Taser abuse: how many have to die before something is done about it? (36 in 2009)

[Are_grits_groceries]

Jan 9, 2009: Derrick Jones, 17, Black, Martinsville, Virginia
Jan 11, 2009: Rodolfo Lepe, 31, Hispanic, Bakersfield, California
Jan 22, 2009: Roger Redden, 52, Caucasian, Soddy Daisy, Tennessee
Feb 2, 2009: Garrett Jones, 45, Caucasian, Stockton, California
Feb 11, 2009: Richard Lua, 28, Hispanic, San Jose, California
Feb 13, 2009: Rudolph Byrd, Age Unknown, Race Unknown, Quincy, Florida
Feb 13, 2009: Michael Jones, 43, Black, Iberia, Louisiana
Feb 14, 2009: Chenard Kierre Winfield, 32, Black, Los Angeles, California
Feb 28, 2009: Robert Lee Welch, 40, Caucasian, Conroe, Texas
Mar 22, 2009: Brett Elder, 15, Caucasian, Bay City, Michigan
Mar 26, 2009: Marcus D. Moore, 40, Black, Freeport, Illinois
Apr 1, 2009: John J. Meier Jr., 48, Caucasian, Tamarac, Florida
Apr 6, 2009: Ricardo Varela, 41, Hispanic, Fresno, California
Apr 10, 2009: Robert Mitchell, 16, Black, Detroit, Michigan
Apr 16, 2009: Gary A. Decker, 50, Black, Tuscon, Arizona
Apr 18, 2009: Michael Jacobs Jr., 24, Black, Fort Worth, Texas
Apr 30, 2009: Kevin LaDay, 35, Black, Lumberton, Texas
May 4, 2009: Gilbert Tafoya, 53, Caucasian, Holbrook, Arizona
May 17, 2009: Jamaal Valentine, 27, Black, La Marque, Texas
May 23, 2009: Gregory Rold, 37, Black, Salem, Oregon
Jun 9, 2009: Brian Cardall, 32, Caucasian, Hurricane, Utah
Jun 13, 2009: Dwight Madison, 48, Black, Bel Air, Maryland
Jun 20, 2009 Derrek Kairney, 36, Race: Unknown, South Windsor, Connecticut
Jun 30, 2009, Shawn Iinuma, 37, Race: Unknown, Fontana, California
Jul 2, 2009, Rory McKenzie, 25, Black, Bakersfield, California
Jul 20, 2009, Charles Anthony Torrence, 35, Caucasian, Simi Valley, California
Jul 30, 2009, Johnathan Michael Nelson, 27, Caucasian, Riverside County, California
Aug 9, 2009, Terrace Clifton Smith, 52, Race: Unknown, Moreno Valley, California
Aug 12, 2009, Ernest Ridlehuber, 53, Race: Unknown, Greenville, South Carolina
Aug 14, 2009, Hakim Jackson, 31, Black, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Aug 18, 2009, Ronald Eugene Cobbs, 38, Black, Greensboro, North Carolina
Aug 20, 2009, Francisco Sesate, 36, Hispanic, Mesa, Arizona
Aug 22, 2009, T.J. Nance, 37, Race: Unknown, Arizona City, Arizona
Aug 26, 2009, Unidentified Man, Age: TBD, Race: Unknown, Los Angeles, California
Sep 3, 2009, Shane Ledbetter, Age: 38, Caucasian, Aurora, Colorado
Sep 21, 2009, Richard Battistata, Age: 44, Race: Unknown, Laredo, Texas
***
http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/taser_abuse_how_many_have_to_die_before_something_is_done_about_it/

This is just WRONG! The whole thing is awful and the racial disparity makes it worse.

There are some horrible stories at this site.

[imdjh]

1. Much fewer than if they had used their guns.

I'm quick to object when I see the taze being used indiscriminately or out of impatience. I'm thinking of two women (Florida and Georgia) who were tazed for not getting out of their cars fast enough to suit the officer, and one who wouldn't get off the phone as she was calling her husband to tell him she was being harassed by a police officer.

But the concept is sound- less lethal force in a situation where gun might otherwise be drawn. The question is if that is the way it's being used. I think cops are using the taze more than it ought to be used, with the idea that it's some kind of cattle prod to speed "compliance."

As for the race stats not matching the general population, wouldn't they be more likely to match the crime stats?

[Demeter]

2. If the situation didn't call for a gun, then it didn't need a taser, either

[imdjh]

4. I'm going to disagree there.

Some of these guys just don't stop being dangerous until they are hogtied and some of these cops can't get these monster guys hog tied without immobilizing them first.

One problem in this discussion is that you can't prove how many lives something has saved as concretely as you can show how many lives have been taken.
You can show that 36 guys died after being tased, but you can't show how many cops weren't killed or injured as a result of having taser available to them.

[Demeter]

7. If the Choice Is between Shooting Lead or a Taser, then a Taser Is the Choice

but in none of the cases of abuse did the situation ever rise to that level.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

54. That's exactly what tasers are for, to subdue with less lethal force.

[Ignis]

25. That'd be great...if the facts matched that argument.

In fact, studies have shown that deployment of Tasers to police departments results in a SIXFOLD increase in in-custody deaths during the first year.

http://www.ajconline.org/article/S0002-9149%2808%2902113-9/abstract

Would those cops have drawn their sidearms and shot all of those in-custody citizens if Tasers weren't available? Somehow, I doubt it.

[imdjh]

40. I don't like the methodology. (I rarely do)

The article indeed said that there was a six fold increase in in custody deaths during the first year, as compared with an AVERAGE of the previous FIVE years. So without knowing the national trend of such things as violent crimes or murders, we don't really have a lot of context.

The article also said that dun deaths increased over two fold in the same period , which suggests that something was going on besides tasers being issued.

The article ends by saying that after five years, the tasers don't appear to be affecting the in custody death rate.

So either the tasers weren't the real problem, or the criminal population adapted to being tased or something.

[MajorChode]

42. Someone on DU trying to use junk science in relation to taser deaths? No way!

Check the OP's message. '36 taser deaths in 2009' from the obviously unscientific and highly biased web site source.

In other words, 36 people died after a taser was used on them (and that's assuming you trust that web site's numbers). So even if the person shot 8 oz of PCP into their nutsack with a turkey baster an hour before the taser was used, we MUST believe the taser was the cause of death, even if there's no medical report that even suggests such a thing.

Correlation proves causation = logical fallacy = fail.

[paulsby]

27. and in agencies (tasers are better)

that adopt tasers

1) deaths go down (suspect deaths)
2) injuries go down (suspect and cop)

etc.

tasers are a very effective tool. taking people into custody who don't want to go is difficult. much more difficult than many people think. every time you get into a wrestling match with people, there is a risk of injury and even death.

tasers are generally much safer

i once wrestled a guy into handcuffs. he stopped breathing. fortunately, he was revived, but the reality is that when you are dealing with extremely unhealthy people (often street people or drug addicts) and/or they have polydrug combos, dehydration, heart conditions untreated, etc and they are in an extreme fight/flight adrenaline dump situation - deaths happen

also, note that most so called taser deaths are not established that the taser was the primary (if a cause at all) cause of death.

iow, the logic is - they were tased, and they died, therefore the taser CAUSED the death. correlation =/= causation. read the autopsy reports.

tasers save lives. and injuries.

i've been tased twice. i would never volunteer to be struck by a baton

[imdjh]

31. Would you agree that a lot of misconduct passes under the police culture notion...

..... of their "right" to "control the situation" , any situation, as they define both the situation and control of it?

If that sounds like gibberish then maybe I am trying to be too broad and flexible, so it's what if time.

If a police officer pulls me over because he thinks I might be the Bread Store Bandit- I am not going to be aware of his suspicion. Therefore, I am not going to be aware of his level of defensive posture. Therefore, I am not likely to take kindly to what I will see as overly aggressive, intrusive and probably unconstitutional behavior on his part. Mind you I have never had this requested of me like I see done on TV, but I am not going to lie down on the ground at a traffic stop. It's not going to happen. The day when that becomes a "lawful order" is the day when this country is truly in the toilet.

[PM Martin]

35. 95% of police stick together.

That is a reality anywhere in the world.

Tasers seem to have made the police lazy.

[paulsby]

37. this is bad policy

"Mind you I have never had this requested of me like I see done on TV, but I am not going to lie down on the ground at a traffic stop. It's not going to happen. The day when that becomes a "lawful order" is the day when this country is truly in the toilet. ody "

you are expected to obey the orders. the time to protest (legally) is in the court process and when you get a lawyer.

if a cop tells you to lie down, you lie down.

fwiw, i was once taken into custody at gunpoint when i was in college. i obeyed the commands, got down on my knees, and was detained.

it turned out a guy in a green van (i was driving a green van) and matching my general description had just robbed a convenience store just down the road.

did i know this at the time? of course not. but i had a duty to comply, and the cops had reasonable suspicion to detain me. and when you detain somebody for an armed robbery, you get them down on the ground and you protect yourself and the public.

and after about 10 minutes, they realized i was not the guy. great. but they were doing their job, and they did the right thing.

i was treated respectfully and professionally by the cops, but if i had taken YOUR approach, i very well might have been shot or whatever, and it would NOT have been the cops' fault. it would have been my fault.

it doesn't matter if you take this stuff "kindly". it matters that you obey the law. and if you are told to lie down, you lie down. if the cops aren't justified in making that order (and they almost always are), then your redress is in court, you don't have the right to disagree at the scene. and they certainly don't have an obligation to give you a 10 minute explanation to justify their actions.

i have done over a hundred of these types of stops (not surprising for a 20+ yr career). and they have gone swimmingly well.

but when people think they have the right to disobey orders like this, they significantly raise apprehension on the part of the cops. and it's their fault. THEY are escalating.

another thing that happens around here is that people will steal cars. say joe dirtbag steals a blue honda civic. after they steal the car, they will frequently find (or they may have scoped this out beforehand) a similar vehicle. they will surreptitiousy attach the plates from the stolen car to the car they have just found and take THEIR plates and put in on their car (thus giving them cold plates)

i have been on a stop where we stopped a driver of one of these cars. we run the plate and the car comes back stolen. we do felony stop. it turned out that once we checked the VIN, we realized the switch had happened and the people are let go. but they are proned out at gunpoint and they did comply

i suggest you do the same.

it's the right thing, morally and legally.

if you are unlucky enough to be in that situation

[imdjh]

39. I don't think it's a reasonable request.

I am understanding to a point, and I am willing to put my hands on the roof of the car. I am not willing to go down on the ground like a convict, and at my age, physical condition, and standing in the situation it's not a reasonable request. I understand where you are coming from, but liberty begins with dignity, and asking me to prostrate myself is an affront to any free man or ought to be.

It isn't a question of whether I should comply, the police have no business asking me to do this. What if I am standing in an inch of mud?Should I indulge this? I don't think so. How about snow? Don't think so. How about in the rain? It's simply not a reasonable request under any circumstances.

I see this as a dangerous development in police culture. I appreciate your advice, but I don't plan on complying. Of course, we never really know what we will do until the situation arises. We are somewhat conditioned to comply, good or bad.

[PM Martin]

46. Police needs to be reigned in.

Bust their unions to start.

[imdjh]

47. What a peculiar conclusion.

How would busting their unions make sense in reigning in the police culture? The ones who make policy aren't unionized. The patrolmen don't do the "On the ground!" thing because they have the authority to do it, they do it because they are allowed to do it.

[vadawg]

52. sorry i disagree with you, when i pull you over say on a felony stop

as far as im concerned whether you like it or not i have to proceed in the way that is safest to me and to you, i am going to get you to prone out, think about it i have pulled you over and have reason to belileve that you are armed, do you really want me to not take all precautions that i can, as to you no complying. Say the officer believes you are armed, you refuse to comply with orders to keep your arms up and to prone yourself, youthen make a movement that the officer believes is you going for a weapon, you get shot, this would be your fault and not the cops..

[asdjrocky]

49. And cops love 'em, let's face it.

There's nothing more fun for a bunch on low IQ thugs than watching voltage run through a homeless person, old person, defenseless person... take your pick.

I've seen it, you know it, and pretending otherwise just fucking stinks.

[vadawg]

51. Wish i knew how to do the applaud icon

it also seems people are confusing the taser use with the use of a duty weapon. You are also correct people have no idea how hard it is to restrain a combatitive suspect, especially someone hopped out of their mind.

[asdjrocky]

48. Tasers are used for sport by the police.

Figure that out and then we may have something to talk about.

[Echo In Light]

3. Police State 'toys' need to fucking GO

[billyclem]

8. TASERs don't need to GO

But, TASER use as a time saving compliance tool on non-violent people needs to stop.

[Echo In Light]

9. "a time saving compliance tool." Spoken like a True Believer

[billyclem]

11. Uh, notice the context of the phrase

It was used in a statement as to how a TASER is NOT to be used. Did you read the post or just react to a phrase?

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[Shell Beau]

20. I don't see why that matters.

[Bill McBlueState]

21. what the hell?

You ignore the content of the post and instead invent something about its tone, and then you gripe about someone's posting frequency. Nice work.

[billyclem]

23. Pro-authority?

Hmmm, I don't think it was either pro or anti authority; rather, it was pro-TASER for use in place of firearms, in violent situations only. This was the original intent of the device, created by a physicist after two of his friends were shot(not by police) in an altercation after an auto accident. He set out to create something less lethal than guns.

I believe if used as intended, in those cases where a firearm would have been used in the past, it is beneficial. If misused, as a "time saving compliance tool", that is what needs to be stopped.

Why so few posts? Don't really know. Spent a lot of time just reading, waiting for more conversation and fewer one-liners, and making certain my skin was thick enough to put up with, should I say the BS that happens here. Just the choice of name alone has resulted in being told to commit impossible obscene biological acts, called a yokel and other not so nice items.


:hi:

[Echo In Light]

26. I just figured you were a regular using a different name

Re tasers, a-hole sadists will always abuse them since being a 'non lethal' (that kills nonetheless) weapon, not a "tool," but a weapon, makes them more popular, so I'm of the opinion they should be done away with. You obviously think differently. And incidentally, "time saving compliance tool" sounds like cop terminology.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

55. So dense you missed the whole context.

[PADemD]

5. This needs to be looked into by Congress

[imdjh]

6. Why? What would be their authority to do that?

[asdjrocky]

50. Congress can hold an investigation on anything it wants.

The Constitution gives them that right. And authority. Jeez.

[MajorChode]

53. It's already being investigated and has been investigated

State and local governments have studied the issue and the DOJ has commissioned a huge study on the subject and several universities have studied the issue and still are.

[rd_kent]

17. What does?

It has a .0025% fatality rate. There are MANY things that cause more deaths than that. Shouldn't congress look into THOSE those first?

[stray cat]

10. How many would have been shot instead?

[jgraz]

14. Probably very few.

In my experience, cops don't hesitate to use deadly force where it's warranted. The taser is just to keep them from getting their uniform dirty.

[jeepnstein]

24. Not many.

The Taser is intended as a less-than-lethal weapon that is used instead of more traditional forms of hands-on techniques like using a baton or bare hands to get compliance from a suspect. If you've ever had to apply handcuffs to someone who REALLY doesn't want to wear them you'll understand the rationale behind the Taser.

If lethal force is needed, you just go straight to lethal force.

[Ignis]

30. That argument doesn't fly. See post #25. (nt)

[jgraz]

13. Only one has to die...

It just has to be a rich, blonde, white girl.

[anonymous171]

15. It will never stop. Tasers are a great way to avoid touching suspects

And less touching means less problems with the law.

[rd_kent]

16. So a .0025% fatality rate is too high?

Overuse by the cops IS a problem, but anything with a fatality rate that low is not dangerous. What is the fatality rate of people drowning in thier bathtubs? What about falling down stairs?

[MajorChode]

43. What about people who were arrested BEFORE tasers were invented

People seem to forget or are completely ignorant of the fact that the police deal with people who have take overdoses of drugs and/or have other health problems on a daily basis. People were dying in police custody before tasers, and if taser use was banned completely tomorrow, people would still be dying in police custody. The difference is more police officers would probably be injured on the job (with the taxpayer picking up the bill), and more suspects will probably be injured (with the taxpayer picking up the bill).

[rd_kent]

18. So, thats 14201 times a cop DID NOT draw his/her gun. How many might have died

had they used a gun instead?

[dreamnightwind]

19. Excellent, thanks for recognizing the dead

It's amazing what citizens of this country will put up with. Police state, absolutely.

When these were initially deployed, the rationale I heard was that they would be used as a non-lethal alternative to firearms.

Well, that's NOT how they're being used, and they're NOT non-lethal.

You can get tasered just for copping an attitude or being otherwise uncooperative with a cop. That's wrong, cruel, and in too many cases, lethal for someone that has no business being killed by a cop.

I can't believe there are people here on DU defending the way these weapons are being wielded against unarmed citizens.

[jeepnstein]

22. The Taser is a great tool.

It has been used on suspects who later turn up dead, though, and each of those cases needs to be carefully considered. Back in the day before the Taser or OC Spray we used to just have to use impact weapons until the suspect was is custody. Having seen both styles of police work in action, I can say that the Taser is far safer and lends itself to a more accurate accounting of the use less than lethal force. You can't use a Taser and not create a log entry on the weapon. You can't fire a cartridge and not leave evidence of whose weapon was used.

If the policies and procedures outlined by Taser are adopted by an agency it is a very safe and effective tool. I've been subjected to a ride on one and I can tell you it is most unpleasant but it doesn't break bones or cause injury. Given a choice between going hands-on with a suspect or using the Taser I can assure you the Taser will most likely cause the least injury to all parties concerned.

[dreamnightwind]

28. So where's the accountability?

If you're denying there's a problem with how Tasers are being used, I won't even waste my time arguing with you.

If you're not in denial, how can you support this? What keeps them from being abused? What happens to officers that abuse them? I don't mean what is on the books, I mean in reality, what usual consequences are there? And what do we do about death from Taser use and abuse?

Until these issues are resolved, and they certainly are not resolved at this point, no officer should be out there with a Taser.

Personally I have seen little accountability in my life when it comes to the police. They are too quick to defend their own. There is little external oversight, and most of even what little external oversight there is has no real punitive power, or if the power is there, it gets used only in the most blatant and horrific of circumstances.

I don't even think this is a matter of a few bad apple cops. I think it's a problem with the established criteria for using Tasers.

I don't agree that Tasers should be allowed just because an officer wants to get custody of a subject (who may or may not be guilty of anything).

[jeepnstein]

38. Good questions.

Firstly, a Taser keeps a record of the time, number, and duration of cycles it is activated. Any use other than an initial dry function test at the beginning of a shift must be documented on a Use of Force report. No report, used Taser, no donut.

Secondly, the cartridges carry a serialized tagent that clearly shows whose cartridge was used. It blows chaff all over the place with the serial number. If you use discharge one of the cartridges you'd better have a Use of Force report.

Any Use of Force that results in the death of a suspect is worked up like any other homicide. It's not TV where they all just go out for a beer after the shootout. If the death is the result of improper use of force you can be sure the department and the individuals involved will see a lawsuit. This threat is a very powerful deterrent in LE circles.

If you really want to see someone get hurt, try to apply a set of handcuffs to an individual who really doesn't want to wear them. It can turn into a bloody mess with broken bones in a matter of seconds. Like it or not, some times police work requires the use of force.

[annm4peace]

29. thank you for this list

this is a great tool to send to Mayors and city council members.

[Kievan Rus]

32. A lot of minorities up there

We may want to deny it, but racism is still very prevalent in America.

[imdjh]

36. False equation, there.

Yes, there is racism in America (and everywhere else) but these stats don't make the case that racism is in play.

[Nikki Stone1]

33. A white guy in Simi Valley was tazed to death? And Simi Valley is ok with this?

Jul 20, 2009, Charles Anthony Torrence, 35, Caucasian, Simi Valley, California


Bastion of racism and home of the white Rodney King jury whose verdict caused the riots--I wonder if they still trust the police.

[PM Martin]

34. Contrary to popular belief

tasers are not replacing guns.

One is not going to use anything less than a firearm
should lethal force be needed.

Tasers are but a cattle prod.

[Are_grits_groceries]

41. A "cattle prod?" Really?

Read up on cattle prods. They move cattle. They don't stun them into a state where they can't move.

[PM Martin]

45. I am aware of that.

Tasers are worst than that.

[kentuck]

44. It is criminal.

It is assault with intent to disable. It is murder when the victim dies. These people, no matter if they have a badge or not, should be prosecuted for their crimes. This cannot continue.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

56. So lawful use of a taser should be prosecuted.