob. My partner and I do not carry guns. We do not carry battens. We do not carry pepper spray. We do not carry tasers. Our only form of defence is us defending ourselves.

We don't get the training the police do, both here in Australia, and in the U.S. Yet quite often we are faced with dangerous situations (one of the junkies was carrying a knife.) Through all of this we were able to get the more dangerous junkie into a wrist lock. Now if we can do this, and walk away with a few minor bruises, scratches and swelling, why can't police do this, who are trained to defend themselves?

The police don't need to carry tasers. From what I have seen through the reports coming out from over there, your guys who are meant to defend you are totally out of control and power hungry. Using tasers isn't going to resolve anything, and if you think it will, then I am sorry, but you are the one who is indeed a bit delusional.

Yes there are people out there who have lived pretty sheltered lives. But if my partner and I can defend ourselves without the use of any weapons period, or any training, why do the police need tasers when they have the training?

[blurp]

106. Propaganda

The police don't need to carry tasers. From what I have seen through the reports coming out from over there, your guys who are meant to defend you are totally out of control and power hungry.

What reports are those? That sounds like propaganda to me.

[foreigncorrespondent]

379. Oh please!

There has been mishap after mishap of tasers being used for the wrong reaons for bloody months on DU. You wanna call DU a propaganda machine, go right ahead. But if you search going months back, you will find the majority of these postings were using legitimate resources.

[mark414]

431. you want propaganda?

http://www.lapdonline.org

http://www.cityofchicago.org/police

http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd

you must not live in a big city...cops are brutal, and are indeed out of control and power hungry

[AX10]

465. kick

It's true. City cops are usually brown shirts. You heard it from me first. I give no apologies! I saw what happened in NYC with Mr. Diallo.

:puke:

[Tomee450]

493. I saw a big burly cop

slam a woman of about ninety-five pounds against a police car simply because she was drunk and a bit unruly. I saw another cop knock out the front teeth of a motorist who did not move his car fast enough. Neither person was violent, neither was threatening but both were black.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

470. Have you been paying attention over the last several years?

[SouthernDem2004]

117. You want me to confront a person with a knife without a weapon????

Sorry, I have a wife and kids I want to come home to. We are not paid to die.

[foreigncorrespondent]

376. Sorry mate...

...I didn't say that. What I did say was if myself and my partner who are just security guards who haven't received the kind of training police get can do it, then why do the cops need tasers?

By the way, I am a female.

[expatriate]

496. There's a big difference between America and Australia

And that is the fact that a cop in America has a good chance of going up against someone who might just have a gun. The chances of this happening in Australia are much, much smaller. I won't deny that the taser is probably being overused in America, but that is one thing that tempers the situation, and makes a police officer more likely to make use of it.

Being associated with the security industry in Australia myself, I must ask where you are located. In my state (NSW), a security guard cannot make an arrest based on someone else seeing someone steal. The security guard must see the theft personally, and keep the person who stole in direct visual contact at all times between the time of the theft, and the actual arrest. You cannot take the word of someone else that a theft occurred. The person suspected of stealing must have left the building where the theft is supposed to have occurred with no intention of paying before they can even be confronted.

Unless you, as a security guard, have been physically assaulted, in NSW you are not allowed to physically restrain someone, and only then, you are only supposed to defend yourself at the same level of physical force as that being used against you. Also, security officers do not have any special powers of arrest. A security officer has no more powers of arrest than any other citizen - so if you attempted to physically arrest the person you were told was stealing, and they struck out with elbow and cell phone, they probably would be considered to be defending themselves if the matter went to magistrates' court.

This information was pounded home in the certification classes for security officers in NSW. It is based on the New South Wales Crimes Act 40/1900, Section 352. It addresses powers of arrest.

If you are not in NSW, your regulations may vary somewhat, but I doubt it differs that much. We were told that in cases where a theft was reported to us by someone and we did not actually see the theft ourselves, that all we could do was keep the person in sight, and telephone the police. We could not make an arrest ourselves in that situation. We cannot even approach the suspected thief, and have no right to confront them if we didn't see the theft ourselves.

That's why I'm interested as to what the laws are regarding security where you are. We have security guards being prosecuted and sent to prison every day here for breaches.

[merh]

49. I have worked in situations and environments where the officers,

if armed with a taser, would have used them inappropriately and out of fear or in an effort to prove that they are the "law".

There is a mentality, us against them, good guys versus bad guys, when you wear a badge. Often, due to the stress of the situation, due to factors that hinder the effectiveness of the police such as lack of manpower, too much overtime, too little training, the use of "force" is the first alternative that the officer choses. Add to that the lack of proper mental health care for our citizens and you have a voilitale situation.

I'll give you an example, in the jail I worked, there was a frequent visitor, a large schizophrenic woman who would steal sodas and nabs from the convenient stores. She had been in the system for years, it was known that she could be formidable. Some officers knew how to deal with the woman, they would buy her a pack of cigs and another soda, drive her to her shell of a trailer (without electricity) and listen as she ranted about folks stealing her SS check out of her mail box. They would tell her to stop going to the stores and taking things, to stop harassing people and to stop walking down the street naked. NOTHING further was done, there was no local mental health facility to go to, no efforts to try to get her the help she needed.

Now this woman was large and when the cops came to arrest her, she would follow the same pattern, she would ignore them, then she would curse them in some strange language she had developed, she would rage and she would scare the heck out of the officers. She would intimidate them until they were the first ones to strike, once they hit her with the asp or their fists or their batons, she would go wild. I had personally seen her take on 5 deputies with no problem. She reacted out of fear and she wasn't going quietly.

Even though she was taking on the officers, I couldn't stand the thought of them beating her. Yes, she was an aggressor, but not the only aggressor as the officers were acting out of fear and rage and ignorance. (Her actions and reactions were fueled by the same emotions as the officers, fear and rage.) I knew that the woman was a vicitm of our society, she doesn't know better, she was ill. So, what do I do, I start talking to her, I TALKED to her. I got between her and the officers and started to tell her to calm down or the officers would only hurt her more. I just continued to tell her that she had to stop fighting them and let them bring her to her room where I would bring her more cigs and a soda. She settled down, she let them bring her to her cell and she waited on me to bring her the soda and cigs. I then had to convince the staff that they needed to keep her in a cell of her own, with a tray hole door to give access to the officers to give her meals and meds without having to come into contact with her. When it came time to bring her to court (held at the jail) to answer to the charges, I was the one that they called to walk with her and keep her calm.

To help her exist at the jail, I bought her water colors and coloring books and crayons, I gave her the snacks she needed and I maintained daily contact with her. She painted the walls of her cells in colors and images and she was "manageable". I then went through the steps of getting her committed once again to the state facility. You see, she had been there numerous times and their opinion of her was she wasn't "crazy" she was just mean. (Tells you a lot about our mental health care system.)

I provide you with this personal experience to let you know that I do understand the system, have worked in it, have watched guards and police over react out of fear and the need to be the "police". I have seen what a lack of training can do and what ignoring the true problems with our system result in. And yes, I have stepped in and put myself on the line to prevent harm to the victims of our society.

Tasers are NOT the answer, they kill. How many deaths by taser are necessary before you will accept that? Will it take one dying before your eyes before you concede that they are not the answer? The answers to the problem of "management" or "apprehension" are many and they all combine to eliminate the need for force and violence.

Proper training, adequate man power, a legitimate health care system that provides for the needs of these folks without just shuffling them off to the jails, to be managed and controlled by people that have no training and shouldn't be forced to deal with the episodes, those are the needs and where the money that is spent on tasers should go.

I haven't had such bliss, I have been there and watched as poorly trained officers wearing black leather gloves get the spark in their eyes as they get the call over the radio S-34 (fight), as they get to rush to the fight to exert their "powers" and kick some ass and they get paid to do it. I know that for all the good people working in the system, there are the bad ones, I know that they too are only human and the lack of training and manpower makes them the victims, thus they take out their fears on others, they have to prove that they are the "law" and they are in control.

I have been there and I can say with all honesty and passion that arming officers, whether on the streets or in the jails, with tasers scares the hell out of me and I am admantly against it. For one thing, giving weapons to jailers is a recipe for disaster. Most jails, IF properly manned, have 1 officer for every 5 inmates. That is a preferred average, that is not the norm. So why shouldn't the officer be armed? Well with that guard inmate ratio, the odds of the inmates over taking the officer and using his taser on him or others is high and not worth the danger they pose.

Just thought I would give you the perspective of someone that hasn't lived in the bliss you suggest.

[blurp]

108. Works both ways

There is a mentality, us against them, good guys versus bad guys, when you wear a badge.

Works both ways, does it not?

I've been on the wrong side of the law several times. The problem I see with most people that have a problem with cops is that they make everything a personal conflict between them and the officers.

Of course when cops see this all the time it becomes personal for them, too.

[merh]

111. But see, the cops are the "professionals"

With proper training, they accept the "bad guy" mentality as just part of life and they learn how to deal with it and survive. They also learn that if they act as professionals and treat people with RESPECT, the mentality of the community changes.

Training is key, but why train when you can give tasers and spend the money necessary to provide training on the quick fix of the taser?

[blurp]

118. Did you even see the video?

They also learn that if they act as professionals and treat people with RESPECT, the mentality of the community changes.

The cop was amazingly professional, and what did it get him?

We even have posters here saying he should have the tazer connected to his balls.

That's his reward for being a professional.

He's lucky there wasn't a riot afterwords.

[merh]

122. The cop wasn't professional, imho.

He used a taser when it wasn't necessary. Excessive force for the situation at hand.

Backup should have blocked the lady's car so that she couldn't flee. A show of force is much better than the use of force.

There is nothing professional about using a taser to stop a person for a traffic violation. NOTHING.

And yes, I know what I am talking about. I worked in law enforcement, have a degree in criminal justice, am certified as a law enforcement training, have a brother that is a cop and have assisted in lawsuits brought by plaintiffs against law enforcment and defending law enforcement against such lawsuits.

[liberalnurse]

138. Merh, I love ya....

so lets just admit she was an ass.....She did not comply. Why would they need to surround a basic ass? Where are all the "social cops" going to come from anyways? Shall we take them off the beat away from the crack houses, abandon the partrons of business to surround a simple ass....No! She knew she was going to jail...probably been there before with DMV issues. Thats why she got on the phone....she knows the drill.

[merh]

147. Yes, she was an ass, but that does not justify the use of force

to make her comply, especially using a device that has been known to kill people.

You should admit that. It was a friggin traffic violation, she wasn't holding anyone at bay with a knife, she wasn't threatening anyone. The police have the advantage of the "profession", the availability of man power to quell a situation and the luxurary of time. What the heck was the rush.

Nope, nothing professional about the cops behavior, imho.

[blurp]

149. Nothing professional, at all?

Nope, nothing professional about the cops behavior, imho.

This statement alone means you can't be taken seriously.

[merh]

163. Your statements mean you can't be taken seriously.

So what.

The use of excessive force to perfect an arrest for a petty offense or traffic offense is never justified and is a violation of the person's constitutional rights.

That is the simple truth of the matter.

[OrlandoGator]

227. The use of force on a subject who doesn't comply with arrest commands.

And no one is mentioning here that she took a swing at the arresting officer, that's why he pulled his Taser.

[screembloodymurder]

285. Since when is a traffic violation

a felony. This woman was simply trying to demand her constitutional rights.

[OrlandoGator]

292. She broke the law and refused to comply with arrest commands.

You can find a better poster child for standing up to oppression and tyranny than this moron.

If anyone...black, white, hispanic, green...anyone is notified that they are under arrest and refuse to be taken into custody, they should rightfully expect to be subdued with force. Police don't have the time or inclination to worry about you wrapping up your cell phone call.

[liberalnurse]

151. Yes it does.

The cop is not a matradee......He gave multiple warnings.....she was non-compliant.....she knew the drill, she chose poorly. You just don't like Tasers because some have died....which frequently have been proved not to be a Taser related death. Tasers have saved many lives by controlling a potentially explosive situation. God Bless the Taser.

[merh]

170. The cop is the professional, sworn to uphold the laws of his/her

state and of our nation. That includes the U.S. Constitution. The use of excessive force to perfect an arrest is a violation of the U.S. Constitution, thus the cop violated his oath and the law.

It is that simple. The officer had other options available to him. If he did not know what they were, then his training was inadequate.

[SouthernDem2004]

175. What court has ruled Tasers UnConstitutional?

[merh]

182. No courts as of yet have found tasers unconstitutional.

They have held that the use of lethal force or excessive force is unconstitutional if the circumstances did not warrant the action.

She was not posing a threat to the safety of the officer or the community, SHE was on the phone and did not automatically comply with his directives.

Other alternatives were available to the cop, that he was impatient and did not want to try the other alternatives does not justify his use of excessive force under the circumstances. :hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

So you admit your claim it is Unconstitutional is false.

Also, stun weapons are not considered "deadly force weapons." They may be in your OPINION but are not in the real world.

Sorry, you can not choose when you are willing to comply and when you are not.

[merh]

229. Wrong again, but you can continue to try to twist the issues.

The use of excessive force to perfect an arrest, especially an arrest for a petty offense, has been held unconstitutional. This was excessive force, more force than reasonable and necessary under the circumstances, thus it was unconstitutional.

:hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

258. This is excessive force in your opinion. It is not in the eyes of the

courts and thus you are wrong. You can declare anything you want Unconstitutional but that does not make it so.

[merh]

259. Yes it is - go back and learn some more.

d. Cruel and Unusual Punishment:
1) Stun Gun - Using a stun gun on a jailee after he had contentiously refused to sweep his cell was cruel and unusual as a matter of law. (Hickey v. Reeder, 12 F.3d 754, 759 (8th Cir. 1993)

http://www.laaw.com/uoflegout.htm

[SouthernDem2004]

271. Lol, that is the best you can do with google?

They ruled Tasers could not be used as punishment. She was Tasered because she failed to comply with a lawful order.

[merh]

286. The inmate was stunned because he did not comply with an order

:shrug:

Duhh, that is what I found for now, but will be happy to provide you with a full thread of cases discussing excessive force. BTW, where is your backup links, heh? :shrug:

[SouthernDem2004]

296. No, he was stunned for not cleaning his cell.

He was not stunned for not complying with a lawful order. Read your own post.

Links for what? If you are what you claim (former LE, degree in CJ, a certified trainer (whatever that means) and an advisor in lawsuits) then you should know basic Police tactics. I fail to understand why you do not. That fact that you do not understand why a backup Officer does not pull in front of a suspect's vehicle seems to contradict your claims. Not to mention asking why OC was not used. Why do you have to go searching google for stuff you should basicly know if you are what you say you are? My posts are based on training and experience. Yours seem to be based on poorly done google searches.

[merh]

299. He was ordered to clean his cell and he failed to comply, violating

an order from a lawful officer in the jail (he didn't put down the phone and get out of his car fast enough).

:banghead:

Your posts are based on the closed minded, blue lined mentality of cops are always right and bad guys deserve what they get. Just as I would not want Antonio Scalia teaching a course on legal ethics or constitutional rights, I would not want you to train any officer that I know.

Guess what the course I taught concerned. How about the constitutional rights of the accused and the civil rights of the arrestee.

Damn, no links yet.

[SouthernDem2004]

305. Lol, there is a law that people clean their cells?

Do you know what a lawful order is?

Now your a professor. Moving up in the world I see.

What exactly do you want links for?

[merh]

309. In jails, yes.

Guess you don't know all you think you know.

When a person is in jail, they are obligated to follow the rules and the regulations of the jail, just as if they were on the streets and they have to follow the laws of their community.

If they violate the rules and the regulations, if they do not comply with the orders of the jailers, they have violated the law, they have violated a direct command.

Ain't it something. In this situation, ignorance isn't bliss, it is just dangerous and sad.

[SouthernDem2004]

315. Wrong yet again... The rules of the jail are not laws.

You can insult me all you want but there is no law on the books requiring someone to clean a cell. Rules and laws are not the same thing. Here is a site for you www.m-w.com

If you violate the rules of the swimming pool at the YMCA are you failing to comply to a lawful order? lol

[merh]

323. Wrong again.

But good try. Yes, when someone is in a jail, they are subject to the rules and regulations (laws) of the jail and they must follow them.
You know, since you are the one that provided the link, one would expect you to have utilized it to double check your stance before you posted it. As you can see below, your link supports what I posted. :eyes:

Main Entry: 1law
Pronunciation: 'lo
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English lagu, of Scandinavian origin; akin to Old Norse log law; akin to Old English licgan to lie -- more at LIE
1 a (1) : a binding custom or practice of a community : a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority (2) : the whole body of such customs, practices, or rules (3) : COMMON LAW b (1) : the control brought about by the existence or enforcement of such law (2) : the action of laws considered as a means of redressing wrongs; also : LITIGATION (3) : the agency of or an agent of established law c : a rule or order that it is advisable or obligatory to observe d : something compatible with or enforceable by established law e : CONTROL, AUTHORITY
2 a often capitalized : the revelation of the will of God set forth in the Old Testament b capitalized : the first part of the Jewish scriptures : PENTATEUCH, TORAH -- see BIBLE table
3 : a rule of construction or procedure <the laws of poetry>
4 : the whole body of laws relating to one subject
5 a : the legal profession b : law as a department of knowledge : JURISPRUDENCE c : legal knowledge
6 a : a statement of an order or relation of phenomena that so far as is known is invariable under the given conditions b : a general relation proved or assumed to hold between mathematical or logical expressions
- at law : under or within the provisions of the law <enforceable at law>
synonyms LAW, RULE, REGULATION, PRECEPT, STATUTE, ORDINANCE, CANON mean a principle governing action or procedure. LAW implies imposition by a sovereign authority and the obligation of obedience on the part of all subject to that authority <obey the law>. RULE applies to more restricted or specific situations <the rules of the game>. REGULATION implies prescription by authority in order to control an organization or system <regulations affecting nuclear power plants>. PRECEPT commonly suggests something advisory and not obligatory communicated typically through teaching <the precepts of effective writing>. STATUTE implies a law enacted by a legislative body <a statute requiring the use of seat belts>. ORDINANCE applies to an order governing some detail of procedure or conduct enforced by a limited authority such as a municipality <a city ordinance>. CANON suggests in nonreligious use a principle or rule of behavior or procedure commonly accepted as a valid guide <the canons of good taste>. synonym see in addition HYPOTHESIS

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=law&x=0&y=0

[SouthernDem2004]

433. Tell me, how much time did he get sentenced to for not cleaning his cell?

I am sure it was an interesting trial. Lol

[merh]

439. He loses privileges and/or he get administrative segregation.

Gee, you aren't very informed are you?

Instead of making fun of something you are totally clueless on, I would suggest you take the time to research and read. Ridiculing only proves that you are not as bright as you think you are. :hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

454. Lol, you stated not cleaning his cell was a violation of the law.

Find me that law! lol

It is a violation of the Jail's rules but is not the violation on any City, County, State or Federal Law.

I never claimed to be bright. What I am is an experienced Police Officer. You claim to have past LE experience, a degree in CJ, a certified trainer and a consultant. Oh wait, you added Professor a few posts ago. You never did tell me what a "certified trainer" is supposed to be. I think you meant a Certified Instructor. Of course you should know that with your background. <cough>

[merh]

460. It is a violation of the laws of the jail

Laws are the rules and regulations adopted by and for a society to prevent chaos and to create some order. The laws of the jail are its rules and regulations, that is why the courts have repeated held that not providing an inmate with a copy of the jail policies is a violation of their civil rights. Simply put, you can punish someone for violating a rule that they do not know exisits.

It is also a basic rule of the jail, that society in and of itself, a community that must have its own laws (rules and regulations) to exist, that the prisoner maintain and keep clean his/her cell and that the prisoner must obey the orders of the jailers. When the jailer shocked this fellow for not complying with his order to clean the cell, it is very similar to the officer that tased the woman for not putting the phone down. It was too extreme under the circumstances and the failure to comply did not warrant the excessive force used to make the inmate comply.

:hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

477. Wow, that is just weak and makes no sense.

[merh]

488. Makes no sense

because you don't understand the system or constitutional law.

You ought to consider taking some courses. It will help you better understand the simple issues posted.

[liberalnurse]

377. There is always more to the story.....

we just have her version. I suspect the inmate came after the Officer.......I bet I'm real warm on this assumption.

[merh]

383. WTF?

Go read the case we are discussing that held that using a stun gun on a prisoner in jail is a constitutional violation.

:wtf:

[SouthernDem2004]

432. No, the case your discussing is Tazing someone as punishment in a jail.

Read your own post and link.

[merh]

435. I have read the case.

Folks not yet convicted or in jail (arrestees) have more rights than those in jail, ain't that the damnedest thing! :freak:

You should read up on all of the cases that discuss the constitutional rights of the arrestees, the accused and those in jail, you would find them fascinating. :hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

455. If you actually read the full case please post a link. I could not find

the entire case.

Hmm, changing the subject? We were discussing your claim that Tasers have been banned in jails and you claim not cleaning ones cell is a violation of the law. Both statements are false.

[merh]

456. Never claimed they were banned in jails.

Claimed that misuse of the taser or using it to force someone to comply with the orders of the police (the jailer) is unconstitutional.

:hi:

Reading is fundamental!

[liberalnurse]

169. She was driving on a suspended liscense....

That kicks things up a notch. That is not a ticket offense....they need to post bond or stay in jail. She knew she would go to jail, thats why she was on the phone..... She knew this Merh....

[merh]

172. She was on the phone, calling for help.

She wasn't weilding a weapon. There was no justification for the use of excessive force, suspended licenses are traffic violations, even if they include jail time and the necessity for bail. The cops should have known this, that they didn't clearly reflects that proper training is being replaced by tasers and the money that should be spent on training is being wasted in arming the officers with a dangerous weapon.

[OrlandoGator]

177. On the phone calling for help? Are you kidding me?

She was on the phone with her friend complaining about being pulled over and giving the friend a play-by-play of the situation.

This situation is not rose-colored. Your glasses are causing that.

[liberalnurse]

181. I'm sitting here at my keyboard...

cleaning off the ice tea I just spewed! Unbelievable!

:banghead:

[merh]

183. Are you kidding me?

You justify the use of force because she was telling a friend what was occurring? Dear god, how can that justify the use of force for a TRAFFIC STOP/ARREST?

[liberalnurse]

188. She would of got a phone call at jail....

Tell me this.....Why do you not hold the woman accountable for her behavior?

You sound like the Officer should of just shaken his finger and scolded her for all her violations then kissed her good-bye. :shrug:

You want to process this like a school yard prank......If you watched the video, they were not in the "best" of neighborhoods. Pedestrians were not even paying attention initially but it could of easily escalated into a drive-by shooting!

Think...... :spank:

[merh]

193. Because the officer's behavior was far more harmful than her

behavior. He is sworn to uphold the law and he violated it, imho. He violated her constitutional rights by using excessive force to perfect an arrest for a TRAFFIC OFFENSE.

You need to think. You need to recognize that when an officer takes the oath, when he puts on the badge, he has a greater burden than the average citizen. He also has greater advantages and resources at his disposal to be able to contend with a woman who won't get off of her phone and out of her car.

He had other alternatives available to him to diffuse the situation and to perfect the arrest. He was simply impatient and poorly trained.

I am not the one trying to justify a violation of the law, others here are doing a good job of that.

[liberalnurse]

207. Merh.....

No, it was not a reasonable, safe option. The Officers can not ever leave themselves or the public vulnerable to attack and injury because someone wants to dispute/resist. Never. Your options are neither logical nor are they healthy for either group.

The Officer was upholding the law and abiding by his oath.

SHE was responsible....she new the score, she chose poorly.

[merh]

234. And I pray one day you are never subjected to the behavior you

justify, that the shoe is never on the other foot.

Try a little empathy and understanding and then, go read the constitution and the case law interpretting the same. The use of the taser in this situation was the use of excessive force and was not justifiable. The alternatives I have suggested are reasonable and logical, it is you that are emotionally vested with defending law enforcement, understandable, but not practical under our system of the law.

As I defend the civil rights of one individual, I defend your civil rights. As I challenge the law to respect the constitutional rights of one person, I challenge them to respect yours.

[OrlandoGator]

238. I won't ever be subjected to a police Taser.

That's because when they pull me over, I am polite and comply with their commands 100%. If for some reason they arrest me, I go along and let my lawyer sort out the rest.

[merh]

252. That woman was afraid of racial profiling. She called to advise

another that she was being arrested, the officer used excessive force.
At no time was she a threat to drive off, as she never attempted to drive off during the entire stop.

You apparently have never been subjected to racial profiling, which will be something that will have to be answered to by this police force. That is obvious since they got their black FTO to narrate the video. There was no swing at a police officer as alleged and this police force will be probably be sued, so that so very polite and professional police officer not only subjected the woman to excessive force and a violation of her constitutional rights, he has now subjected the police force to the expensive of defending the litigation and the taxpayers with paying for his mistakes and poor judgment.

Don't say never, with the future that is ahead of us, we don't know what actions we will be subjected to because we voice our dissent. (Of note, the protestors at the RNC that were herded to and offsite holding pin and had their rights violated.)

FYI -- The court have held that even a person in jail can't be shocked for failing to comply.


d. Cruel and Unusual Punishment:
1) Stun Gun - Using a stun gun on a jailee after he had contentiously refused to sweep his cell was cruel and unusual as a matter of law. (Hickey v. Reeder, 12 F.3d 754, 759 (8th Cir. 1993)

http://www.laaw.com/uoflegout.htm


As I defend her rights, I defend yours. As I insist upon the proper training, it is not to hinder the officers, it is to protect them and those under their watch (including you).

[liberalnurse]

261. That woman is pulling shit out of her ass.

She KNEW HER LICENSE WERE SUSPENDED and was going to jail. She was stalling for whatever reason. That was dangerous for the Officer and surrounding citizens. Stop making this more than what it was. That claim is an insult to real victims of racial profiling.....

[merh]

263. Did you watch the video without the officer's commentary?

She was calling to tell the other perons (sounded like "Mom" to me, could have been "Bob") that she was being arrested, then she freaked when he pulled the "gun" and said "he's going to shoot me. He did not give her ample time to comply, his impatience was noted on the video as was that fact that two white officers pulled over a black woman and she was afraid.

Again. This action has subjected the department to scrutiny, maybe that scrutiny will require the proper training to diffuse like circumstances in the future.

As I defend her rights, I defend your rights and the rights of the cops. They are held to a higher standard, as they are the "trained professionals". :hi:

[liberalnurse]

339. Like....I don't need not stink'en commentary

to figure this one out......Believe me on that. Sooner or later, it's going to sink in, I hope, that you recognize that Tasers are here for good.

She wasn't freaked out but shocked and pissed off.....She new her ass was in the hot seat and going to jail. You give her way too much credit....she new from the get-go...her arrogance put her on the street. That Officer was in danger. She could of been talking to her front man who would come up there and shoot the Officer if she could of delayed the arrest. Thats a reality. Your coddling of the criminal is exactly what would promote such a tragic outcome if the Officers did not act prudently. Your excuses are dangerous and obtuse.

I acknowledge your passion but please apply your good nature to a worthy cause.

[merh]

344. Please view the video that is linked at post 319

Then try to explain to me why portions of the video are missing.

Listen to Mr. Professional Cop as he violates departmental policy by not providing the citizen with his badge number/unit number.

Listen as he is the one with the attitude and as he expounds upon the charges, accuses her of fighting (which is never seen on the video) and then tells her to get up, it doesn't hurt after he zaps her with electricity.

There is no excuse for this.

[merh]

414. Your right, she was only too aware that her family had been

subjected to the harassment of the force because her relative had sued the department in the 90's.

Goodwin said the department has treated her family unfairly ever since a relative filed a lawsuit against the city in the early '90s. She had been calling her brother to come to the scene because, she told officers, "I don't trust y'all."
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2005/05/29/a16a_taser_vig1_0529.html

Just pulling things out of her ass. Nothing to see here folks, move along. :sarcasm:

[OrlandoGator]

262. A person is jail is less of a threat than a pulled-over driver.

Again, the threat is in the number of unknowns.

And as for racial profiling, that is ludicrous. The officer knew he was on camera, he even mentions it to the radio dispatcher. Don't you think a cop who was about to engage in some egrigious racism would do something to conceal the evidence of what happened?

[merh]

265. She never tried to pull away during the stop, she never made any

effort to flee, or any actions that could have been perceived as a threat.

This was a long traffic stop, not a acting out of instinct to save my life and to protect mankind.

Racial profiling is what she was afraid of and I would venture to guess that if you check the records of that department, you will find in that community the number of stops of black with bad tail lights and speeding far out numbers the stops for whites.

:hi:

[OrlandoGator]

276. No, going to jail was what she was afraid of.

And she knew she was going there when she got pulled over driving with a suspended license.

[merh]

283. Yeah, she knew she was going to jail

What the heck do you think she was telling the person on the other end of the phone. What, are you just dense. She knew she was going to jail, she wanted someone to know she was being arrested, she was scared of the POLICE!!!

I'd be curious to see their files on alleged police abuse and racial profiling.

[OrlandoGator]

287. She was breaking the law. Maybe she should have been more scared.

She knowingly broke the law, then resisted arrest by refusing to comply with the arresting officer's commands. Why are we doing a Hands Across America for someone acting spectaularly stupid?

[merh]

289. The stupid one was the officer.

He was impatient with her and he overacted to the situation.

He violated her civil rights.

Why are you defending a man that did not act professionally?

[OrlandoGator]

293. Telling her to get out of the car six times is "impatient"?

How long should he have waited? The woman was under arrest and she refused to follow the arresting officer's commands. There's no "take your time, honey" when it comes to this sort of thing.

There are civil responsibilities that go hand-in-hand with civil rights. This woman was committing a crime and refusing to fulfill her civil responsibilities by being arrested without a physical incident.

She was the one who made the conscious decision to go to jail the hard way. She could have just gotten out of the car when she was told to. Instead, she decided to cop an attitude and talk on her cell phone.

Spare me.

[merh]

294. I have a brother that is a copy, he is 6'9" and quite large and

intimidating. I have told him that if he ever arrests anyone for the crime of "intimidating an officer" I will personally kick his ass.

THE OFFICER WAS IMPATIENT. I don't care how many times he ordered her out of the car, his use of the taser to get her to comply, to respect his badge, was extreme for the situation. He violated her civil rights.

You answer me this, why was it so important that she get off the phone and do as he say when he said it. What would have been the harm in him waiting for her to finish her call?

Explain that one to me, will ya.

[OrlandoGator]

297. Explain to me what the hell your brother has to do with this?

You say the officer was impatient, then you say you don't care how long it took for her to exit the vehicle.

At what point should the officer get "impatient" then if he's giving her all the time in the world to finish her phone call?

By the way, since when is the completion of a cell phone call of any concern whatsoever to a police officer arresting a subject? Why in the hell should the cop stand there and wait to arrest someone (putting himself in danger in the process as he allows the subject to possibly access hidden weapons in the car).

You are not a police officer and you have no idea what it means to be one. You don't see me offering my insights on goat herding...it's not my forte. You should follow suit on this subject.

[merh]

303. If you support this officers actions

you shouldn't be a police officer or you should go back for some more training.

That woman was not a danger to him, she did not try to pull away form the scene, endangering the lives of the citizens in the street as alleged by those supporting the officers training.

When you wear a gun, when you have a badge on your chest, you have a responsibility to all citizens, even the ones you arrest because they didn't jump as high as you said to jump as quickly as you wanted them to jump.

GOT THAT.

Go back and read, you will see that this is not outside of my area of experience, training or education. I think you should consider goat herding.

[SouthernDem2004]

308. Ok, you claim...

to be former law enforcement, have a degree in CJ, be an expert advisor to attorney's and a professor. I miss anything?

[merh]

311. Not expert advisor.

Have assisted in litigation. Big difference.

Again, where are your links? Where is the documentation to support all that you claim is the "truth"?

[SouthernDem2004]

314. What links are you talking about?

You keep babbling about links but refuse to say what links you need.

Just trying to nail down your ever increasingly impressive resume.

[merh]

330. You have yet to provide me any links that support your

contention. The link you did provide challenging me to look up the definition of law, clearly shows that you are either mistaken or cannot read.

I give you the benefit of the doubt, you just made a mistake.

[SouthernDem2004]

434. Lol, still no answer from you on what links.

You are making my day. :)

[merh]

437. Links that support your position that the use of the taser is a

standard policy when arresting misdemeanor offenders or anyone that is being charged with Petty Offenses or Traffic Violations.

Any links that suggest the blocking of her car during that 10 minutes is against policy (or applying the boot to the wheels or ordering she relinquish her keys).

Something real, not the dictionary.

[SouthernDem2004]

452. Lol....

"standard policy when arresting misdemeanor offenders or anyone that is being charged with Petty Offenses or Traffic Violations."

Who ever said it was? It is allowable when the person fails to comply to a lawful order. No one pulls someone over and for speeding, walks up and stuns them.

"Any links that suggest the blocking of her car during that 10 minutes is against policy (or applying the boot to the wheels or ordering she relinquish her keys)."

Wow, your claim to be prior LE and have a degree in CJ are disproving by this statement alone. Hard to find links to training but lets try:
http://www.musc.edu/publicsafety/policies/PP79.html
http://www.mopca.com/members/documents/vol2/modstops.txt
http://www.theiacp.org/div_sec_com/committees/PoliceTrafficPoliciesProcedures.pdf#search='traffic%20stop%20procedures'
http://www.tpub.com/maa/125.htm
http://www.tpub.com/maa/126.htm

I could go on or direct you to some of the Companies that teach these topics. The good manuals and courses are not free I am afraid.

Boot the vehicle? lol... Yea we all carry one of those things in our trunk. What moron is going to risk their life putting one on anyway. .. That is just ridiculous.

[merh]

458. And where in any of those links does it provide that you can

use excessive force to arrest a misdemeanor traffic law offender?

BTW - Innocent until proven guilty is a basic tenet of our great nation, she is an alleged criminal, no court of law has found her guily of the alleged crimes.

Interesting enough she was charged with the suspended license and failure to comply, I see nothing about the original charge of speeding and all of the other alleged violations he rattled off during the arrest. :shrug: Who knows, maybe he was too busy preparing his report regarding the use of the taser. I would think that the department does have a procedure to investigate all taser use - like when an officer has to fire his weapon, that is automatically investigated to be sure that the discharge of same complied with departmental policy.

But odd, it appears that policies are lacking in this city as is reflected by the article linked in previous posts.

:hi:

[merh]

462. And in reading those links you provided me,

there is nothing about particular procedures to take when confronting a petty offender that poses no risk to the officers.

BTW: I don't recall hearing the officers reading the lady her rights before putting her in the car, when they arrested her. They did call a tow truck to tow her vehicle. And I still have a problem with missing footage from the video :freak:, and a problem with her being shocked twice! :freak: But heck, you think this was a professional arrest and a justified use of force, so what do those little ole discrepancies mean any way? We have your opinion. :shrug:

[SouthernDem2004]

476. OK, I can not resist. Read her rights? Lol now I know you are not who

you say you are. There is no way your resume is accurate. Read her rights? Lol, You do not even know what a Miranda warning is for or when it is used! I mean come on, you say you are former LE, have a degree in CJ, work as a consultant and are a professor of Constitutional law and yet you do not know when and why Miranda is given! That is just sad. Oh yea, your also a "certified trainer" whatever that means.

Miranda warnings are only given when the subject is going to be questioned. 90% of people arrested are not given Miranda. The suspect in this video committed the misdeamenor in the prescence of the Officers. No need for questioning...

I call shanagans! LOL

[Name removed]

487. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SouthernDem2004]

489. Are you intentionally misinforming people? That are you are just plain

ignorant. Your resume claims are obviously false. You continually post incorrect information. You need to stop before people start believing this nonsesense. Miranda is only for custodial interrogations! Stop misinforming people!

Links:
http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/documents/miranda.html
http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term/1868774D-F6B1-4458-9A0DF7C2B1EAF314/alpha/M/
http://www.enforcergraphics.com/mar99.htm
http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/mirandarights/a/mirandaqa.htm
http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectID/8B6A7AA5-700E-4A9B-9CF45606F6E4A635/104/143/268/ART/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning
http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/miranda.htm

[merh]

491. No I am not.

When you arrest someone, you should read them their rights. That is to protect you, the law enforcement officer, so that the arrest sticks. So that no admissions made while that person is in your custody can be striken because you didn't bother to tell the poor soul that they had the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. And yes, even little ole misdemeanor offenders that face time in jail have the right to attorneys. Would you like that Supreme Court case? Oh heck, I'll give it to you any way, let you go do some reading. Shelton v. Alabama.

Gosh, now where do you work? I know plenty of defense lawyers that would love to know you guys don't read the folks you arrest their rights.

:hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

498. Sad... I hope no one is believes a word you say.

This is pointless.

[merh]

500. Sad, I want to be around when you arrest someone.

Get them cases tossed out if that person happens to make incriminating statements in your presence, once you have them in custody and under your happy little power.

:hi:

Let me know what jurisdiction, please, pretty please. I won't tell all the criminal defense lawyers, just some of them!

[merh]

501. And you promised to put me on ignore and not respond to

me any more. You just can't be trusted :-(

[SouthernDem2004]

503. Yea but you keep spouting misinformation. I guess there are enough

post by you now that people can judge for themselves. Enjoy your world...

[merh]

505. Ain't spouting misinformation, you are.

Gosh, please won't you tell me the jurisdiction. I mean if you are so all fired sure that you are right, you won't mind defense lawyers in the area knowing that your force makes a practice of not advising the accused of their rights when you arrest them.

:shrug:

I can tell you enjoy your power world. I pray I am never in your area, god only know what could happen to me if I had my tag improperly displayed or if I seemed to swerve out of my lane. All the sudden, I have tail light problems. :freak: Doubt you would keep that video a runnin!

:hi:

Now ignore me!

[SouthernDem2004]

506. Think I will continue pointing of your falsehoods. Wouldnt want people

being misinformed.

[OrlandoGator]

322. So answer my question, how long should the officer have waited?

You said he got impatient, then said he should have given her as long as she needed to complete her phone call.

Those two statements are in conflict. At what point would it have been appropriate for the officer to become "impatient" then?

[merh]

333. He got impatient. He did not wait for her to finish her call.

He said jump, she didn't jump as high or as fast as he wanted, so he used excessive force to prove he was in charge.

How are my statements in conflict?

He should not have become impatient. He had the advantage, the gun, the call for further backup. He should have waited forever as far as I am concerned. She was not harming herself, she was not posing a threat to society, she was sitting in her car on the phone.

You tell me, why didn't he wait?

[OrlandoGator]

335. You don't seem to understand...the POLICE OFFICER controls the arrest.

You don't wait for someone to finish talking on the phone to a friend before ARRESTING THEM.

Have you taken a moment to re-read what you are saying? If you told a police officer that they should be "patient" while arresting someone so that they can finish gabbing, they'd laugh their ass off at you.

[merh]

342. The entire sitution took approx 10 minutes.

The unedited version is very interesting. Mr. Professional cop had the attitude, when the lady asked him his badge/unit number, he told her "Believe me, I'll be there in court, don't worry about it". That in itself violates most department's policies, as cops are to supply that information to the person when asked.

She told him she was scared of them, that they had stopped others in her family and that she knew on bogus stops (racial profiling) and that she didn't trust them.

Mr. Professional Cop told her she wasn't hurting and to stop over reacting, it wasn't that bad he had been tased before. He was not being a professional, he was being an ass.

Mr. Professional Cop then accused her of fighting when there was no fighting. If you know these cops, please advise them that the tapes are missing sections. 7:56:56 to 7:59:23 missing, the tape jumps. Also the tape jumps at 54:11 to 54:11. What's up with that?

The tape can also be analysed to depict what happened in the passenger side to show that she either did or did not swing at the other cop.

BTW - yes, the officer controls the arrest and he didn't do it in this case without the use of excessive force. HE is not a professional and has an attitude problem and it appears that this community has had to suffer with racial profiling.

Wish the guy had known how to conduct a traffic stop and a proper arrest, this is not an example of either. It should be used to teach folks what NOT to do.

Where is that missing video? What happened on the tape?

[OrlandoGator]

362. He told her his name, and that he did not have a "unit number".

You are siding with the criminal here, and that won't get you far.

[merh]

369. He knew what she meant by unit number, that is badge number

and all departments require that the officers supply that when asked.

I am holding him to the same standards that he is expecting of her. How can he justify violating the law (rules and regulations of his department) and use excessive force on her because she failed to follow the law and his orders? In the jails, they refer to it as "don't play the radio", that means that you follow the rules, you toe the line and don't violate the laws, so those that you expect to do the same thing respect your position and are more likely to comply.

Again, 10 minutes is not a long time, he had other options available to him.

As I defend her constitutional rights, I defend yours.

[liberalnurse]

373. You are way out of line.....

You need to "buck-up and suck-up" because you don't have a clue. He defends and protects you, 24/7. You do not have the credentials to say such an arrogant and irresponsible, disrespectful statement. Get a grip please.

[OrlandoGator]

378. Apparently cops should arrest people on their terms.

Talking to a friend on the cell phone? No problem, I'll just wait over here. Holler when you're done, then we'll head to jail.

No, go ahead...finish your McNuggets. Want me to get you a refill on that Fanta?

Fantasyland.

[liberalnurse]

395. You bring me to tears .....

laughing so hard......:rofl:

[merh]

380. Excuse me!

I am not way out of line. You need to get a grip on reality. If you fear working in the environment, then get out now. The mentality that it is good guy versus bad guy on the streets is dangerous to both the police and the citizenry.

[OrlandoGator]

393. You think a cop should wait for an arrest subject to finish on the phone.

Who needs to get a grip on reality?

[merh]

394. Ah yes, I mean what risk did that pose?

His job is to protect all citizens, including those he arrests. DON'T YOU KNOW THAT?

He has taken an oath to protect and serve, this was a PETTY CRIME, a traffic violation, she was posing no risk to him or the public.

Any TRUE FIELD TRAINING OFFICER will tell you to be patient, to use force only when necessary, and lethal force only when you or someone else is in danger.

If you are on a force, please let me know which force so that I stay out of your jurisdiction.

:hi:

[OrlandoGator]

398. A cop is not obligated to wait for when it is convenient for you...

...to arrest you. That's asinine.

[merh]

A COP IS OBLIGATED to not harm the suspect when he

is making an arrest, especially if that suspect is not posing a risk to him or others. A cop is obligated to follow the law and uphold the constitution and departmental policy, thus, he should have waited. He had not tried every option available to him before he tased her.

:hi:

[OrlandoGator]

406. The subject posed an enormous risk in this case.

By refusing to get out of the vehicle and taking a swing (or a slap or whatever) an an officer, she escalated the situation to a point where force was required.

The officer tried every option that would have kept himself and his backup safe. Reaching into the car is not one of those options.

[merh]

410. Oh, you see a swing in that video?

I don't. I hear the officer accuse her of fighting him, taking a swing at him, then realizing it was on video, changing the accusations to swings at the other cop.

She posed no threat.

And why was she tased twice?

[merh]

411. And where are those missing seconds on the video that

is in and of itself not accurate as the date depicted on it reflects 080604 and the incident occurred on May 28, 2005?

:shrug:

[merh]

412. And if taser use is a great tool, why is it that

Police explore Taser policy
Chiefs want countywide unified guidelines on the weapons' use.

By Bill Douthat
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Friday, June 03, 2005

Police chiefs are moving with urgency to develop countywide standards on the use of Taser stun guns.

A police planning group voted Thursday to establish guidelines on the electric shock Taser, including its use on minors, the elderly and pregnant women.

The model policy also would address training standards for officers armed with Tasers and under what circumstances the weapon would be fired.

"What we need to decide is at what level of resistance is an officer allowed to use the Taser," Palm Beach Gardens Police Chief Stephen Stepp said. "There have been a few instances where the use of the Taser has been controversial."

(snip)

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2005/06/03/s1a_tasers_0603.html

[OrlandoGator]

415. Any tool that can subdue a subject without lethal force is valuable.

As someone else pointed out earlier...some of you people seem to think that snatching the woman out by her arm, locking her elbow and throwing her face-down into the street was preferable to the use of the Taser here.

Okay, I guess I'm very glad you chose not to be police officers.

[merh]

422. As the chiefs of police of Florida have pointed out,

a policy needs to be developed that provides when the use of tasers is appropriate. I will bet you that traffic stops such as this will not be part of that policy.

As for the use of force, I told you, the officer had only to wait. She posed no threat, force, any force was not necessary. SHE WAS BEING ARRESTED FOR A PETTY OFFENSE! A TRAFFIC VIOLATION. A MISDEMEANOR!

I was a sworn deputy. I still have the star with my name on it to prove it! :hi:

LOL

[merh]

424. Oh, BTW, where is that missing video?

:shrug:

[merh]

407. And, btw - why the heck was she shocked twice?

Then, less than a minute after the first shock, another pop is audible, followed by the clicking sound of the Taser cycling another 50,000 volts into her body for five seconds. She screams anew and yanks one probe from her arm.

Goodwin said the department has treated her family unfairly ever since a relative filed a lawsuit against the city in the early '90s. She had been calling her brother to come to the scene because, she told officers, "I don't trust y'all."

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2005/05/29/a16a_taser_vig1_0529.html

And why wasn't she charged with speeding, the original reason for the stop?

Goodwin was charged with driving on a suspended license and resisting arrest without violence. She was treated at Bethesda Memorial Hospital after complaining that her arm was numb, according to the report, and then transferred to jail.

Things that make you go hmmmmmmm? :shrug:

[liberalnurse]

399. I LOVE MY JOB.......

I am damn good at it too.

[merh]

402. Glad you love it.

Tasers are still bad! :hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

269. Huh?

Once again your clain it is excessive is just your opinion.

I have no idea why you have a problem with the Traininf Officer being black. Those are your issues to deal with.

You did not see if she swung at the Officer that was at the passenger side unless you can see through metal on a tape.

Please back up your claim Tasers can not be used in jails.

You are incorrect in your assesment of Hickey v. Reeder. You should have done a little more googling.... They ruled stuns could not be used as punishment. That has nothing to do with failing to comply.

[liberalnurse]

382. Ditto......

I would chose to argue my case in a court of law if need be..... Plus, I'm loved by my Comrades ......:blush:

[merh]

420. I'd rather protect the civil rights of those that need to have them

protected, than claim to be loved by my COMRADES. Sounds sort of facists or communistic to me and we know what those folks thought about civil rights.

Nice try on that low blow thing! :hi:

[takebackthewh]

492. Exactly. n/t

[SouthernDem2004]

120. No offense but Jailers are not Police.

I have nothing but respect for those that work in a jail or prison. Its a job I would not want to do. However, jailers are not Police.

[Blue Diadem]

250. Around here "jailers" are deputies..

From what I understand, they put their stint in at the jail before being promoted to road duty.

[liberalnurse]

266. Thats a requirement in my county as well.

I think the jail rotation gives great experience......It has a support environment and gives the Deputy the opportunity to see more community issues at hand.

[SouthernDem2004]

272. True here to but... Most are not certified LE until after they leave the

jail. You do not have to go to a Police Academy to be a jailer. Jails are run by SOs but most of the jailers are Deputys in name only.

[merh]

334. Jailers are police.

They are the law enforcement of their community. They are sworn to protect and serve those in the jail and those that work at the jail.

You ought to get some training. You have a huge ego and that is a dangerous thing as a law enforcement officer. You put yourself on a higher level than the lowly jailers and you believe that your word is to be honored and respected because you have a badge. You have a higher responsibility to the citizens than joe blow on the street, you have sworn to protect and serve, to enforce the laws and those laws include the constitution. When you close your eyes to violations of the constitution, you violate your oath.

As I defend this lady's rights under the constitution, I defend yours. As you violate her rights, or support the violation of her rights, you violate my rights.

That's how it works.

[ConfuZed]

95. Removed

I'm not going to flame anyone

[blurp]

115. Don't bother, nurse.

There are people that simply can't stand violence of any sort. It's part of their constitution.

The cops could have tazed Hitler and they'd still get upset.

I'm not saying such people are bad or stupid. It's just the way they are built psychologically.

[liberalnurse]

143. I agree with you there.

Information is falling on a few deaf ears. I sense the majority do not hold the unrealistic views of the few. Oh well......

[blurp]

109. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind

"and if they use the Taser -- they get zapped also. "

Maybe you should change your avatar.

[NCMojo]

3. Here's my question...

If you watch the videos... did you laugh when she was screaming and crying hysterically? Did you find the videos funny or entertaining?

[liberalnurse]

5. To be honest with you.....

I was holding my breath, fearful that the woman might try and drive off or pull out a concealed gun and shoot the Officer. He was very kind to her.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

89. I thought he was exceptionally kind with the second "taze" when

she didn't roll over on her stomach fast enough for him as she was still screaming in shock and pain.

Lay off the X... If you think that was being kind????

[blurp]

112. Honestly? I thought the crying and screaming were fake.

It's all part of her game.

Sorry, but that's true.

We should always be sympathetic to people that are innocent, but this lady isn't innocent.

[liberalnurse]

4. The woman definitely chose poorly.....

She was asked to get out of the car multiple times.... then warned repeated what would happen, that she would be Tased if she did not comply with the order....again, a repeated warning which was ignored.

She wanted to argue, resisting even after the Officer physically tried to get her to get out without compromising safety. She knew exactly why she was pulled over. Everyone knows that if an Officer gives an order, arguing is not the wise choice.

The Officer is in charge as it's his/her turf and was absolutely correct with enforcing the law. It was a clean arrest. She was a drama queen, mouthy,argumentative and most of all unpredictable. Her behavior is typical of a suspect trying to control the arrest, a dangerous situation if continued...officers get hurt that way, many have died. She was ordered to comply and chose poorly.

[NCMojo]

17. But returning to my question...

... regardless of whether or not this was a proper incident... do you find the videos funny?

[liberalnurse]

23. No.......

[SouthernDem2004]

6. The dangers to the Officers:

1) The lit cigarette can be used to hurt Officers when thet attempt to remover her from the vehicle.
2) The cell phone could be a gun. http://www.socalhtcia.net/cellphonegun.asp
3) A weapon could be concealed under the airbag cover. Some criminals take out the air bag and hide weapons.
4) There may be a weapon between the seat and center console.
5) There may be a weapon in the center console.
6) She may have a weapon on the passenger's seat.
7) She may be sitting on a weapon.
8) She could try to drive off when Officers reach in thus dragging and injuring the Officer.
9) She could bite the Officer.
10) She could hit the Officer.

Those are just off the top of my head. Officer's must be aware of these things on every stop. You never know who you are dealing with.

This is an example of a good use of a Taser. Pepper spray would be a bad choice. So would striking her. The Officers did a good job.

[liberalnurse]

8. Bravo ....I salute you SouthernDem....

Officers work for a living...they are people too! Their job is one where they must wear Kevlar for Chripe-sakes!

:patriot:

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. Why not pepper spray?

[SouthernDem2004]

12. Because...

It causes pain and tearing to the eyes. Makes it real hard to see. If she attempted to drive off and ended up running into or over someone, the Police would be sued.

[proud2BlibKansan]

19. Thanks for the answer.

[MojoXN]

152. Pepper Spray can kill you if you have asthma or other breathing problems.

[proud2BlibKansan]

392. And tasers can't??

[Guaranteed]

31. Yes, any of those could happen in any traffic stop.

Grandma COULD be packing. Better Tase her, just to be safe.

You know, they used to just drag a woman acting like that out of the car. Apparently things have changed, somehow.

A Taser is not a catch-all weapon. They are dangerous. They've killed people (there are countless threads in LBN that I'm sure you've seen).

I watched this video. That woman was being extremely uncooperative and certainly needed to be dealt with fairly harshly. But did she need to be or deserve to be electrocuted? Absolutely not. The officers said that she "took a swing" at one of them, but I sure didn't see it. There were two officers there, and they very easily could have just dragged her out of the car and handcuffed her. Seems like the officers just don't want to get their hands dirty, at the expense of civilians' rights. That's not a good enough reason. They need to do their job instead of taking the easy way out by electrocuting people and maybe even killing them.

[lumpy]

94. Bullgoose.

You said it right. There is no question that tasers can be dangerous weapons and should be used with discretion. So far there have been 80 deaths due to the use of tasers. Pepper spray or physical force should have been used in this case. Disgusting.

[blurp]

124. And your suggestion is that they should rough her up instead?

There were two officers there, and they very easily could have just dragged her out of the car and handcuffed her. Seems like the officers just don't want to get their hands dirty, at the expense of civilians' rights.

You've never been in a fight, have you?

[Guaranteed]

247. Yes. That's they way they should have done it.

Dragged her out, got her down on the ground on her stomach and handcuffed her.

And, yes, I've been in fistfights. Never with a woman, though.

[SouthernDem2004]

129. So, What you are saying is that they should have physically assualted

her?

Ok, lets ignore the dangers I listed and lets look at using physical force. To remove her from the vehicle the Officer is going to grab her left arm by the wrist if possible. He will then violently jerk her out of the vehicle. When she starts coming out he is going to switch to an arm-bar which is going to force her to continue to come out of the vehicle but is going to put her face first into the hot asphalt. Once she hits the ground, rather hard I might add, he is going to shift the hold and she will end up face down on the asphalt with the rather large Officer pinning her to the ground while torquing her are to attempt to immoblize her. If she refuses to bring the other arm behind her back the backup Officer and contact Officer will use pain compliance to get her to comply. This can involve pressure points, further pressure on the arm or pepper spray.

What are the results? Well, She is going to have some facial injuries due to hitting the ground face first not to mention the struggle during the cuffing. Theres a lawsuit waiting to happen...

Safety concerns: Aside from the dangers I mentioned previously the Officers now have to worry about any onlookers becoming involved. It is hard to watch your back when fighting someone on the ground. Also, you would be in the roadway and there is the danger of being hit by traffic.

I have recently been tazzed. Yes, it hurts like you would not believe. However, the pain is brief as you can tell in the video.

Sorry, The Officers remained calm and did a good job.

[liberalnurse]

155. May I take this moment to share?????

:woohoo: :applause: :rofl:

[Guaranteed]

251. Yes. That's exactly what they should have done.

The hard way, without the electricity.

[SouthernDem2004]

274. Wow, people supporting the ol' beat down method. My how times

have changed.

[Bouncy Ball]

355. You do realize, of course, that tasering is not immune to lawsuits, right?

You talk about possible facial injuries like that's the only way the police ever get sued.

HELLO? Someone could just as easily sue for excessive use of force with a taser as for any other reason!

:crazy:

[Bouncy Ball]

351. WAIT. You don't consider TASERING someone a physical

assault???

Your comments just illustrate my wariness about this weapon. It does indeed make the police officers feel like they don't need to "get their hands dirty."

Heck you showed it yourself by saying the tasering wasn't a physical assault. Damn, if hitting someone with 50,000 volts isn't physical assault, I don't know what is!

[bpilgrim]

62. the OFFICERS need HELP, obviously

headlines linked here...
http://www.infowars.com/subject_archives/ps/tasers_archive.htm

TASERS ARCHIVE

Taser Death in Lake City

Officer Quits Over Use Of Taser on Suspect

March 10, 2005 Man Tasered In Hospital Bed, Forced To Give Urine Sample

Officer Shoots Student With Taser Gun

Taser International Propaganda: Zogby Poll Shows Three-in-Four Americans Support Use of TASER(TM) Devices

Cop accidentally stuns fellow officer with Taser

Sanford man dies when tasered by police

Mother whose teenage son was shocked 16 times by police plans to sue

Police defend use of Taser on girl, 13

Police use Taser on man at eatery

Police say using Taser on cat appropriate

Five Officers Face Disciplinary Charges In Stun Gun Case

Taser moratorium sought in Texas

Man with heart ailment dies after being shocked with Taser

County cops address Taser threat

Police fear civilian taser popularity

Tased and confused: Lifesaver, lethal weapon, aid for crowd control, tool of torture?

Ohio county halts Taser use after death

Taser gun safety is questioned as 85 die

Man begs police not to use stun gun on him during raid

Police Taser and Target the Disabled

Taser announces $675K in stun gun orders

Man Dies After Being Shot With Taser

Man who died after Taser stun was facing trial

Suspect hit by Taser on 9 occasions; 41-year-old died 4 hours after his arrest at art museum

Are Tasers too risky for police officers to use?

Taser to Increase Stun Gun's Power: NY Times

Four teens Tasered in scuffle with Miami-area cops

Is the Taser a safer alternative for a police firearm, or is it a ethal weapon?

Naked Jogger Tasered, Arrested By Arkansas Police

Heart expert warns about using Tasers

Fans Zapped by Tasers at Football Game

Eugene police set aside plans for Tasers

Pacifica Taser Gun Death Under Investigation

Jarring death rate fuels flap over police, Tasers

Jarring death rate fuels flap over police, Tasers

Teen dies after being shot with Taser gun by Collier County Deputies

Officer's injury tied to Taser

Taser, Inc. Gets Research Contract From DoD

Miami Police Use Taser To Subdue Wheelchair-Bound Man

Fla. Officer Uses Stun Gun on 12- Year-Old

Tempe OKs Taser guns for 9 schools

Man Dies After Police Use Taser Gun On Him

Cameras Roll As Police Use Taser Gun To Subdue Suspect

Maker Defends Taser, Stun-Gun in the Sights of Scandal

Homeland Security nominee Kerik sat on board of stun-gun maker

5 of 7 hit with Tasers were not violent

Dead Inmate was Tasered twice

Police are too Quick to Grab for Taser's Power, Say Critics

Warning on Police Use of Stun Guns After 74 Die

Taser on children OK, police say

School Official Asks Police to Stop Tasers

Cops Taser 14-Year-Old Who Wouldn't Drop Game Boy

Police review policy after Tasers used on kids

Police used Taser gun to subdue 6-year-old student wielding piece of glass

Police State Targets, Tasers, Arrests and Jails Elementary School Children

FAA OKs Tasers on Commercial Flights

November 05, 2004] Man Dies After Police Use Stun Gun on Him

Police defend current weapons

Police Accused Of Firing Taser At Pregnant Bride

ShockRounds(TM) and Electric Shock Weapons in Law Enforcement

Pentagon Looks to Directed-Energy Weapons

Officer's Taser is used on girl, 9

Man Accuses Police of Brutality with Tasers

The Pentagon's Secret Scream

http://www.infowars.com/subject_archives/ps/tasers_archive.htm

psst... pass the word ;->

peace

[merh]

65. I'm just curious.

Why would pepper spray be "a bad choice." :shrug:

[SouthernDem2004]

130. Answer:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3788527&mesg_id=3788969&page=

[CarefullyLiberal]

226. I support you too, SouthernDem2004

I will always support American law enforcement officers, especially the ones one that work in field.

Any tools they need to protect themselves, I'm for it. Any training they need, I'm for it. Any raises or added benefits they need, I'm for it.

What I'm not for is coddling criminals, giving them a big hug, some counseling and sending them on their way.

I don't understand how liberals can be against law enforcement and the protection these men and women need as they protect our lives and property?

-Fergus

[Guaranteed]

401. I support the safety and well-being of everyone in our country.

I want our police to be safe. I also want our people to be safe. I don't like seeing people needlessly being electrocuted on video. Yes, that woman was very noncompliant. She was going to have to be dealt with physically. But that electrocution was nasty. She was flopping around on the ground like a fish, screaming, in serious pain and in shock. And that could have been any one of us in a different situation.

I support the health and freedom of all of us. What was done to that woman was unjust. She was victimized. You can see it in the video- it's not an act. She's hysterical and going into shock. I just don't like seeing that. I have strong beliefs about what is right and appropriate in the law. This was way over the top. She just didn't deserve it. All of the what if's and maybes in the world won't change the fact that they used deadly force or nearly so on her unnecessarily.

I also don't like to see our police being threatened, harmed or killed. That is horrible, and they need all of the tools that are necessary to carry out their jobs correctly and justly. But that wasn't the case here. It was in the other direction this time, and has seemed to be going in that direction since these Tasers became popular. It's disheartening, and it's going to have to stop. Hopefully this will find its way to the SCOTUS (before the Chimp gets ahold of it) so that clear regulations can be set on the use of these weapons.

[OrlandoGator]

9. She refused to comply with the officer's commands at least 10 times.

In my honest opinion, I think the officer gave the woman a few too many warnings. Otherwise, the use of the taser in that situation was completely warranted.

[Guaranteed]

32. Why couldn't they have just dragged her out and handcuffed her?

Why the need for electrocution?

[lumpy]

97. The cop wanted to use his new toy.

That's why.

[blurp]

126. Because electrocution is actually less violent

[Bouncy Ball]

356. ...

:rofl:

Um, sounds like that would be a relative thing!

[OrlandoGator]

133. There's no safe way for the officer to do that.

The cop reaches in to grab the driver, the driver hits the gas pedal, the cop gets dragged down the highway.

My guess is that never in a million years would you ever attempt such a maneuver.

[Guaranteed]

213. The car should be off before trying to remove them. nt

[SlavesandBulldozers]

485. because when you electrocute them they dont have all

those nasty cuts and bruises that lawyers can use to prove that the "subject" was unlawfully treated.

[rucky]

70. give her a break, she was late for a modeling shoot

:silly:

[lonestarnot]

10. Yes an exercise of power and authority....abuse is disgusting! Tell me

this big burly overgrown uniform c student could not think of a better way to lure out of the vehicle this uncooperative asshole. What about a back-up and maybe a little civility. Aren't they trained in civility any more? No just draw and quarter...Or Zap and Fry.

[LoZoccolo]

13. Did you watch the video?

He did call for back-up.

[lonestarnot]

14. unfortunately, some setting in computer does not allow video...could

look at the pics only. He did call for back-up and fired before they arrived?

[SouthernDem2004]

16. Nope, backup was there most of the time.

Try Internet Explorer and download the plugin. I do not normally use IE but had to in order to watch the video.

[lonestarnot]

21. Unfortunately... I already know how they are.

My girlfriend who works for the cops, brother was killed while clothed in her cop shirt. His bullet holed truck sat in my driveway for a very long time while a decision was made on a wrongful death suit. So I don't need the video, but will try to download the stuff for watching future videos and thanks for the post!

[liberalnurse]

29. Your situation taints your opinion

of the current discussion. I'm sorry for your loss.

[lonestarnot]

30. So I'm thrown off the jury just like that... well alrightie then.

[merh]

75. Why didn't backup

park their vehicle in the path of her vehicle in an attempt to prevent her from driving away?

[liberalnurse]

79. Why didn't she just comply?

She had multiple traffic violations....She already knew her license were suspended......The Officer gave her a list of other violations which prompted her to be stopped. The arrest was due to her driving under suspension...She would of just been ticketed for the other violations. She new the drill.

[merh]

81. That is not the issue.

Why didn't back up block her vehicle in, preventing her from driving off and then the pepper spray could have been used?

Why is it a "must get her to comply now" situation?
What happened to patience and the "show of force" not use of force?

That is the problem, lack of training and lack of explaining to the officers that they have the advantage and time is on their side.

This instant gratification society of ours has made patience an archiac virtue.

Guess what, nothing justifies the use of electrical current to make a person arrested for a traffic violation comply. Other options were available.

[lumpy]

98. Yes, life is all about ass.

ok

[SouthernDem2004]

114. Not safe...

It would not be safe for an Officer to pull in front of a vehicle. She could have rammed him or if she had a weapon could have shot him.

Also, she could have just backed-up or pushed the front vehicle out of the way.

[merh]

125. That is not correct.

Law enforcement often use their vehicle as deterents, even when the assailant is armed. To not have blocked her vehicle was negligent, imho.

The back up unit should have pulled their vehicle in front of her car with the front of the police car facing her's at an angle, leaving the officer the engine block as protection.

She could have done a whole lot, as could the officers. She did nothing violent, they did. It was a traffic violation.

[SouthernDem2004]

140. You are mistaken:

The backup Officer does not pull in front of a suspects vehicle. We are training not to do so. The suspect could have been armed and pulling in front only gives them a target.

She refused to exit the vehicle. Sorry, but you can not refuse to be arrested.

[merh]

166. The officers had other alternatives.

Please give me the name of your training officer and I will be happy to provide them materials to consider in teaching you what alternatives were available. :hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

171. Go ahead and link me to them...

I am a FTO.

What company do you claim to work for?

[merh]

173. If you are an FTO

you go ahead and provide me with your links. :hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

178. Yea, thats what I thought. You make some interesting claims.

Your opinions are counter to most LE training. Lol, the backup Officer pulling in front of a suspect vehicle. If one of my rookies did that we would be having a loooonnng discussion.

You make some interesting claims about your experience and yet your opinions fly in the face of actual LE training. You seem to know little about Officer safety and techniques. Saftey is the primary concern of Officers.

[OrlandoGator]

184. Safety of the officer AND the subject.

The use of the Taser here possibly saved this woman's life. The alternative was the officer drawing his sidearm.

[merh]

186. You claim they are counter, yet you provide no supporting

documentation. Your claims are as legitimate as mine.

Safety of the citizenry is as important to the law enforcement community as is safety to the officer. They go hand in hand and should be stressed as common goals. That officer has now opened himself, his department, his back up to civil lawsuits.

Provide me with some back up to your claim that the use of excessive force to perfect a traffic stop is justified and taught by any agency.

[SouthernDem2004]

190. What excessive force??? That is your opinion only. The courts have ruled

no such thing. Physically removing her from the vehicle would have been more forceful and would have resulted in her being injured.

Your posts about blocking a vehicle and the one asking why pepper spray was not used show a lack of knowledge of Police tactics and training.

You claim to be a certified trainer, What exactly does that mean? What company do you work for? (You should know what I mean by company.)

[merh]

231. Just because the courts have yet to rule on it doesn't mean it is not

excessive. How silly of you to think that an officer can get away with abusive and/or excessive behavior because no one yet has told him yet it is unconstitional.

:hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

278. Ok, now you are making no sense. Well, even less then before...

The courts do not have a problem with Tasers unless they are abused or misused. You can declare anything you want Unconstitutional.

[merh]

288. Excessive force to perfect an arrest is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

How dense are you? And you are a training officer. Please tell me what jurisdiction so that I never make the mistake of ever being in your city.

:banghead:

[SouthernDem2004]

301. YOU claim it is excessive. The courts do not. YOU do not decide the law.

[merh]

307. The court will

AND it doesn't take the decision of the courts to determine that the action is unconstitutional. It just takes people that use their brains and understand the constitutional rights of others.

Do I have to have a court tell me that driving in excess of the speed limit is a crime? NO. It is the law, as written, so too is the use of excessive force to perfect an arrest for a traffic offense.

Again, you haven't provided any links :shrug:

[SouthernDem2004]

318. Lol, you are amusing.

The Supreme Court determines Constitutionality. Didn't you claim to teach this type of stuff?

Your second paragraph just makes no sense at all.

Once again, what links do you want?

[merh]

328. No, the constitution exists as is.

The courts interpet the laws and determine if they are constitutional. The constitution is the supreme law of the land the the supreme court is the guardian of the constitution.

"Equal Justice Under Law . . ."

These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court is the highest tribunal in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.

And again, you are a FTO where? I just want to stay out of your jurisidiction. You know, you ought to quit, you definitely are not ahead and with each new post, you just keep slipping further and further behind, showing your ignorance and your poor training.

[SouthernDem2004]

438. Now your just proving yourself wrong. Your opening sentence is what

I have been telling you. The courts have not ruled against stun weapons. You keep calling them Unconstitutional and yet you just stated that the courts determine Constitutionality. (Which I have been telling you for oh 12 posts or so.) Now you are contradicting yourself, lol.

This is starting to get dull.

[merh]

440. The courts don't have to tell me that if you violate the rights of

a citizen, it is unconstitutional. I know what the rights are under the constitution. You should too. THE USE OF EXCESSIVE FORCE to perfect an arrest for a petty offense when the arrestee is not posing a threat to herself, the officer or others is unconstitutional.

:hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

453. You are certainly entitled to your opinion but it is just that, your

opinion. Stun weapons are not Unconstitutional. Sorry, that is just a fact. You can call it excessive force in your opinion but that is just your opinion.

[merh]

461. Stun guns and tasers NOT used improperly and under the wrong

conditions, without proper policies adopted by a department that govern their use, and used to abuse the alleged criminal are unconstitutional.

The action depicted on the video was excessive force under the conditions and therefore was unconstitional. (US v. Koon)

:hi:

[merh]

443. Oh, I have been meaning to ask you.

Why the second shock when she was down? :shrug:

Just wondering if that constitutes excessive force?


:hi:

[Guaranteed]

331. Here's the 8th Amendment:

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

The use of electrocution against nonviolent, noncompliant suspects is cruel and unusual. It is excessive force.

Maybe a fascist RW court wouldn't see it that way, but a good moderate or liberal judge sure as hell would. That's not justice.

[OrlandoGator]

357. Standing there until a subject feels like being arrested: not an option.

We're on Earth. Come join us.

[Guaranteed]

372. It sounds as if you're not listening to what I'm saying.

I didn't say force can't be used at all against those who are noncompliant. Obviously, when someone is unwilling to be arrested some level of force must be used. I've said this repeatedly.

It is the level of force that is in question, here. These Tasers have killed, and they put people through extremely intense pain.

I'm open to plenty of physical options for the officer as far as getting compliance from a *nonviolent* suspect. That's just not one of them. In fact, that is WAY out there. WAY WAY out there. Totally inappropriate. You just don't need that much force. It's deadly, it's extremely painful, it's just brutal. And it's unnecessary.

Like I said in another post- when we electrocute terrorists in Guantanamo, we call that torture.

I'm not against using pepper spray in the more serious noncompliance situations or a baton against the legs. When the officer has warned the suspect repeatedly, he obviously has to do something to gain compliance. He just doesn't have to electrocute them. It seems as if all of the justifications here for electrocution have been based on what if's and maybes. That's just not good enough when we're talking about our rights as U.S. citizens, due process and justice.

[AX10]

490. Richard McNevin = Liddie England

[merh]

468. FYI

The court's have not ruled that inserting a plunger handle into some one's rectum is excessive force, however, I am relatively sure it is.

You know what, that officer could face federal charges for violating this woman's civil rights under the color of the law (Hobbs Act). You know, like those officers that assaulted Rodney King. The federal courts found Officer Koon violated Mr. King's civil rights when they beat and tased him. The court's took into consideration that Mr. King was an agressor, and may have provoked some of the attack, but after considering all of the circumstances, the POLICE, Officer Koon, was found guilty of civil rights violations.

Do you see how your argument is without basis. I don't need the courts to tell me that excessive force used to arrest a person alleged to have committed a traffic offense or petty offense is unconstitutional. I know it is from reading other cases they have rendered and from their interpretation of the laws and the constitution.

[OrlandoGator]

141. You are dead wrong.

Please, do some research about police procedures before diving headlong into a debate about them.

[liberalnurse]

146. Excellent advice......

:yourock:

[merh]

164. Please provide me with research to the contrary.

:hi:

[LoZoccolo]

22. Wrong again.

The backup was on the other side of the SUV when he fired.

And I will say that the cop was acting like a major-league asshole and half of the reason he's afraid of getting shot is his own fault (you increase your chances of someone pulling a gun on you 100% when you project the image of a flagrant dickweed). He could have just told her his name and then told her to get out of the car instead of acting like a prick about withholding information. But she still ignored several warnings.

[OrlandoGator]

24. The cop was the asshole?

Are you kidding? That woman dished out a boatload of verbal abuse and he responded professionally.

Seriously, I don't think you have the faintest idea of how dangerous a "routine" traffic stop is for a police officer. Like I said earlier, I think the cop gave a few too many warnings.

[LoZoccolo]

27. Your error is the pretext that there is "the" asshole...

...and that the title can only be bestowed on one person in any situation.

[OrlandoGator]

28. Your error is that the cop wasn't acting like an asshole.

Just doing his job, and doing it correctly. It is completely unreasonable to expect a police officer to reach into a car to force someone out of it when they refuse to follow commands. That is so unbelievably dangerous to the officer, for a hundred different reasons.

That said, how would you have handled the situation? Would you have stood there and waited for the woman to finish her phone conversation? No. During a traffic stop, the officer is in complete control of the situation. This is not a point of debate.

I don't disagree that generally police brutality is a problem that needs to be addressed. However, this is a good example of onboard video cameras in a police car ensuring that officers follow proper procedures.

[slaveplanet]

113. give me a break

"It is completely unreasonable to expect a police officer to reach into a car to force someone out of it when they refuse to follow commands. That is so unbelievably dangerous to the officer, for a hundred different reasons."

Yet, they have no qualms about pulling drivers over broken shards of safety glass , like we've seen hundreds of times on FOXTV COPS.

no this is about lazyiness ,acclimating the civillians to torture, and a primer for the next round of toys they plan on unleashing.

[OrlandoGator]

137. Reaching into a vehicle during a stop to remove a driver is stupid.

I don't care how many times you've seen it on TV. Any cop will tell you that you never do that.

[slaveplanet]

150. watch an LA high speed chase

Not once, never , do they even hesitate to shoot or pull the driver from the vehicle. It's SOP

[liberalnurse]

159. You bring out an interesting point....

Your experience comes from watching TV......:blush:


Enough said......"NEXT"....

[LoZoccolo]

444. Sure he was.

It is completely unreasonable to expect a police officer to reach into a car to force someone out of it when they refuse to follow commands. That is so unbelievably dangerous to the officer, for a hundred different reasons.

Agreed.

That said, how would you have handled the situation? Would you have stood there and waited for the woman to finish her phone conversation? No. During a traffic stop, the officer is in complete control of the situation. This is not a point of debate.

Agreed.

Go back and find out why I think he was acting like an asshole. Don't try to guess what you think it is; go back and find out.

[liberalnurse]

26. He didn't need back-up but I believe he called in ...

He had all the necessary tools to maintain control and implemented the correct action. I saw a second Officer but the video does not let me determine if he was a partner or back-up.

There are several video clips of this....here is another not shared in the intial post....it maybe one of several in the collection at the web link.

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

[slaveplanet]

204. you bring out an interesting point

Your experience comes from watching TV......


Enough said......"NEXT"....

[liberalnurse]

217. No, my experience does not come from

watching TV as you well suspected.......reply #26 was referencing the video of the discussion. But, you already knew that.

[slaveplanet]

219. so you were actually there on scene

during the incident that is on the video which was played first on , cough , cough, TV....do tell

[liberalnurse]

233. Slave....you are way out of your element....

Go find the remote and move along......

[slaveplanet]

316. Hey ...It's you, that are the one

that first piped in with your condesention..and is out of their element.

That video and the officer's little diatribe were all over TV earlier this week....they conveniently left out her chance to give her side of the story as usual.

your hypocrisy is showing...

[SouthernDem2004]

15. Lol, Did you watch the video?

They tried numerous times to get her to exit the vehicle. I guess they could have dropped to their knees and begged. Not very safe not to mention it is rather time consuming. Heck, I guess obeying laws is optional. Maybe they should have set up a tent and waited her out.

By the way. I made As in highschool and Bs & Cs mostly in college. (Had a little to much fun in college.)

[Guaranteed]

37. I'm thinking they just didn't want to get their hands dirty.

They managed to somehow get people out of cars before the Taser came along. It was just a little more work before.

The Taser. The microwave of law enforcement (but not nearly as healthy).

[JVS]

119. Before the taser, she'd have probably been hit with a night-stick or shot

I think the taser is an improvement.

[Guaranteed]

205. She'd have gotten a couple of whacks with the stick, probably.

I doubt she'd have been shot.

I'd rather get hit with the stick about the legs.

[JVS]

457. In most cases being hit with a taser is less damaging than a stick

[SouthernDem2004]

142. Yes, before the Taser the Polce would have risked injury to themselves

and the suspect.

[Guaranteed]

206. This way, they just electrocute the subject, threat or not.

No injuries to worry about.

[SouthernDem2004]

215. She refused to comply. Force was warranted.

[Guaranteed]

228. But what level of force? Electrocution?

Or should they be only allowed to lay their hands on the suspect in order to get them out of the car, onto the ground, and handcuffed? Perhaps a club to the leg or two? While, of course, watching the suspect's hands for weapons.

Caution. Yes, caution is important. But jumping from "uncooperative" to "THREAT!" is a huge leap. You can't hurt someone that severely- and being Tased is severe, many people have been killed- for simply not doing what you tell them to do.

Ever seen "Gandhi"? Remember when he was burning those citizenship cards, and that English officer kept beating him, more and more severely, as he kept going back to the burning garbage can to throw in another card? He was disobeying that officer, very deliberately and repeatedly. But did he deserve to get his wrist broken with the baton, or hit in the head and knocked out?

[SouthernDem2004]

256. Reply:

You can not strike someones legs while they are seated in a vehicle.

Her injuries were not severe. As a matter of fact there is no mention of any injuries.

What does India in the early 1900s have to do with anything?

[OrlandoGator]

20. Please watch the video before drawing conclusions.

The officer warned the woman at least ten times that he would tase her if she didn't exit the vehicle, and even then she refused to get off her cell phone. Also, he called for backup at the first sign that she was going to be difficult. And keep in mind that at the point where he tased her, he had learned that her license was suspended and he was trying to arrest her...so her refusals to comply were actually resisting arrest, not just innocently "sitting in her car."

Please put yourself in a police officer's shoes for a moment. At "routine" traffic stops, cops get shot at or run over all the time. It is probably the most vulnerable position a cop can be in. For a pulled-over driver to refuse over and over and over to comply with simple commands is just plain stupid.

[Guaranteed]

33. Being nonviolently uncooperative is not a good enough reason

to electrocute someone.

Nonviolent protesters do nearly exactly the same thing that this woman did. They refuse to move from where they are sitting. They have attitudes and often give some lip to officers.

Are officers correct in electrocuting them? Clearly, no. There are other ways to handle the situation.

[liberalnurse]

36. You cross up the issue here ....she's not a protester,

thats another story. You use the word electrocute like repugs use partial birth abortion. The suspect was not electrocuted nor do they use the procedure of partial birth abortion....they haven't in years. That too is another story.

[Guaranteed]

39. PBA? Now THAT'S crossing up the issue.

I don't see any similarities between the use of Tasers and abortion.

They electrocuted her. You saw her twitching, right? Besides, "tase" isn't a verb.

Seems like she was doing exactly the same thing as someone engaging in civil disobedience would be doing. Refusing to comply with a police officer's orders and having an attitude. Are you saying that she did something else that made electrocuting her appropriate? Or would electrocuting protestors also be appropriate?

Why couldn't they have just yanked her out of the car and put a knee in her back?

[liberalnurse]

41. See post #38......

for your answer....Additionally, you use the term electrocute as a "trigger" and inflammatory term just like the repugs do with PBA. Neither is acceptable or accurate.

[Guaranteed]

43. They electrocuted her. If that seems harsh to you,

that's because it is. Objectively, that's exactly what they did. TWICE. I know you'd like to push that to the back of people's minds, but that's what they did.

Your comparison to the PBA issue IS totally out-of-bounds, though.

Here you had a nonviolent, uncooperative woman sitting in an SUV. She wouldn't get out, so they used electricity on her. When our government officials do that to terrorists in Guantanamo, we call it torture.

So maybe we should have a slightly higher set of standards for such measures than "she's a jerk and she wouldn't move."

[liberalnurse]

44. It's not too harsh for me

it is INACURATE!

[soda]

473. At "routine" traffic stops, cops get shot at or run over all the time

yes and after watching this video i begin to understand why

[liberalnurse]

25. The Officer is in control

not the motorist in a highway pull over. It is a privilege to drive, not a right. We agree to abide by the rules of the road when we apply for a drivers license.

[NCMojo]

34. The reason I brought up the whole "funny" angle...

I am a member at another forum where they posted this same link -- http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=425042

A sampling of the comments there:

"Nice, made my day."

"that video was great."

"hahaha she was so milking that with her screaming."

"Are you sure they didn't taze a zoo animal? Can people make those sounds?"

"She was crying forever. dumb idiot. hahahaha they even warned her a couple times."

"At least they got her whining cries on tape. They can use them for a siren."

"Kind of wished they tazed her again to make her stop crying. I think that was more annoying than the actual mouthing off."


And so on. I could only make it through Page 3 before I felt sick to my stomach.

Just wanted to see if my reaction was out of the ordinary...

[Guaranteed]

35. Actually, civilians do have rights, whether they're in a car or not.

This woman was not being violent. As such, she had the RIGHT to not be electrocuted.

Oh, she was being uncooperative and nasty, alright. But they should have just dragged her out and handcuffed her, like they're supposed to. You don't electrocute someone for what she was doing.

[liberalnurse]

38. The suggested style of removing

the subject of the arrest is not safe nor is it reasonable and invite combativeness. Injury and deaths have occurred with that approach. She alone is held responsible for being Tased......she chose poorly.

[Guaranteed]

40. Her rights were violated.

That's excessive force. Yes, it's so much easier just to cook her, but in my opinion the police should just go ahead and do their jobs.

The 8th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution:

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

Electrocuting a nonviolent, uncooperative perp? That's cruel, and unnecessary. You can't trump a U.S. citizen's rights with "what if's" and "maybe's."

[liberalnurse]

42. May I suggest you go and work

or observe law enforcement from the ground level for at least a month or so.......Maybe try working at a jail in a large city....you will be essentially safer there as an observer than riding in a cruiser. It would be great if you actually had a responsible position wherein your life was on the line when confronting the combative suspects. I'd like to see you "process their issues". You obviously lack insight and I encourage you to see both sides.

[Guaranteed]

45. May I suggest you engage in some kind of nonviolent civil disobedience

for a day or two. Maybe you should bone up on the Constitution, too. You know, get familiar with what it means to live in AMERICA, and to have your health and freedom protected by the due process of our justice system.

[liberalnurse]

46. I have indeed protested my share issues...

and plan to continue. Additionally, I have insight to both sides of this general discussion and support Law Enforcement 100%. I know their sacrifice and find the Taser a blessing.

[Guaranteed]

48. Our rights as U.S. citizens trump officers' convenience.

If it is too much for an officer to carry out their jobs correctly and justly, they're a danger to the public and should either quit or be fired. It's tougher to do it that way, but that's the price of living in a free and just society.

[liberalnurse]

50. They are indeed carrying out their job

SAFELY for the Officer and the suspect. I realize you have no real, on-hands experience in accomplish such a task, thus I encourage you to become informed.

No matter how loudly the opponents protest the Taser...it is here to stay. It is too valuable. The arguement of deaths involing the coincidence of Taser use are rare in comparison to the injuries and deaths without them. There is a reported 80% decrease in Officer injury. I suspect that it is even higher for the innocent lives saved by a Taser intervention.

[Kingshakabobo]

54. Also,

How much danger did this woman pose to the police when she was tasered the second time while on the ground?

What ever happened to the police physically grabbing the perpetrators hands and pulling them behind their back?

Perhaps they should have tasered her until she placed the cuffs on her self?

Before you answer, keep in mind that they are the professionals and she is, no matter what you think of her, a hysterical civilian.

[liberalnurse]

Maybe it was for "good measure"

"We showed that Bitch didn't we"?:sarcasm:

[Guaranteed]

68. Speaking of hands-on experience, have you had the pleasure

of being electrocuted yourself? 50,000 volts' worth? I imagine that it's not very fun. Especially in those "rare" situations where the person being tased actually dies.

But, hey, they deserved it, right? They didn't move when they were told to.

As far as the 80% decrease in officers being injured (I'm assuming they're including minor abrasions and bruises), if you could provide some evidence of that spectacular statistic, that would be great. In any case, the numbers on police brutality are skyrocketing with these kinds of occurrences, that's for sure (but, hey we're glad the guy who needlessly electrocuted the nonviolent woman didn't get hurt, right?).

The Taser is an indispensable weapon against violent, armed and sometimes unarmed offenders. But your cavalier attitude when it comes to when it should be used is what is giving the Taser a bad name. It is a dangerous weapon, and there should be higher standards for officers as to when it should be used against someone. Higher than the offender just being uncooperative, at the very least. Much higher.

Police have been using Tasers on kids, the elderly, and the disabled. People who clearly are no threat to them physically when unarmed. That fact alone should be enough to at least bother you a tiny little bit.

The Taser isn't there for the officer's convenience. It's not a magic wand or a catch-all penicillin. Such a weapon is there to protect police from REAL threats (not imagined ones) wherein the use of their gun would be an overreaction to a violent offender. Unarmed, large offenders, or offenders armed with comparatively not-so-dangerous weapons (a candlestick, or a chain, for example). That's when a Taser should be used.

The suspect has a knife? You use a gun.

A little kid throwing a tantrum and thrashing around? You grab hold of them and hold them down, maybe handcuff them.

A unarmed drunk guy big enough to overtake you, even if you're using your baton, acting violent toward you? You Taser him. If you had four or five officers there to bring him down, maybe you wouldn't even have to do that.

With all of your "experience" in the area of law enforcement, I have to lay out what justice and reasonable force are for you. That's too bad.

[liberalnurse]

80. If I am ever stopped by the police....

they would have no need to Tase me....I would comply. I would argue my case if need be in the court room.

[Guaranteed]

83. Did you comply with their requests when you were engaging in nonviolent

civil disobedience? Or have you actually engaged in it?

Your point is moot, in any case. Her nonviolent noncompliance does not call for the use of a Taser. That's excessive (VERY excessive) force. I suppose you'd give the same response if they had shot her? She just should have complied?

[liberalnurse]

87. Yes I did comply.......

Additionally, you fictionalize the current event........which is also a moot issue as your "what if's" have no weight in the discussion.

All suspects are ordered to comply.

[Guaranteed]

91. Well then that was hardly civil disobedience.

The idea is to not follow the police's orders- nonviolently, nonthreateningly. And in such a situation the use of a Taser is totally inappropriate.

[blurp]

136. Right. The process is there to sort things out. Use it.

Most of these conflicts could be avoided if people just followed the process.

If you disagree with the officer, then just go to court and sort it out.

Of course, I saw the first video of her speeding by in the SUV. She was in the wrong from the start.

[lumpy]

104. Oh sure the taser is

a great weapon and it will be here to stay. When will it fall into the hands of the criminal contingent? They'll just love it; it might save them from the death penalty.

[Kingshakabobo]

51. Would you be OK with the police tasing.........

protesters who step over a barricade line at a protest or march without a permit?

I would assume it would be easier to cuff someone when they are disabled on the ground. No?

[liberalnurse]

55. If the protester displays

threatening behavior or ignores orders issued by an Officer, I suspect Tasing may be an option. Non-aggressive containment of a crowd can be accomplished without the need of Tasing. Only if the situation escalates...it can be infectious and riots can occur.

If they are already cuffed, no....absolutely not. If they intentionally spit...well maybe.

[Kingshakabobo]

59. You advocate tasing cuffed prisoners who spit? n/t

[liberalnurse]

66. Yes.

Bloodborne pathogens....nasty, deadly!

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[liberalnurse]

84. You know better that to post that way....

If you can't discuss the issue like an adult.....call the opponent a name. Whooooo you sure do boost your credibility and advocacy.

You are such disappointment these days.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

93. Interesting choice of words "opponent." Do you see a lot of people

in this light?

[OrlandoGator]

101. People with opposing views in a debate are opponents.

n/t

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

135. True. But this is a discussion board. Not a debate club.

[OrlandoGator]

139. Thanks for telling me where I am.

I often get disoriented. That's what friends are for.

Far be it from me to assume that people are allowed to disagree here.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

72. "orders"?

was she under arrest?

[OrlandoGator]

102. Yes, she was driving with a suspended license. He was arresting her.

n/t

[SlavesandBulldozers]

273. missed that part.

thanks

[fortyfeetunder]

107. Speaking of civil disobedience

I guess with the justifications for the law enforcement we've read about the tasering-- wonder what's the thought from them on the water hoses and biting German Shepherds --as justifiable defense techniques used by law enforcement to the civil rights movement in the 60's....

[OrlandoGator]

110. There's a subtle difference...

...between a peaceful, lawful demonstration and willful breaking of the law (driving with suspended license) and subsequent repeated disobedience to a police officer's arrest commands.

[fortyfeetunder]

199. Not necessarily so.

Because what was construed by the civil rights movement looking back as peaceful, and lawful --- was also construed by the law enforcement as repeated disobedience to arrest commands.

[OrlandoGator]

243. So you think that driving with a suspended license is a gray area?

That "civil disobedience" applies here?

[lumpy]

Burn out can be a bad thing.

ok

[lumpy]

99. Definately excessive force was used.

Some people would just as soon forget about the Constitution. It really doesn't matter in this case what the woman's driving record amounted to. So she was lippy, uncooperative, verbally combative. Did she pose a threat to the officer's life or anyone elses? Excessive force,yes, since it has been proved that tasers are life threatening. Pepper spray has not been proved to be life threatening as well as bruised arms.

[OrlandoGator]

100. Tell us how the officer could have removed her more safely.

She created the threat to herself by refusing the officer's commands. The officer acted within his rights to remove the woman from the vehicle in the safest manner possible to himself and to her.

[lumpy]

116. Surely it was safer for the officer

to use a taser but not for the offender in view of the fact that deaths have resulted from the use of tasers. Police officers are bound to use good judgement in arrests. The offender was guilty of not using good judgement in not obeying the officer's orders. The officer did not use good judgement in using a potentially dangerous weapon on an offender who from all indications was not a danger to the officer. Tasers are more deadly than a baton or pepper spray or, in most cases, physical force.

[OrlandoGator]

131. How can you tell a driver in a car is not a danger to you?

There are at least 20 places in the driver area of an automobile to conceal a weapon. Any cop will tell you that the most dangerous part of their job is traffic stops.

Face it, 15 years ago, this situation would have probably involved the officer drawing his firearm. The Taser may have saved this woman's life.

[Guaranteed]

306. If it's impossible to tell, it sounds as if you're arguing that they

should all be shot.

[OrlandoGator]

312. No, but they should all be treated as if they could become violent.

Until the officer has established total control of the situation.

[Guaranteed]

324. YES. On THAT we are agreed.

However, to me that doesn't mean tasing them.

That means being ready in the case that they DO become violent, and in the meantime doing what needs to be done to gain compliance (and only that much).

[SouthernDem2004]

144. Well so far no court has agreed with you so its not UnConstitutional.

[alarimer]

450. They're just preparing us for the police state

"You must comply NOW". As far am I am concerned we have been in a police state for many years. Cops abuse people like this all the time and get away with it. I am afraid of cops. I have no reason to other than the abuses that have been reported. I have not met an actual cop that wasn't a muscle-brained idiot.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

69. i agree

why was she asked to step out of the car?

[liberalnurse]

77. Step one to arrest her.....

Driving with a suspended liscense.....Off to jail they go.....

[SlavesandBulldozers]

275. gotcha thanks

i always thought that tasers were supposed to be used in situations where there was a perceived threat to an officer. in the days before tasers how would this be handled? two to the chest?

[Sparkle]

86. The cop said her license was suspended.

I'm not a cop but if I was, I would have approached the vehicle and kindly asked her to step out of the car I am going to arrest you because your license is suspended. I wouldn't have done it the way he did but that's the way it happen. I'm on the side of the cop, he didn't seem to be acting like an asshole (as most of them normally do). And the woman did not obey orders, if some cop tells me to step out of the car, I would do it. She continued to tell whoever what was happening as if he would drive over and stop the police. If you have a suspended drivers license, then don't speed or draw attention to your vehicle.

And it is kind of funny all of that fake wailing she was doing. It sounded like it was coming from a porno movie. :-)

[liberalnurse]

88. Yes, he did ask nicely.....followed by warnings.

There are several different video segments to senerio.....I just discovered that today.......

[OrlandoGator]

103. He offered her too many warnings.

After the third or fourth non-compliance in an arrest situation, such force is completely warranted.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

277. ive never been shocked by a taser

so i don't know if it was fake. i would probably be on the ground wailing too.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

280. i didn't find it funny, even if it was fake.

i think the whole situation was shitty. i don't see how the cop felt threatened. i did see how he warned her about being tased if she didnt step out of the car, but I always thought tasers were for situations where there was a threat.

[bpilgrim]

47. TASERS ARCHIVE - the MISUSE of this sometimes LETHAL WEAPON is SICK

link to headlines...
http://www.infowars.com/subject_archives/ps/tasers_archive.htm

Taser Death in Lake City

Officer Quits Over Use Of Taser on Suspect

March 10, 2005 Man Tasered In Hospital Bed, Forced To Give Urine Sample

Officer Shoots Student With Taser Gun

Taser International Propaganda: Zogby Poll Shows Three-in-Four Americans Support Use of TASER(TM) Devices

Cop accidentally stuns fellow officer with Taser

Sanford man dies when tasered by police

Mother whose teenage son was shocked 16 times by police plans to sue

Police defend use of Taser on girl, 13

Police use Taser on man at eatery

Police say using Taser on cat appropriate

Five Officers Face Disciplinary Charges In Stun Gun Case

Taser moratorium sought in Texas

Man with heart ailment dies after being shocked with Taser

County cops address Taser threat

Police fear civilian taser popularity

Tased and confused: Lifesaver, lethal weapon, aid for crowd control, tool of torture?

Ohio county halts Taser use after death

Taser gun safety is questioned as 85 die

Man begs police not to use stun gun on him during raid

Police Taser and Target the Disabled

Taser announces $675K in stun gun orders

Man Dies After Being Shot With Taser

Man who died after Taser stun was facing trial

Suspect hit by Taser on 9 occasions; 41-year-old died 4 hours after his arrest at art museum

Are Tasers too risky for police officers to use?

Taser to Increase Stun Gun's Power: NY Times

Four teens Tasered in scuffle with Miami-area cops

Is the Taser a safer alternative for a police firearm, or is it a ethal weapon?

Naked Jogger Tasered, Arrested By Arkansas Police

Heart expert warns about using Tasers

Fans Zapped by Tasers at Football Game

Eugene police set aside plans for Tasers

Pacifica Taser Gun Death Under Investigation

Jarring death rate fuels flap over police, Tasers

Jarring death rate fuels flap over police, Tasers

Teen dies after being shot with Taser gun by Collier County Deputies

Officer's injury tied to Taser

Taser, Inc. Gets Research Contract From DoD

Miami Police Use Taser To Subdue Wheelchair-Bound Man

Fla. Officer Uses Stun Gun on 12- Year-Old

Tempe OKs Taser guns for 9 schools

Man Dies After Police Use Taser Gun On Him

Cameras Roll As Police Use Taser Gun To Subdue Suspect

Maker Defends Taser, Stun-Gun in the Sights of Scandal

Homeland Security nominee Kerik sat on board of stun-gun maker

5 of 7 hit with Tasers were not violent

Dead Inmate was Tasered twice

Police are too Quick to Grab for Taser's Power, Say Critics

Warning on Police Use of Stun Guns After 74 Die

Taser on children OK, police say

School Official Asks Police to Stop Tasers

Cops Taser 14-Year-Old Who Wouldn't Drop Game Boy

Police review policy after Tasers used on kids

Police used Taser gun to subdue 6-year-old student wielding piece of glass

Police State Targets, Tasers, Arrests and Jails Elementary School Children

FAA OKs Tasers on Commercial Flights

November 05, 2004] Man Dies After Police Use Stun Gun on Him

Police defend current weapons

Police Accused Of Firing Taser At Pregnant Bride

ShockRounds(TM) and Electric Shock Weapons in Law Enforcement

Pentagon Looks to Directed-Energy Weapons

Officer's Taser is used on girl, 9

Man Accuses Police of Brutality with Tasers

The Pentagon's Secret Scream

read the stories here...
http://www.infowars.com/subject_archives/ps/tasers_archive.htm

psst... pass the word

peace

[liberalnurse]

52. So what?????

Deaths and injury occurred long before Tasers.The rates are significantly lowered as a direct result of Taser intervention.

[Kingshakabobo]

56. So what?

Tell me prison nurse. How ever did we get urine samples out of uncooperative subjects before we legalized the use of the cattle prod errr I mean taser?

[liberalnurse]

58. Are you volunteering for me to

demonstrate?

[Kingshakabobo]

60. No. I think you can simply explain it to us

since you take the moral high ground with the attitude of "I've been there and you haven't".

[liberalnurse]

71. I think I am familiar with the event you speak of.....

I will address that:

I would of applied an external catheter,(it resembles a condom with a collection tube and bag attached),push fluids if he had an IV and eventually he would pee.

Then we would have a specimen.
:smoke:

[Kingshakabobo]

73. You forgot the taser!! n/t

[liberalnurse]

82. I would do it the way I explained.

I wasn't there......so it went differently.

[liberalnurse]

179. Oh, I'm not a prison nurse.....

I have a bigger, better position as a Nurse Supervisor which interfaces with our Law Enforcement Community 24/7.

[bpilgrim]

61. the OFFICERS need HELP, obviously

that's what.

peace

[SlavesandBulldozers]

74. "Taser intervention"

what are you a taser salesman?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

53. THIS FUCKING OFFICER BETTER BE FIRED!!!!

[OrlandoGator]

105. For what? Doing his job?

Sign up for your local police department's ridealong program some time so you can fully comprehend the level of danger to an officer during a traffic stop.

The officer was arresting the woman, and she refused to comply with his commands. He used the level of force necessary to remove her from the car and take her into custody. The use of the Taser might have saved her life...a similar situation ten years ago may have resulted in the use of the officer's firearm.

[ConfuZed]

329. Yes I expect him to be fired just like a black cop was fired for doing...

almost the same thing to a non compliant white woman.

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/11616134.htm

[Bouncy Ball]

360. Don't count on it! LOL!

Hey tasering people instead of dealing with them the old-fashioned way is cool! Don't want to mess with a nonviolent uncooperative person? Just hit 'em with 50,000 volts, man! TWICE!

:sarcasm:

[Walt Starr]

475. Yeah, bring back the "old fashioned" way of dealing with those who resist

arrest.

Bust their heads with nightsticks, or better yet, shoot them!

:eyes:

That was the "old fashioned way".

[MS68]

57. When is it okay to taser?

As they're reaching for their gun? Maybe while they're reaching in and dragging her out of her car? Maybe he could grab the taser with his third hand while he's dragging her resistant body out of her car, and cross his fingers with his fourth one to hope that she doesn't have a gun hidden somewhere that she could reach for.

There are some cops out there that let the power go to their head and are abusive, but as far as I'm concerned, when an officer tells you to do something, you do it. If you don't agree with their treatment of you, you file a complaint later.

These people do have jobs in which they have to be constantly vigilant about their own safety. They're out there putting their lives on the line and you can take a look at their crappy salary to see how much society appreciates it.

[liberalnurse]

63. Excellent insight......

Thank you for sharing. One thing I've notice on such threads are people such as you and myself offer a retrospective opinion looking at both sides. There are some who have a narrow scope agenda that won't seek progressive balance despite evidence to the contrary.

If any Law Enforcement Officers or colleagues of such are here today....May I say THANK YOU for your commendable display of courage while you are protecting all of us.....each and every day.

[bpilgrim]

64. when a subject is VIOLENT.

http://www.infowars.com/subject_archives/ps/tasers_archive.htm

TASERS ARCHIVE

Taser Death in Lake City

Officer Quits Over Use Of Taser on Suspect

March 10, 2005 Man Tasered In Hospital Bed, Forced To Give Urine Sample

Officer Shoots Student With Taser Gun

Taser International Propaganda: Zogby Poll Shows Three-in-Four Americans Support Use of TASER(TM) Devices

Cop accidentally stuns fellow officer with Taser

Sanford man dies when tasered by police

Mother whose teenage son was shocked 16 times by police plans to sue

Police defend use of Taser on girl, 13

Police use Taser on man at eatery

Police say using Taser on cat appropriate

Five Officers Face Disciplinary Charges In Stun Gun Case

Taser moratorium sought in Texas

Man with heart ailment dies after being shocked with Taser

County cops address Taser threat

Police fear civilian taser popularity

Tased and confused: Lifesaver, lethal weapon, aid for crowd control, tool of torture?

Ohio county halts Taser use after death

Taser gun safety is questioned as 85 die

Man begs police not to use stun gun on him during raid

Police Taser and Target the Disabled

Taser announces $675K in stun gun orders

Man Dies After Being Shot With Taser

Man who died after Taser stun was facing trial

Suspect hit by Taser on 9 occasions; 41-year-old died 4 hours after his arrest at art museum

Are Tasers too risky for police officers to use?

Taser to Increase Stun Gun's Power: NY Times

Four teens Tasered in scuffle with Miami-area cops

Is the Taser a safer alternative for a police firearm, or is it a ethal weapon?

Naked Jogger Tasered, Arrested By Arkansas Police

Heart expert warns about using Tasers

Fans Zapped by Tasers at Football Game

Eugene police set aside plans for Tasers

Pacifica Taser Gun Death Under Investigation

Jarring death rate fuels flap over police, Tasers

Jarring death rate fuels flap over police, Tasers

Teen dies after being shot with Taser gun by Collier County Deputies

Officer's injury tied to Taser

Taser, Inc. Gets Research Contract From DoD

Miami Police Use Taser To Subdue Wheelchair-Bound Man

Fla. Officer Uses Stun Gun on 12- Year-Old

Tempe OKs Taser guns for 9 schools

Man Dies After Police Use Taser Gun On Him

Cameras Roll As Police Use Taser Gun To Subdue Suspect

Maker Defends Taser, Stun-Gun in the Sights of Scandal

Homeland Security nominee Kerik sat on board of stun-gun maker

5 of 7 hit with Tasers were not violent

Dead Inmate was Tasered twice

Police are too Quick to Grab for Taser's Power, Say Critics

Warning on Police Use of Stun Guns After 74 Die

Taser on children OK, police say

School Official Asks Police to Stop Tasers

Cops Taser 14-Year-Old Who Wouldn't Drop Game Boy

Police review policy after Tasers used on kids

Police used Taser gun to subdue 6-year-old student wielding piece of glass

Police State Targets, Tasers, Arrests and Jails Elementary School Children

FAA OKs Tasers on Commercial Flights

November 05, 2004] Man Dies After Police Use Stun Gun on Him

Police defend current weapons

Police Accused Of Firing Taser At Pregnant Bride

ShockRounds(TM) and Electric Shock Weapons in Law Enforcement

Pentagon Looks to Directed-Energy Weapons

Officer's Taser is used on girl, 9

Man Accuses Police of Brutality with Tasers

The Pentagon's Secret Scream

peace

[SlavesandBulldozers]

67. gee they don't feel appreciated?

i wonder why the fuck that might be.

[Guaranteed]

78. Well, hell, if you're REALLY not sure if they're armed, just shoot 'em.

Actually, if you believe a suspect is armed with a gun, you draw your gun immediately. I'd forego the taser in that situation.

Of course, I'd probably act on the reality of the situation, too, instead of electrocuting people for imagined behaviors. All with due caution- while respecting the suspect's RIGHTS.

[MS68]

85. As far as I'm concerned, the suspect gave up her rights..

when she refused to obey the orders of a law enforcement officer. The examples above are definite examples of misuse of tasers. It sounds like they do need more training and clear guidelines of when to use them and consequences of misuse. I didn't watch the video, but it sounded to me like she was definitely uncooperative, maybe not violent. I guess he could have pulled his gun out and ordered her out of the car and then tasered her if she still didn't comply. But, with the proper training and usage, I think the use of tasers is probably better than the use of guns.

The way I look at it, I don't need to worry about being improperly tasered because I don't break the law, and when pulled over, I follow instructions. Demonstrations and the like are a different story, however...

[Guaranteed]

90. No, that's not the way the law works.

All suspects have rights. In fact, the 8th Amendment applies specifically to those who have been arrested.

The problem with your thinking is that you think an officer wouldn't cross the line with you. Who's to say that you'd have to break the law at all to get it from a cop? If you would allow an officer to Taser someone who's just being noncompliant, then why wouldn't others allow a cop to pepper spray you just for walking down the street?

Police need very strict rules governing their use of force.

[liberalnurse]

92. I agree, she did not hold up her

end of the agreement so to speak. She was in violation of the law by driving under suspension. She intentionally took the risk and got busted. She got Tased because she escalated the situation by refusing to get out of the car. She knew exactly that jail was the next step. Thats why she was on the phone calling her "friend".....

She was a viable threat to the Officer at that point.

[Guaranteed]

210. How was she a threat?

What was so threatening- not INCONVENIENT- about her that isn't the case in virtually every other arrest that is made wherein people do NOT get tased?

[OrlandoGator]

218. The threat was the number of unknowns in the situation.

- Weapons in the car? Unknown.
- History of violence? Unknown.
- Intent to injure or kill a police officer? Unknown.

[Guaranteed]

221. You don't know the intent or history for any other arrest.

And anybody could have a knife hidden cleverly somewhere on them while you're arresting them. Yet there are tried and true procedures for all of these threats.

BTW I shouldn't call them threats- they're possibilities.

It seems as if the Taser is just being used as a substitute for cautious and thorough police work. And, again, the suspect's rights are being violated.

[liberalnurse]

232. Her failure to comply to multiple orders

to exit the vehicle escalated the threat to the Officer. She was defiant to the commands which presented the Officer with the understanding that she may become hostile.

[Guaranteed]

239. Again, "uncooperative" does not equal "threat."

While there may be a correlation between the two, one needs to use caution in proceeding in a situation like that instead of acting on a threat that IN FACT has NOT been presented.

There was NO THREAT presented to those officers. Treating her as if she had threatened the officers is, therefore, unjust.

[OrlandoGator]

240. And she threw a punch at him.

Watch how he suddenly jumps back and draws the Taser. He initially had no intention of using it, but some physical action by the driver in the car escalated the situation.

[Guaranteed]

244. I heard the officers say that, but I didn't see her throw a punch. nt

[OrlandoGator]

246. He grabs her arm, then jumps back and draws the Taser.

Something happened that led him to believe there was a physical threat.

[lostnfound]

445. Tased just 30 seconds after his FIRST request to get out of the car.

During the traffic stop' portion you can understand why he was getting annoyed, as she was asking for his badge # and was claiming she hadn't been speeding.

BUt he told her then to stay in the car.

After 40 seconds of unrecorded talking on the radio, the arrest video begins, showing the policeman approaching her car and start telling her to get out. she says she's on the phone

7:54:54
"put your cigarette out and step out of the vehicle. (FIRST REQUEST)
7:54:57
"put your phone down"
7:54:59
"no I'm CALLING somebody"
7:55:01
"I'm going to tell you one more time, put your phone down"
7:55:04
"(mom/marge/mark?), the police has pulled me over, and he's telling me he's going to arrest me"
7:55:07
"he's arresting me!"
7:55:09
"stop! don't touch me! the police are..."
Are you gonna shoot me?!?!
7:55:13 He's got a gun and he's going to shoot me!
7:55:15
"get out of the car now or I'm going to tase you!"
7:55:17
"get out of the car now or I'm going to tase you!"
7:55:20
"You're going to tase me?!"
7:55:21
"I'm going to tell you one more time
7:55:24
"get out of the car now or I'm going to tase you!"
7:55:27
Scream...

[OrlandoGator]

448. 30 seconds is an eternity during a traffic stop.

Considering that it takes less than one second to draw a concealed weapon.

[lostnfound]

459. Then there's no room in this ugly world for slow thinkers like me.

There are days --particularly as a new mother -- that I could not answer a simple question about my name or what I had for breakfast in 30 seconds or less. Days when my brain stops as surely as a short circuit, where it takes TIME to process a thought or remember what I was thinking. If a room was on fire, I might find myself wondering where I left the keys or if I need to pack anything before I leave.

Given her young age, and the media stories about white officers beating up blacks, she may have been too afraid to think straight.

[Bouncy Ball]

365. So.

Considering this quote of yours:

"There are some cops out there that let the power go to their head and are abusive, but as far as I'm concerned, when an officer tells you to do something, you do it. If you don't agree with their treatment of you, you file a complaint later."

Police officer pulls you over late at night. Not very well-traveled road. Tells you to get out. He's in an unmarked car. Do you get out? Then he decides he's going to sodomize you with his nightstick.

You better do what he says or he'll taser you, right? File a complaint later? Of course, what's your other option, right?

[OrlandoGator]

96. Bottom Line: The use of the Taser might have saved this woman's life.

Before the advent of "less lethal" weapons for use by law enforcement, resistance to arrest and sudden moves by a driver would likely lead to the use of the officer's firearm.

Due diligence must always be given before the decision is made to use a Taser. The police officer in the video removed the subject from the vehicle in the safest possible way...to himself and the driver.

[lumpy]

121. "an excersize of power" per poster's statement.

Tasers could be the first line of offense in th making of a police state.

[MojoXN]

123. Listen to her scream...

And then tell me that this was a "justified use of force". Any cop worth his salt should not have hesitated to physically remove her from the vehicle BEFORE subjecting her to severe electrical shock, which has killed hundreds, if not thousands. Either that police department needs to change its use of force guidelines, or that cop is a fuxking pussy, or both. Come on, what real threat does an unarmed 22 year old woman present? It's unfair to judge the situation without having seen the video. I agree that she should have just shut her mouth and complied, but I think that the cop's response went WAY too far.

MojoXN

[OrlandoGator]

127. The fallacies in your post:

1) The use of Tasers by police has resulted in very few isolated deaths. The weapon is not regarded as "non-lethal" and the guidelines for using it are similar to those for using a firearm. I'm not sure if the "hundreds if not thousands" figure is referring to police Tasers or just electric shock in general. You should clarify.

2) There was no way for the officer to know the woman was unarmed.

3) There is no safe way to "physically remove" someone from a car without putting yourself in grave danger.

4) This was an arrest situation, not a mere traffic ticket. The woman was driving with a suspended license and the officer was arresting her. Her refusal to comply with the officer's commands equated to resisting arrest.

[MojoXN]

148. They were already in the process of physically taking her from the car...

They could have simply attempted to dontinue doing so. There is a large range of congenital heart and/or lung defects that will cause death if the sufferer is shocked with high voltage in general. Also, those under the influence of alcohol or other drugs are more susceptible to fatal complications. It is unfair to say that something is non-lethal if even one fatality is known of, let alone multiple. Though the amperage of a taser is low, about 175 mA, the voltage in police models is sometimes in excess of 75,000 V. When the juice is pulsed, especially in susceptible indiiduals, it can cause arrythmia or pulmonary spasms.

You are absolutely right that there was no way for him to be 100% certain that she was unarmed. And, you are correct that her actions did constitute resisting arrest. I can't argue with either of those points, much as I'd like to... Sigh. Still, the cop could have lightened the fuck up a lot. He gave her about ten seconds of explanation, and that's not right. Now, if he had explained himself for sixty or a hundred and twenty seconds, and BEEN POILTE ABOUT IT and she still hadn't complied, well, that's a different story.

MojoXN

[OrlandoGator]

154. What part of "Get out of the car or I will tase you" is hard to grasp?

n/t

[MojoXN]

168. Hypothetically speaking...

Although I agree that it's highly doubtful, it is possible that she didn't know what "tazed" meant. She should have just listened, but the fact that she didn't doesn't automatically justify the cop's actions. He could have showed more restraint. The problem with giving someone a weapon and telling them, "Hey! This thing won't hurt people, so feel free to use it!" is that they will do just that; use it, whether the situation calls for it or not. From the cops' standpoint, it becomes easier to just taze someone rather than dealing with them in a less violent manner. From what I've gathered, this isn't an isolated incident in that community by any means. It makes you think that perhaps that particular police department should change its standards regarding tasers.

MojoXN

[OrlandoGator]

192. The woman is heard saying "He's pointing a gun at me!"

If she didn't know that the police officer meant business, she is too stupid to drive. And considering that her license was suspended and she was pulled over for going 15 above the speed limit, perhaps that's the case.

You seem to think that the use of the Taser here was inappropriate because the woman was unarmed and not dangerous. Perhaps, but the point is that the police officer has know way of knowing that up front...they must assume all arrest subjects are armed and respond accordingly.

[liberalnurse]

202. Again....let me share this moment....

with......:rofl:

[Kingshakabobo]

128. She "COULD" have a bazooka under the seat.

Taser 'em all and let god sort 'em out.

:sarcasm:

[blurp]

134. You trivialize the danger.

The risk of having a driver with a gun is real.

Of course, you're not risking YOUR life, so feel free to talk sh1t.

[Kingshakabobo]

160. Sure, the risk was so imminent the officer let her

sit unattended in the vehicle for four minutes while he ran her license. If the officer was in fear for his safety he would have had her out of the car with her hands on the hood from the beginning so your straw-man argument doesn't cut it with me. Everyone MIGHT have a weapon in their car.

Don't get me wrong, I don't feel police need to act like WWF wrestlers and go to the mat with every perpetrator. I DO believe when police get involved in a skirmish it shouldn't be a fair fight. I feel they should have tools at their disposal to subdue violent perpetrators such as batons, mace and yes, tasers. As a matter of fact, I'm one one of the few people around here, I'm sure, that feels the LA police acted within their rights to use batons on Rodney King(save the flames for another thread regarding King please).

That being said, this officer didn't hesitate to use his taser because this woman had "an attitude". You can even hear the officer say she has an attitude on the tape. By the time he returned to the vehicle, the officer was clearly agitated from her "street lawyer" non-sense, lost his cool and took it out on her.

Even if you give the officer a pass on the first tasering, the second shot was way over the top. The woman was on the ground crying like a baby and in no way a threat to the officers. If they can't handle a 22 year old crying girl on the ground maybe they should find another line of work.

[liberalnurse]

214. Damn Good One there!

:bounce:

Now your talking....let him walk in your shoes for a hour!

A vision of one with yellow shoe strings come to mind.

[Guaranteed]

235. That's because you're exaggerating it

in trying to justify tasing anyone who doesn't get out of the car immediately at the officer's request. Most people who get pulled over are not going to have a gun in their car.

Being cautious is important, but you don't get to electrocute non-violent people in order to do it. That's not justice.

[OrlandoGator]

279. Police officers don't have time for statistical analysis.

"Most people" being unarmed means absolutely nothing. A cop must preserve his own safety by assuming the worst case scenario.

He is in control of the traffic stop, not the offender.

[Guaranteed]

300. Well, if you're saying that a cop has to assume that I'm going to try

to kill him whenever he pulls me over, and that because of that he's going to attempt to hurt me, then I'm going to have to defend myself, too.

I'm sure you'd do the same.

On the other hand, you could be saying that they need to be cautious. That's understandable, and correct. But tasing everyone that doesn't follow their orders- which wouldn't be me- violent or nonviolent, is an injustice. If cops are truly going to do what you're suggesting they do, they're going to have some serious trust issues with the public. The citizens they are protecting have rights, and deserve respect in their own right. Police need to remember that.

[OrlandoGator]

313. I'm not saying he should assume you're violent...

...just that he must treat you as if it is a possibility.

So what you should do is when you're pulled over turn down your radio, hang up your cell phone, put both hands on the top of your steering wheel, be polite and do whatever the officer tells you to do. And if he arrests you, let your lawyer sort it out.

[Guaranteed]

321. That wasn't what you said before.

You said he had to assume the worst. That was your justification for tasing everyone who is noncompliant and nonviolent.

If he isn't assuming the worst, or the next to worst, or whatever- if he's simply being CAUTIOUS- then he has absolutely NO RIGHT to electrocute somebody who is only being noncompliant. He CAN rough them up a bit- a BIT, enough to get compliance- but only that much, unless he is ACTUALLY threatened, in reality.

[OrlandoGator]

326. He can "rough them up a bit" but not tase them?

I've been tased before. I'd rather have that any day over a nightstick to a vital area or a shot of pepper spray.

[Guaranteed]

327. A nightstick to a vital area would be deadly force, correct?

That wouldn't be allowed.

You typically give them shots to the legs, right, to gain compliance?

That's much safer. Tasers have killed people (and been used against people that wouldn't have even needed a baton smack- kids, elderly, disabled, etc.) And pepper spray is much, much safer too.

[blurp]

132. The screaming was obviously fake.

Have you ever had kids?

This woman is acting.

[name not needed]

145. Right

and Rodney King got what he deserved

:eyes:

[blurp]

153. You're just the sort of sucker this woman is looking for

[Guaranteed]

208. She was just electrocuted twice.

50,000V. She was kind of "upset."

[OrlandoGator]

216. She was putting on an act.

A 50,000-volt Taser does not inflict the torturous level of pain that she was portraying.

[Guaranteed]

222. She wasn't portraying pain. She was hysterical.

She was basically going into shock.

[OrlandoGator]

224. Oh, so that's why the first words out of her mouth were "You racists!"

Sounds like hysteria to me.

[Guaranteed]

230. Yeah, it was. She was being victimized. nt

[OrlandoGator]

236. If he had used his pistol instead of his Taser...

...she might have become a victim indeed.

Don't want to get tased? Don't resist arrest when you break the law.

[Guaranteed]

242. Yes, he would have been even MORE wrong to do that.

I suppose that makes what he did in this case right, then?

[OrlandoGator]

245. In this situation, without the Taser he's pulling his pistol.

And to answer your question, yes. He did do the right thing in this case to bring the subject under control and arrest. A police officer in the field doesn't have the luxury of allowing a traffic stop to go down on the other person's terms.

[Guaranteed]

254. But he's also not pulling the trigger. nt

[OrlandoGator]

282. You don't pull a weapon without intent to use it.

You know little to nothing about police procedures. Please just stop pretending that you do.

[Guaranteed]

291. I know that if he had shot her he would have been in a shitload

of trouble.

Or am I wrong about that?

BTW, that's not just a police procedure. That's standard firearm philosophy. And I think you mean the will to use it if needbe, not the intent. If he had the intent he'd just fire.

[OrlandoGator]

295. She's in her car. He doesn't know if she's armed.

And she's refusing to get out of the car. Then, she makes some type of sudden move towards him.

She could very easily have come out of this situation dead on a stretcher, and odds are the officer would have been exonerated in the end.

Instead, she went through a few seconds of paralysis and pain. What option would you choose?

Oh, that's right...cops should draw their pistols but never actually use them.

[Guaranteed]

302. I'm sorry, but I truly believe that police shouldn't be shooting unarmed

civilians.

Don't think you'll budge me on that one.

[OrlandoGator]

317. So just tell me how he knows she's unarmed?

Since she refuses to get out of the car and be searched, how (short of clairvoyance) can the officer possibly know if the subject is unarmed?

[Guaranteed]

325. He doesn't. He has to be ready at all times.

However, the standard here isn't that he has to know that she is UNarmed in order to NOT shoot her.

You KNOW this: He has to know (or reasonably believe, my guess would be as to what the courts would say) that she IS armed in order to SHOOT her.

[liberalnurse]

371. Exactly...very low amps....

Watch this bull......itr's a good example of the limitations of the Taser. She was a pissed off drama queen.

http://www.big-boys.com/articles/bulltaser.html


This makes me laugh.....I love it.

[Guaranteed]

374. Presumably, it's supposed to incapacitate the suspect.

That takes some power, some discomfort, and some serious danger. We're talking electricity.

[sir_captain]

441. Dude, you need to study up

I don't even really disagree with you. I don't think that the taser was particularly needed in this case, even if the woman was obviously an ass.

But before you continue to throw around hysterical lines about 50,000 volts and serious danger from electricity and so on, you ought to learn about some basic tenets of physics and of physiology. Or at least man up to the fact that you've been throwing stuff around without knowing what it means.

[Guaranteed]

451. You must have missed all of the LBN threads about people being

killed by Tasers.

Did you watch the video and see her flopping around like a fish? Don't try to downplay the damage that a Taser can do to someone. It has KILLED people.

[sir_captain]

463. You still don't get it, do you?

I'm not defending tasers--I don't think its use was warranted here.

What I am suggesting you stop doing is throwing around hysterical terms that are *incorrect*

Let me repeat slowly for you so you understand. Voltage is *not* dangerous. Electricity moving through one's body is *not* inherently dangerous. 50,000 Volts is *not* necessarily dangerous. You have something like a *million* volts going through you when you touch a science museum globe that makes your hair stand on end. I mean, without looking it up, do you even know what voltage is? I doubt it.

What is dangerous is the amount of *current* being generated--the amperage. A 120V AC outlet is *far* more dangerous than a taser because it has vastly more current running through it.

All I'm saying is that it would improve your arguments, and not make all of us liberals look like morons, if you took the time to have some extremely basic knowledge about what you're talking about.

[Guaranteed]

467. I know the fucking difference between voltage and amperage.

I've studied plenty of physics. And, WITHOUT LOOKING IT UP, voltage is the charge gradient between two points.

In ANY case, Tasers can be deadly. Period.

[sir_captain]

471. So if you know the difference

then why did you keep parroting that idiocy about 50,000 volts = electrocution?

I have no argument with you otherwise.

[sir_captain]

225. Voltage is not dangerous

You've got way more than 50,000 volts going through you when you touch one of those science museum globes that makes your hair stand up. Amperage (current) is what's dangerous. The 50,000 volt figure sounds scary, but is essentially meaningless.

[liberalnurse]

260. Exactly...very low amps....

It just gives them a brief "Charlie Horse".......or cramp.....a body cramp but one in the same.

[liberalnurse]

249. Your on fire!

:woohoo:

[bpilgrim]

156. it is truly FRIGHTENING how easily these sometimes LETHAL weapons are use

nowadays.

i think they should ONLY be used on VIOLENT offenders.

but i think it is to late to ever go back considering the virtual police state now being constructed.

hopefully the more press these incidents get the more folks will speak out against them.

peace

[OrlandoGator]

157. Come off it. The use of the Taser here is not the dawn of Orwell's 1984.

To a police officer, an arrest subject who refuses to comply with commands IS assumed to be a violent offender.

[bpilgrim]

237. "IS assumed to be a violent offender" - welcome to the police state

thanks for HIGHLIGHTING my point :toast:

peace

[OrlandoGator]

248. Welcome to having no idea what it's like to be a police officer.

Wait, you seem to have been there all your life.

[ConfuZed]

310. I don't know what its like being president but it still doesnt stop me...

from being critical of the president.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

400. the poor misunderstood police officers

they have no choice to be police officers, it's forced upon them.

[OrlandoGator]

421. You should thank God every day that people choose to be police officers.

Because for every asshole cop who abuses his authority (the one in the Taser video is not one of them), there are fifty good cops who do what they do to make their communities safer.

Your condescension isn't welcome.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

484. my point was that it's a risk they willfully accept when they take the job

it comes with the job right? so suck it up or FUCKING QUIT!!!!!

and if that sounds like condescension perhaps it is. thank God im not in tazer range because we know what happens when a cop gets a bruised ego. aahahhaa! see its what we non-cops call a joke!bzzzztzzztztztz--AAAAAAAH!!!!-bzztztzzztzt zzttztztzztzzt

[MojoXN]

158. Check out the other cases...

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/news/special_reports/tasers/

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2005/05/29/a17a_taser_vig2_0529.html

Excerpt: Josh Welch is no teen angel.

A high school dropout with a few petty crimes under his belt at 16, he smokes cigarettes and talks tough. But his biggest problem on Dec. 9 was that his father had just tried to kill himself. Blood streamed from gashes on his dad's wrists. He needed help.

<snip>

They handcuffed him and sat him down in the driveway to talk. Leslie Welch seemed to be in a daze, his son says, and his blood was dripping onto the driveway.

But there was no ambulance, no paramedics.

"They were just talking to him. The ambulance wasn't here. So I called 911 again," he said. "I asked for cops who could do their job." In a sheriff's report, the deputy wrote that Josh "came at me with a lit cigarette in a threatening manner." Josh, who is working toward his GED, admits he mouthed off at deputies. He said he did walk onto his front porch with a cigarette but didn't threaten anyone.

From just a few feet away, a deputy fired two Taser probes into his chest, "right over his heart, no less," his father says. Josh remembers the pain and how his body "just wobbled around and stuff" on his front patio.

Josh said the deputies arrested him for resisting arrest and possession of paraphernalia, though neither appears on his state criminal record. Josh said he had drug paraphernalia in his pocket that he picked up from the driveway.

<end>


http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2005/05/29/a17a_taser_vig3_0529.html

As the music thumped at Club Prestige one night in September, a man stepped from the crowd and asked the bartender for a cup of water.

It'll cost $2, she told him. Irked by the charge, he flung the water in her face

I made the fateful mistake of going outside to get the police," she said.

Palm Beach County sheriff's deputies, who were working off-duty security details at the Lantana-area club, which is now closed, told the man who threw the water to leave. The bartender and her fianc got irate. How can you let him go, they yelled. The deputies repeatedly told the bartender to calm down and lower her voice. She didn't. Standing outside the club, she continued yelling at them.

One standing several feet away hit her with his Taser. One prong lodged in her left breast. The other went into her abdomen. She fell to the sidewalk, flailing. "I thought he had shot me with a gun. I actually looked down to see if there was blood," she said, calling the pain indescribable.


STILL THINK THAT THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERRIFF'S DEPARTMENT HAS ACCEPTABLE TASER POLICIES???

And remember, these are just three incidents. How many more are there, just in that one county?

MojoXN

[MojoXN]

161. And the coup de grace...

From yesterday: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2005/06/03/s1a_tasers_0603.html


Police explore Taser policy

<snip>
The call for a unified policy came four days after The Palm Beach Post published a report reviewing more than 1,000 Taser incidents in Palm Beach County and the Treasure Coast between late 2001, when Boca Raton police officers became the first to add Tasers to their arsenal, and last December, when 19 agencies carried them. The Post investigation showed:

• Six people 65 or older, including an 86-year-old man, and at least 35 people 16 and under, including a 100-pound, 14-year-old boy, were shocked.

• Eighty-seven women of child-bearing years were shocked, including three women who, after being shocked, said they were pregnant.

• One out of every four suspects shocked was unarmed, nonviolent and not posing an apparent immediate threat.

• Departments varied widely in how they recorded and tracked Taser use, some requiring little or no explanation for why officers fired the weapon


So that sheds some light on the situation in S. Florida, I should think...

MojoXN

[OrlandoGator]

167. Your "unarmed and nonviolent" statistic is misleading.

A police officer has no way of knowing if a subject is unarmed until they search them. And they don't have the option of waiting for a subject to get violent in order to know whether or not they are nonviolent.

If a police officer is arresting you and you refuse to comply with his commands, you should expect that officer to use physical force to subdue you. Sorry if that is unpleasant to you, but I've seen about 50 or so videos of police officers being shot at and run over during "routine" traffic stops.

Cops simply don't have the clairvoyance needed to know if someone is going to try to kill them simply by looking at them. They are given the authority to act in whatever way they feel is necessary to maintain control of the situation.

[OrlandoGator]

162. These cases have nothing to do with the one in the video.

They should be investigated fully and it should be determined whether or not the use of the Tasers was warranted.

On the other hand, in the video of the traffic stop, it is completely clear that the officer in question acted appropriately to arrest the subject in a way that put himself and her in the least amount of physical danger.

Without the Taser, he would have probably used his gun. And when she took the swing at the backup officer, she may have been shot.

[liberalnurse]

165. So, whats your point?

Josh was threatening and was stopped in his tracks.....They have medics at the jail to sooth his wounds.

Oh this is typical....

Josh said he had drug paraphernalia in his pocket that he picked up from the driveway.



Yea right......sure ya did ......

:nopity:

[MojoXN]

174. I agree, that kid was pretty stupid to start mouthng off to cops...

with drugs in his pocket. But as you'll notice, he was arrested for resisting arrest, and possession of paraphernelia. Nothing about assault, battery, or disturbing the peace. The cop tased him for being a smartass, searched him, found his contraband, and arrested him. Meanwhile, the kid's dad is bleeding from a flesh wound. The kid's distraughht, why the hell would it have been so hard for the cops to talk to him and calm him down. If he keeps yelling, so what? I know I'd be pretty hyper if someone I cared about was hurt badly. now, if the kid takes a swing on one of the cops, well, that's different. but the fact remains, he didn't. This bullshit about, "Holding a cigarette in a threatening manner" is hilarious. The kid's at his own house; if he wants a weapon, he'll know where to get something a little more lethal than a cigarette. Based on the information that I've seen, which is admittedly incomplete, the cops were wrong to tase the kid.

MojoXN

[bpilgrim]

241. many more here... --------- ---------- ------------- -------> LINK

headlines linked here...
http://www.infowars.com/subject_archives/ps/tasers_archive.htm

TASERS ARCHIVE

Taser Death in Lake City

Officer Quits Over Use Of Taser on Suspect

March 10, 2005 Man Tasered In Hospital Bed, Forced To Give Urine Sample

Officer Shoots Student With Taser Gun

Taser International Propaganda: Zogby Poll Shows Three-in-Four Americans Support Use of TASER(TM) Devices

Cop accidentally stuns fellow officer with Taser

Sanford man dies when tasered by police

Mother whose teenage son was shocked 16 times by police plans to sue

Police defend use of Taser on girl, 13

Police use Taser on man at eatery

Police say using Taser on cat appropriate

Five Officers Face Disciplinary Charges In Stun Gun Case

Taser moratorium sought in Texas

Man with heart ailment dies after being shocked with Taser

County cops address Taser threat

Police fear civilian taser popularity

Tased and confused: Lifesaver, lethal weapon, aid for crowd control, tool of torture?

Ohio county halts Taser use after death

Taser gun safety is questioned as 85 die

Man begs police not to use stun gun on him during raid

Police Taser and Target the Disabled

Taser announces $675K in stun gun orders

Man Dies After Being Shot With Taser

Man who died after Taser stun was facing trial

Suspect hit by Taser on 9 occasions; 41-year-old died 4 hours after his arrest at art museum

Are Tasers too risky for police officers to use?

Taser to Increase Stun Gun's Power: NY Times

Four teens Tasered in scuffle with Miami-area cops

Is the Taser a safer alternative for a police firearm, or is it a ethal weapon?

Naked Jogger Tasered, Arrested By Arkansas Police

Heart expert warns about using Tasers

Fans Zapped by Tasers at Football Game

Eugene police set aside plans for Tasers

Pacifica Taser Gun Death Under Investigation

Jarring death rate fuels flap over police, Tasers

Jarring death rate fuels flap over police, Tasers

Teen dies after being shot with Taser gun by Collier County Deputies

Officer's injury tied to Taser

Taser, Inc. Gets Research Contract From DoD

Miami Police Use Taser To Subdue Wheelchair-Bound Man

Fla. Officer Uses Stun Gun on 12- Year-Old

Tempe OKs Taser guns for 9 schools

Man Dies After Police Use Taser Gun On Him

Cameras Roll As Police Use Taser Gun To Subdue Suspect

Maker Defends Taser, Stun-Gun in the Sights of Scandal

Homeland Security nominee Kerik sat on board of stun-gun maker

5 of 7 hit with Tasers were not violent

Dead Inmate was Tasered twice

Police are too Quick to Grab for Taser's Power, Say Critics

Warning on Police Use of Stun Guns After 74 Die

Taser on children OK, police say

School Official Asks Police to Stop Tasers

Cops Taser 14-Year-Old Who Wouldn't Drop Game Boy

Police review policy after Tasers used on kids

Police used Taser gun to subdue 6-year-old student wielding piece of glass

Police State Targets, Tasers, Arrests and Jails Elementary School Children

FAA OKs Tasers on Commercial Flights

November 05, 2004] Man Dies After Police Use Stun Gun on Him

Police defend current weapons

Police Accused Of Firing Taser At Pregnant Bride

ShockRounds(TM) and Electric Shock Weapons in Law Enforcement

Pentagon Looks to Directed-Energy Weapons

Officer's Taser is used on girl, 9

Man Accuses Police of Brutality with Tasers

The Pentagon's Secret Scream

http://www.infowars.com/subject_archives/ps/tasers_archive.htm

psst... pass the word ;->

peace

[liberalnurse]

255. Why do you resort to spamming the thread?

Do you not feel you are getting enough attention?

Ahhhhhhh Here ya go.....:grouphug:

[bpilgrim]

270. spreading the word

is what i do

peace

[merh]

418. Have you seen this palm beach coverage?

They have great information on the use or rather misuse of tasers.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2005/05/29/a16a_taser_vig1_0529.html

Look at all the links on the left side of the page. :thumbsup:

[Rex]

176. From what I've seen about cop life is that it mostly sux.

If your walking a beat then 99% of what you see is the ugly side of society. I'm sure that, after a while, cops develop a conditioned response to us, the People. One response they are conditioned to react to is a threat to their dominance. I can guarantee that if you refuse to follow an order by a cop, then he/she will arrest you. Refusing to cooperate will demand that they manhandle you into a controlled environment. I think the taser is used today as a form of punishment for failure to follow orders. I agree that it is an abuse of power in most cases I've read about, but like I said cops on patrol are more like robots tasked to do a specific job.

[SouthernDem2004]

185. Hmmm, I actually kind of agree with you....

I would not damn all using of Tazers though. The only ones you normally read about are the ones used improperly. I have seen them used probably about 7 times I can recall. They were properly used and there was no media coverage.

There is some truth tothe part about use of force being a conditioned response. Notice how the Officers in this video did not get excited and it was kind of done matter of factly. In most cases when I use force it is just kind of routine. I do not get excited, yell or fly off the handle. I just use the force required, put them in the car, take them to jail and write the report. No big deal, just another day at the office...

[Rex]

196. In the Army they taught us not to think about killing someone.

It is just a "duty" to be performed and everyone is expected to follow through because we all signed up for the job. Emotions can come later and in private.

I've seen some cop-aggressor footage that if it was me, I would have tasered the person too. I've also seen footage of them being used as a punishment for pissing off the cops. IMO it is a case by case basis REMEMBERING that cops are enforcers and are conditioned to be that way from day one training.

So you're a cop? Thanks for being a public servant and helping to protect your local community! :)

[SouthernDem2004]

212. Yep, was Army also and now Guard.

[OrlandoGator]

180. Let's recap the alternatives offered in this thread:

- Wait patiently for the woman to hang up the cell phone and exit the car whenever she feels like it.
- Reach into the vehicle and forcibly remove the woman.
- Park another police car in front of her car to block her in.

Minor detail: NONE of these "alternatives" are correct police procedure for arresting a subject who is inside a car and refusing to exit. And let's not forget that she was being arrested for driving with a suspended license, not merely being given a speeding ticket.

The police officer acted appropriately. If you are being arrested and you refuse commands, you should fully expect the officer to use physical force to subdue you.

[Guaranteed]

187. Would you mind telling us what the "proper" police procedure is

for those officers that don't have Tasers? My guess is that they aren't all equipped with them.

Whatever are they to do?

[OrlandoGator]

189. Pull their firearm and threaten the subject out of the vehicle.

In light of that, the Taser is preferable.

[Guaranteed]

191. Actually, as long as the cop didn't have an itchy trigger finger,

I think I'd rather have the gun pointed at me than getting 50,00V in my chest. A lot less painful. Not even as SCARY, in fact.

My guess is this woman would rather have had that, too.

[SouthernDem2004]

194. If you still refused what would you do then? Shoot her? You should

never pull your weapon unless you may think you will need to use it. It is not there as a threat. We do not use guns to threaten people.

[Guaranteed]

197. What did they do BEFORE the Taser?

Did they shoot them? No. They grabbed them and dragged them out.

[SouthernDem2004]

Causing injuries to Officers and suspects. Not to mention the added

safety concerns to Officers. I have pulled many a resistive person from a vehicle. Its not that easy. Sometimes they are belted in. Sometimes they grab onto things. Heck, they may have a weapon. Sorry but Tasers are ideal for these situtations. There is alot of abuse of Tasers going on but this is not one of those cases.

[Guaranteed]

203. What you're saying is that the suspect should be electrocuted every

time.

Previously, the suspect and maybe the officers would get some scrapes and bruises. Your policy is they get fried, though. Every time.

You don't consider that an injury?

In any case, what you're saying is that you're willing to violate the suspect's rights for the sake of the hope that less officers- and it does seem to be just the officers, really- will get injured. I don't think you can do that.

It's just like the Patriot Act. You know, we'd have to worry about terrorism a whole lot less in this country if the FBI could just go into anyone's house that they wanted to and search it. That's clearly not right, though.

[SouthernDem2004]

209. Odd, I never said that...

That women was not injured.

Her rights were not violated.

This has nothing to do with the PA.

[OrlandoGator]

195. I've been hit with a 50,000 volt taser (for training purposes).

It hurts for all of about two minutes. I'd much rather be tased than shot.

[Guaranteed]

198. I'd rather get dragged out and have a knee in my back.

And that would be a lot more appropriate.

How about those protestors practicing civil disobedience? Do you think it's right to Tase them?

[OrlandoGator]

200. No, it's not. But they aren't breaking the law.

That's not really comparable. This woman in the video wasn't a peaceful protestor singing Kumbayah on her knees with a candle in her hand. She was being arrested for driving with a suspended license.

Arrest subjects who fail to comply with officer's commands should expect to have physical force used on them.

[Guaranteed]

201. Sure they are. Civil disobedience?

Deliberately holding up traffic? Chaining yourself to a building? They do all kinds of stuff that breaks the law. They're doing it deliberately. But they're doing it nonviolently.

They do not follow officers' orders, and they are often mouthy. But they are DELIBERATELY non-threatening and non-violent.

[Rex]

211. It is the spectacle of the taser, the notoriety that garners attention.

What law enforcement needs is non-threatening and non-violent weapons. I've seen other stun type weapons that only disrupt the central nervous system and cause no pain...why not use these type of weapons instead of "old sparky" with a trigger? OTOH, I'd rather be tasered than shot by a nervous newbie, but there are far safer non-lethal weapons out there.

I think people are mostly reacting to the actual violence of the taser itself. Law enforcement needs to go with a less "violent" weapon IMO.

[liberalnurse]

220. You mean it's like this......

http://www.big-boys.com/articles/bulltaser.html

[OrlandoGator]

223. Video clips with analysis:

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

Listen to the clips of Sgt. Sedrick Aiken (who incidentally is black) explain how Ofc. McNevin acted appropriately.

[liberalnurse]

253. Did you watch the "Big Boy" clip?

Did it make you laugh?

[merh]

257. Fear of racial profiling had the department assign a black

officer to narrate and explain away the excessive force and violation of this woman's constitutinal rights. IT IS CALLED SPINNING.

[liberalnurse]

264. Like I said before.....

That woman is pulling shit out of her ass....It's an overused, abused and manipulative claim. She is trying to take the focus off of the facts of the case. It won't fly. It's those lame, fake claims that dilute the real cases! That pisses me off. Double Shame on her!:grr:

[merh]

267. And you are not being anything more than emotional about it.

You need to recognize that the cops make mistakes, the cops need to be held to a higher standard. You don't know what the patterns of arrests and stops are in that community, you don't know how the citizens feel about those cops, how they fear them and don't trust them. If she trusted them, if she wasn't in fear, why did she call her friend or mom or whoever. Was it so someone would know that she was in danger?

[liberalnurse]

268. You are beating a dead horse.

You are reading way too much into this arrest and hunting for an excuse. I call it as I see it. She chose poorly and to all that it implies.

[merh]

284. It is you that is beating a dead horse.

And you are using the taser to kill the horse.

As I defend her constitutional rights, I defend yours.

[OrlandoGator]

281. Actually, the Sergeant in the narration is the best qualified to talk.

Who's the one being racist here? You assume that because there's a black officer siding (correctly) with the cop who tased the subject, that it's spin. That's he's just window dressing and not actually an expert in the field.

[merh]

290. Was he there?

It doesn't say he was there. He was window dressing.

PR for the department, plan and simple, which will also make a jury very leary of their procedures and their actions.

[OrlandoGator]

298. So qualified experts are "window dressing" if they happen to be black.

Okay, I see your point. Interesting.

[merh]

304. In a case of racial profiling and use of excessive force.

YES!

It's done all the time in the South.

[OrlandoGator]

320. More on your "window dressing" Sgt. Sedrick Aiken:

He's the administrator of the Police Officer Examination for Boynton Beach:

http://www.bbpd.org/testing_dates_cont.htm

Chances are, he knows a thing or two about police procedures.

[merh]

332. Didn't say he didn't "not know".

I am saying that they have him narrating the arrest to try to diffuse the claim that racial profiling is what she was afraid of and why she did not comply as quickly as the officer insisted.

They are doing damage control. If the video was okay as it is, why did they need him to narrate it?

[OrlandoGator]

336. Race had nothing at all to do with any of this.

The only one claiming racism here is the criminal. There's video footage of exactly how the arrest went down: why he pulled her over, why he arrested her.

She was:

- Driving with a suspended license
- Speeding
- Driving with a broken windshield
- Driving with a broken tail light

How does race have anything to do with why he pulled her over and arrested her? Anything at all?

[MojoXN]

337. I wholeheartedly agree...

Racism has nothing to do with this.

MojoXN

[merh]

343. Her hesitancy to cooperate is because she was aware that others

had been harassed by the police because of their color. She talks about it alot if you listen to the version without all of the spin, a link to which can be found at post 319.

This man continues to expound upon the charges, accuses her of fighting when none was seen in the video, tells her she is not hurt and to stop carrying on AND THE VIDEO is missing footage.

Who is the criminal?

[OrlandoGator]

345. She hesitated to cooperate because she knew she was guilty.

Driving with a suspended license is a CRIMINAL offense. In Florida, you get arrested for it.

The criminal is the woman who ended up getting tased.

[merh]

348. Bull shit

She hesitated because she was aware of the racial profiling.

And please explain the missing sections from the video.

The cop violated her rights when he tased her, he violated his oath, and he is just as much at fault as she is.

10 minutes is not a long stop, he could have waited. HE SHOULD HAVE WAITED.

The taser was excessive force for the situation.

[OrlandoGator]

350. She is not a victim here.

And you won't find a single police officer who will agree with you, either.

If you are being arrested, comply with the arresting officer. It is not a complex formula.

[merh]

358. The officer had other options available to him to perfect the arrest.

Use of excessive force should NEVER be condoned or explained away.
That you can justify tasing this woman and causing her to bleed is a sad statement indeed.

[liberalnurse]

391. She new she was busted...short and to the point.

Get over it.

[ConfuZed]

319. Another link without the editing or cheesy comentary

http://media2.big-boys.com/bbfiles/policetazer.wmv

[merh]

338. That is not even an unedited version.

Almost 2 minutes of that video is missing. It jumps from 7:56:56 to 7:59:23 - what happened during that time?

Also missing is 7:54:11 to 7:54:51 - What's up with the missing video????


:shrug:

[OrlandoGator]

347. Take off your conspiracy theory tinfoil hat.

The "missing footage" you seek is in the third video at the bottom of this link:

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

[merh]

354. Oh, there it is

So that is where they discuss the blood, so they sent electrical volts into her and caused her to bleed. No excessive force there :sarcasm:

[OrlandoGator]

367. A Taser uses sharp probes that launch from the gun and attach.

The probes scratched her skin. It is not uncommon.

A Taser is not the same thing as a "stun gun" which requires the user to touch the weapon to the person being subdued. The Taser is designed to be used from a distance...the probes shoot from the gun and are attached to thin wires that carry the current from the electronics in the housing to the probes.

These probes can cause cuts. Nobody is claiming that being tased is a pleasant experience. It's not supposed to be.

[merh]

375. And arrests are not supposed to be "unpleasant" experiences

either. As a matter of fact, most officers are trained to conduct an arrest with minimal force and without drawing blood. Funny, it doesn't surprise me that you find it so unimportant that the woman was in agony and bleeding, just another nasty criminal off the streets FOR A PETTY OFFENSE - TRAFFIC VIOLATION.

[OrlandoGator]

381. The level "unpleasantness" of the arrest was up to her.

She made a conscious decision to make it a very unpleasant arrest. One way or another, she was going to be arrested that day...she just chose the hard way.

[merh]

384. I thought you said the officer controlled the arrest.

How was it up to her if he was controlling things?

Talk about conflicting statements.

[OrlandoGator]

386. He controlled the arrest by giving her the option to surrender.

He exercised his control by using force when she refused to comply.

I wish I lived in a happy lollipop world where no one shoots at or tries to run over police officers. Must be groovy.

[merh]

390. He dude,

been there, done that. You can try all of the justification you like and try to make it appear as if I don't deal with reality but that won't change things.

THIS WAS EXCESSIVE FORCE. No one tried to run over these officers, she just didn't put the phone down fast enough, she didn't jump as quickly as he wanted.

You can try to spin it all you like, it ain't going to change the facts.

Tasers should be outlawed and excessive force was used to perfect this arrest.

The money wasted on tasers would be better spent training officers how to conduct arrests without harming citizens, especially arrests for TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS -- PETTY OFFENSES!!!!!


:hi:

[merh]

361. Where is 7:54:11 to 7:54:51?

Just wondering?

:shrug:

[Scout1071]

340. Totally unnecessary to taser that woman.

Period. Yes, she had a funky attitude, but she did not deserve to be assaulted so viciously.

[OrlandoGator]

346. How would you have arrested her?

Explain to us how you:

1) Get the woman out of her car.
2) Get her handcuffed.
3) Get her into the back of the police car.

When she refuses to comply with the arresting officer's commands.

Please, tell us how you'd do all this without putting yourself and the subject at risk, and without using a Taser.

[Scout1071]

364. God forbid he actually attempt to speak to the woman.

No need whatsoever to taser her at that moment. She was not complying with the police officer's demands, but she was not violent in the least bit and didn't deserve to be tasered.

[OrlandoGator]

368. It is not the officer's prerogative to conduct the arrest on her terms.

He is in control of the situation, and she repeatedly refused to comply with his commands. The use of the Taser in this situation is the single safest way to get the subject out of the car and under arrest.

Had the officer reached into the car (which he actually did try to do at first), the subject would have been in physical control of the situation. Police officers are trained to not put themselves in that position.

[liberalnurse]

385. Yes, yes, yes, yes!

Please let this sink in,; somewhere!

[Scout1071]

389. Great. That is your opinion. In my opinion...she did not need to be

tasered in that situation. What threat was she posing to that officer?

I'm really not here to argue with you. I do not think that tasers should be used nearly as frequently. They should be a last resort.

[OrlandoGator]

397. The threat was in her unwillingness to reveal herself.

What weapons are in the car? What outstanding warrants does this person have?

These questions run through an officer's head when he tells you to step out of the vehicle. He is assessing the threat level so he can respond accordingly.

If the subject refuses to comply with the officer's threat assessment, he has to treat the subject as a threat. It's a matter of safety.

Everyone here is complaining about her being nonviolent and unarmed. How in the hell is the officer supposed to know that if she won't get out of the car?

[Guaranteed]

No. The officer is obligated to conduct the arrest within the suspect's

rights, which are, in fact, set by her behavior.

She made no threatening comments or gestures. The officer, there with another officer, had no reason to feel as if he was in danger. Therefore, the officer had no right to use anything near deadly force on her.

[SouthernDem2004]

479. Huh, How did you know she was unarmed? A vehicle is not a weapon

in itself? How would you get her out of the vehicle?

[Guaranteed]

341. This is a great thread.

This is what DU is all about. It's a good topic to see critical thinking and back and forth over.

[liberalnurse]

353. Now we do agree on that!

:hi:

[Guaranteed]

363. I wish DU was always like this. nt

[OrlandoGator]

370. Me, too.

Thanks for keeping it civilized, guys. The folks in the Gungeon could learn a thing or two here.

[Bouncy Ball]

349. I've already seen that video, and I find it disturbing.

a) she WAS wrong for not getting off her phone and getting out of the car

b) I have watched the video over and over and I do not see where she ever "swung" at either officer, despite what the one officer claims at the end of the video

c) which means she was not violent

d) the use of 50,000 volts seems a tad excessive for someone who isn't even violent

e) even putting all of that aside, WHY did he taser her a second time when she was ON THE GROUND? Because she was going to suddenly attain superhuman powers and get up and attack them??? Sure. She looked like she weighs all of 110 pounds and she was ALREADY DOWN.

All in all, I found this video extremely disturbing, especially when combined with the stories of children, elderly, diabetics, and pregnant women being tasered (a pregnant woman was tasered in the NECK--a place you are never supposed to apply it!).

I am about as pro-police officer as you can GET, but I think the potential for abuse is far too high. And in this case, I think the behavior of the woman did not warrant being tasered once, much less twice.

And sadly, I am wary around police officers now.

[OrlandoGator]

352. What is your basis for "excessive" voltage?

Also, there is a point in the video where the officer reaches to grab her arm and then suddenly jumps back and pulls the Taser. This was where she engaged in some kind of physical action that the officer perceived as a threat.

[Bouncy Ball]

387. I never said "excessive voltage."

The voltage is what it is. As far as I know, it's not adjustable.

My comments stand as they are.

[Floogeldy]

359. The other officer . . .

. . . opens the door on the passenger side, and tries to take the phone away from her. That is when she takes a swipe at him.

[Bouncy Ball]

388. You can actually see that on the video?

Because I've seen the video multiple times and can't see that.

Let's even say she did. What would a police officer have done pre-taser days?

[Floogeldy]

396. You can see the officer open the passenger door . . .

. . . and lean into the car. I assume the arresting officer is telling the truth when he states she takes a swipe at the other officer.

I guess I would refer you to one of SouthernDem2004's post:

"So, What you are saying is that they should have physically assualted her?

Ok, lets ignore the dangers I listed and lets look at using physical force. To remove her from the vehicle the Officer is going to grab her left arm by the wrist if possible. He will then violently jerk her out of the vehicle. When she starts coming out he is going to switch to an arm-bar which is going to force her to continue to come out of the vehicle but is going to put her face first into the hot asphalt. Once she hits the ground, rather hard I might add, he is going to shift the hold and she will end up face down on the asphalt with the rather large Officer pinning her to the ground while torquing her are to attempt to immoblize her. If she refuses to bring the other arm behind her back the backup Officer and contact Officer will use pain compliance to get her to comply. This can involve pressure points, further pressure on the arm or pepper spray.

What are the results? Well, She is going to have some facial injuries due to hitting the ground face first not to mention the struggle during the cuffing. Theres a lawsuit waiting to happen...

Safety concerns: Aside from the dangers I mentioned previously the Officers now have to worry about any onlookers becoming involved. It is hard to watch your back when fighting someone on the ground. Also, you would be in the roadway and there is the danger of being hit by traffic.

I have recently been tazzed. Yes, it hurts like you would not believe. However, the pain is brief as you can tell in the video.

Sorry, The Officers remained calm and did a good job."

[Guaranteed]

366. Yes, the second time was WAY out-of-bounds. nt

[sir_captain]

442. Once again, Bouncy

since you didn't acknowledge my post in the lounge thread:

It's not the voltage that makes it dangerous--it's the amperage. You have way more than 50,000 volts going through you when you touch one of those science museum globes that makes your hair stand on end. Amperage, or, the amount of *current*, is what is actually dangerous.

120V AC outlets in your house are much more dangerous than a 50,000V taser. I'm not saying he should have used it--I don't think he should have. But let's at least talk about this with a modicum of accuracy.

[Yellow_Dog]

403. The taser is to be used in place of deadly force

in the nation of the free under the fear czar our government now considers speeding an offense that requires deadly force? This fat bald cop felt his life was in danger?

Or was this the case of a little person that had lost his vision of his job and became intoxicated with the power that it gave him?

[Floogeldy]

404. I doubt it.

Police officers are authorized to use deadly force (firearms) when threatened with deadly force.

If an arrestee or suspect has a gun, I DON'T THINK the officer is going to pull out his or her Taser device to defend!

[Guaranteed]

405. Yes. It is supposed to be used somewhere in between the baton

and the sidearm.

When the officer feels as if he is in very real physical danger/is in danger of being physically overtaken/harmed, but feels that shooting a suspect would be an overreaction, the taser should be used.

[Floogeldy]

408. That's not what Yellow Dog said

He said Tasers are to be used in place of deadly force.

[Guaranteed]

413. In place of deadly force, IOW when the use of a gun could be an over-

reaction or unnecessary, but serious force is nevertheless necessary and the suspect needs to be incapacitated.

Here is what I said in an earlier post:

"The Taser isn't there for the officer's convenience. It's not a magic wand or a catch-all penicillin. Such a weapon is there to protect police from REAL threats (not imagined ones) wherein the use of their gun would be an overreaction to a violent offender. Unarmed, large offenders, or offenders armed with comparatively not-so-dangerous weapons (a candlestick, or a chain, for example). That's when a Taser should be used.

The suspect has a knife? You use a gun.

A little kid throwing a tantrum and thrashing around? You grab hold of them and hold them down, maybe handcuff them.

A unarmed drunk guy big enough to overtake you, even if you're using your baton, acting violent toward you? You Taser him. If you had four or five officers there to bring him down, maybe you wouldn't even have to do that."

Basically, normal to big-sized unarmed violent suspects in a one-on-one situation could very well be tased, as could someone with a semi-dangerous weapon in any situation. Those seem to be the kinds of situations in which using a gun would be too much force, but using a baton may not be enough. And *I, personally,* believe that that is when a Taser should be used. That seems like justice to me. It allows the officer to maintain control of the situation while not using excessive force. And that's the idea.

[Floogeldy]

417. You're not making any sense.

Please give me an example where a police officer would use a Taser device in place of deadly force.

[Guaranteed]

423. It makes perfect sense. I gave three examples in the previous post

of situations where an officer without a Taser might feel inclined to use his gun, but could instead use a Taser in order to prevent the near certain killing of the suspect when it is not necessary.

The idea is that there is a large gap between the use of the baton and the use of the gun. The Taser helps to fill in that gap. But it is currently being used in much less dire situations than it should be.

[SouthernDem2004]

478. I agree with you to an extent but there are no hard rules of when to use

what... Every situation is different. For example the chain you give as an example... I will draw my gun on that one. Tasers are close range weapons. I am not getting close.

Also, Tasers are considered less force then a baton. Believe it or not so are K-9s.

[OrlandoGator]

409. Please cite where you get your gun>Taser>baton theory.

We give officers the right to determine what level of force is required. Here, the Taser was the safest possible option.

[Guaranteed]

416. It's just logic. How could you think that a weapon that electrocutes and

sometimes kills people, always causing them to thrash about violently on the ground and sending electrical current through their body, would be used before the baton? And certainly a gun is more effective than a Taser if deadly force is needed. Therefore, it seems reasonable and logical that the Taser would be used in the chain somewhere between the baton and the gun.

[OrlandoGator]

419. Because using a baton requires getting within a foot of the subject.

By the way, "electrocute" means to kill with electricity. The word you're looking for is "shock."

A well-trained officer can do exponentially more damage with a baton than with a Taser. Give me the choice, I'll take the Taser any day.

[Guaranteed]

426. So does arresting them.

The idea is to subdue them. You're going to have to get near the suspect. And if they are non-compliant but non-violent, it is simply inappropriate to use such excessive force on them.

[Floogeldy]

425. It is not logical . . .

. . . to prefer taking blows to the head and body with a heavy stick than a shock that causes zero permanent damage.

[Guaranteed]

428. No, that's deadly force. If an officer is relying on his baton

for deadly force, he isn't doing his job properly. If you're going to try to kill someone, use the gun. It's much more effective. The baton is for compliance and unarmed violent suspects.

BTW, I think we've established that Tasers kill people.

[Floogeldy]

430. You still haven't given me an example . . .

. . . where an officer would use a Taser device in place of deadly force.

[HR_Pufnstuf]

427. She may not have known what he was about to do..

If you listen to the video closely, it sounds as if the Police Officer says

"...or I will tase you".


"Tase" isnt a word.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=tase+definition


Easy case for her atty.


Any officer who uses a Taser in the country should be taught to say

"Get out of the car, or I will SHOCK YOU"



This is the same if a scientist said "This laser will lase you"

[Floogeldy]

429. No. She thought he had a gun and was going to shoot her.

:crazy:

[OrlandoGator]

447. But "Get out of the car" is English. She understood that.

And she was well aware that he was pointing a "gun" at her.

[shawn703]

436. I don't see anything wrong with this

He told her if she didn't get out of the car he was going to use the taser. She had the opportunity to make the correct choice but still chose poorly. Police officers protect us, and they should be allowed to do it in a way that minimizes the danger to themselves and others. We complain when our military does not have the necessary armor to protect themselves, but when an officer chooses the safest way to gain control of a situation we blow a gasket? If he would have went in the car to forcibly pull the woman out, and she shot him (which in turn would have meant she would have been by the backup officer), it would have been better than if he used the taser on her? Are the lives of police officers worth less than the lives of our men and women in the military?

:wtf:

Edited for spelling

[OrlandoGator]

446. Indeed. Without the Taser, he would have had to use his pistol.

The "outraged" people here think that this was so extreme and violent. They fail to realize that the alternative was to put a gun in the woman's face.

[Hobarticus]

482. She was warned six friggin' times....

I agree, she had all the chances in the world to comply with his requests.

No outrage here.

[crowcalling]

449. 22 yr old woman - what if she were pregnant?

Okay - now insert this scenario into the argument. Is it still okay to taser the woman for a traffic violation? What if the unborn child is killed - still okay?

[shawn703]

464. What if she was?

Let's extend that argument further... If she was pregnant and pulls out a gun on an officer, should the officer refuse to respond with deadly force because of the potential harm to the unborn child? If she was pregnant, has a heart condition, etc, and is told to comply or risk being tasered, she should bear responsibility for the consequences of not complying.

And she wasn't tasered because of a traffic violation, she was tasered because she was resisting arrest for driving on a suspended license. If you have a suspended license, usually you have a history of reckless driving and are a danger to others on the road.

[merh]

469. Hey - are you familiar with the phrase

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

She is alleged to have been driving with a suspended license, though oddly enough, the article doesn't state that she was actually charged with the speeding violation she was originally stopped for.

The suspended drivers license charge could be a clerical error or a computer click, that is why she is entitled to go to court and the state has to prove the charge.

Additionally, I will point out that the woman was not read her rights and there is approximately 40 sec of the video I cannot find.

She was tased twice, not once, twice.

This was a use of excessive force and the woman's civil rights were violated. This officer should be fired for the unlawful discharge of his weapon (a taser is a weapon) and he should face federal charges for violating this woman's civil rights under the color of his office. If you don't know what I am talking about, go back and research Officer Koon, one of the officers involved in the Rodney King beating and tasing. He was convicted of just that. The court did consider King's fighting back and failure to comply, when they sentenced Koon, but it did not negate the crime or justify the excessive force.

:hi:

[shawn703]

472. Yes, but that doesn't have anything to do with the situation

It sounds like you feel the officer found the woman guilty of driving on a suspended license, and passed sentence by shocking her with a taser. That is not what happened. If an officer has reasonable cause to suspect someone of committing a crime, he/she has the right to detain you. If that person resists arrest, the officer has the right to respond with appropriate force.

Believe it or not, using a taser to subdue a suspect is actually healthier for them than using a gun or a baton. Deaths have gone down in places where the taser is being used, not up.

[merh]

474. Well, yes it does.

She is not a "criminal" she is an alleged criminal, it is suspected that she violated the Traffic Laws of the state of Florida (petty offense, misdemeanor offenses).

No force is justified under the circumstances as depicted in the video.

NO FORCE is justified under the circumstances as depicted in the video.

The officer has taken an oath to uphold the laws of the USofA (this includes the constitution) and of the State of Florida. He has an obligation to protect the rights of all citizens, including the accused.

See post 56 above for a full discussion of the problems with this arrest and the excessive use of force.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3795253&mesg_id=3797608

[Hobarticus]

483. But, why didn't she comply with his lawful requests?

I'm not justifying his actions at all...but, can you justify hers?

I read #56, too. And I'm still not buying it.

[merh]

486. See, first he tells her to stay in the car and yells at her a couple

of times, then he tells her to get out and put down the phone and she doesn't do it quick enough, so he shocks the shit out of her, not once, but twice.

The cop is the professional, he is obligationed to protect the citizens from harm and to protect their rights, even the bad guys.

:hi:

[Hobarticus]

494. We must've seen a different video, then...

Because when I watch the entire series, I see the policeman respectfully asking her to get out of the vehicle several times, whereupon she refuses, then he warns her four times to exit her vehicle or she'll get tasered.

After he tasers he the first time, I hear him warning her again to follow his instructions. When she refuses, again, she gets tasered, again, just as he warned her.

I think there's a broad range of opinion between 'quick enough'. I think after four warnings, you'd better do as you're told.

You can even hear a passerby offering to help him.

You're right, he's supposed to act like a professional. However, this woman also had an obligation to follow legal instructions from a law officer. When she refused, he warned her many times, and used non-lethal force when she continued non-compliance. If not, you'd better be ready to accept the consequences.

Believe me, I'm the last person in the world to defend police brutality. But this ain't it, and I don't think was unreasonable. Ignoring several legal commands and warnings is.

[merh]

495. Then you miss the first half of the stop.

Gee, you ought to try to catch the first part. :popcorn:

See how facts get in the way of judgments. :crazy:

"Believe me, I'm the last person in the world to defend police brutality. But this ain't it" I some how doubt that because this is it, the second taser shot was uncalled for, she was on the ground writhing in paid, she was no danger and could have been subdued, unless of course the poor schmucks were afraid to touch the taser leads while still charged! :shrug:

Like I said, try to catch the entire show, including the radio communications he has afterwards, when he tries to minimalize what he did and alleges again that she was violent (though no charges were filed against her for any violence :freak:

[Hobarticus]

497. Gee, let's examine that...

I didn't see the camera showing her 'writhing in pain' on the ground...what camera angle was that? The only one I see is straight out over the hood. I must've missed it, in the series that I saw.

[merh]

499. Yep, you can see her writhing, that's how she is bleeding,

she was in pain and pulled those damn prongs out. If you don't believe me, go listen the that officer's radio communication with his supervisor at the end. Though he simply says she was being melodramatic and he tased her the second time because she wouldn't put her arms behind her back.

:popcorn: I'm telling you, it's a show to watch!

[Hobarticus]

507. I'm sorry, I still don't see her...

I hear her crying, but I don't see anything because the shadow of the car.

I do see the moment before he pulled his Taser, but it's briefly blocked by the other officer.

One could say that she was writhing, even though you can't see it, but just as easily, one could say she swung on him, even though one couldn't see it.

But still, the question remains:

Why didn't she comply? She had four warnings before she was tased the first time. Would she have been tased if she'd complied?

He: "Put your phone down."

She: "No, I'm calling somebody."

I'm sorry, but this is not a case to get one's sense of civic moral outrage in a tizzy over. Not saying she had it coming, but she certainly didn't go out of her way to avoid this.

[ecstatic]

466. I like tasers better than guns

Too many unarmed black folks get shot up when the cops shoot first and ask questions later.

[dejaboutique]

480. what was he supposed to do

after watching that:
1. she knew she was screwed because she had a suspended license
2. she was NOT cooperative
3. she was being hostile by staying in the car when the officer tried to get her out
4. she was on a cell phone
5. calling him a racist

I have been pulled over once and I was extremely polite and cooperative and got a warning instead of a ticket. Everyone has seen COPS enough to know that if you cooperate it is going to be a lot easier. sorry if you dont like it but what was he supposed to do at that point that she started struggling with her? It seems better than shooting her. Try not driving on a suspended license AND resisting a cops order and there will be no taser - simple

[KansDem]

481. I always find it bizarre...

when a police officer does something to put the suspect into great pain, only to then say something like "lie flat on the ground, face down, and put your hands behind you" in say an effort to handcuff the suspect...

I've seen this in videos when the officers have unleashed a dog on a suspect. The dog is snarling, growling, barking and biting, and the cop says, "lie down! And put your hand behind you!" ??? My first reaction would be to protect myself, not "lie down with my hands behind me" with a vicious dog snapping at me...

The same with this incident; I imagine being tasered is extremely painful, and what do people tend to do when in pain? Curl up in the fetal position. This natural response is contrary to what the cops what you to do, so what happens when the suspect doesn't do what the cops want and assumes the fetal position instead? More tasering...

Bizarre...

[LibertyorDeath]

502. If the situation was exactly the same except the occupant was the

Local County Prosecutor do you think the cop would have been that fast to use that amount of force.

I don't fucking think so he would have used discretion & more persuasion
and tried to de-escalate the situation.

The person was stupid not to comply

and that cop was way to fucking fast to use that taser IMO.

[AX10]

504. I've been all over this, I agree with you.

The tazer was out of line.

[theearthisround]

508. Tommorow those tasers will be replaced w GUNS. And it will be you not her.

Cops are given tasers and "less lethal weapons" to condition them to get used to shooting people first, asking questions later. They're being trained to shoot like pavlov trained his dogs to salivate.

That cop was completely dilusional and psyhopathic, as evident by his nonexistant empathy and sympathy to her gut wrenching screams, only to later say in so many words he had to do it. TO PROTECT AND SERVE!

The levels of "doublethink" exibited by that cop was surreal.

George Orwell's 1984:

And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed - if all records told the same tale -- then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan,
'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.' And yet the past, though of its nature alterable, never had been altered. Whatever was true now was true from everlasting to everlasting. It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. 'Reality control', they called it: in Newspeak, 'doublethink.'
'Stand easy!' barked the instructress, a little more genially.
Winston sank his arms to his sides and slowly refilled his lungs with air. His mind slid away into the labyrinthine world of doublethink. To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself. That was the ultimate sublety: consciously to induce unconciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word 'doublethink' involved the use of doublethink.