Is it OK to tase a 9 yr. old?

[OULobo]

I posted this before, but it may been over looked because of other points in the post and by other posters at the same time but:

Has anyone considered comparing the stats of real temporary injury (sprains, strains, bruises, cuts....) or permanent injury/death from incidents of LEO applying pepper spray, hands on/defensive tactics or baton techniques relative to the stats of same injuries from incidents of LEO using Tasers?

I haven't done any hard searching myself, but my hypothesis is that the stats will show that IN GENERAL the taser applications will have a reduced incident of both temp and perm injuries/death.

It sounds like a good idea, but it would only be a fair study if you compared each type of action on an individual basis and we would need a larger body of data for tasers as they are only recently widely used. I would venture to say that Pepper/OC and "hands-on" would be comparable. The big problem would be what encounters are being reported, how to classify what is an acceptable injury and how valid claims of injury are decided. There are plently of situations where the officers are "hands on" and there are no injuries, like cooperative escorts and such. Technically all taser encounters leave injury because they shooting you with probes that peirce the skin.

 

[OULobo]

The point of this question is to compare the tools affects/effects NOT the misuse of any of these things because that is about officer judgement NOT tools.

The issue is also that tasers make the ability to abuse force both more acceptable and easier to get away with. Besides there hasn't been a definitive decision as to what is considered abuse when tasers are involved.

 

[AaronLucia]

What kind of weird question is this?

 

[KenpoTex]

What kind of weird question is this?

Read the thread.

 

[OULobo]

Taser update:

Cops Disciplined for Tasering Grandmother

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20040820/D84J6EMO0.html

This time it's a few officers tasing a 66 yr old grandma while her 74 yr old husband watches, because she disagreed with them giving her a ticket for honking her horn at them. The officers were diciplined and the department policy on use of tasers was changed.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Good to see them diciplined. The article doesn't say why she honked at them unfortunately.

 

[Tgace]

I still wonder what the atmosphere for taser use is in some of these depts? For example, in my dept. OC is "recommended" anytime physical force is going to be necessary (if you dont do what I say and I have to go "hands on" pssst!!). Most depts. stop short of saying "you must" because "you never know" and it also opens the dept. up to liability (better to hang the cop sometimes ). If these depts. are saying the same for the taser than there is a problem IMHO. I dont know what Taser teaches, I dont carry one. But I would only use it if it looks like a major fight is coming up or I might hurt the suspect more by not using it.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I have to wonder what would have happened to me if I had honked at the Buffalo cop who was driving and yacking on his cell phone. In NYS, it's illegal to talk-n-drive unless one has a hands free kit. He didn't. The cops should set examples for us to follow, not be exceptions to the rules. Maybe the old woman saw something hypocritical, maybe she just got impatient sitting behind the patrol car after a light turned. I don't know. Her husband was the one I would have said tasing may be 'an acceptable use of force' as he did assault a cop, abet in defence of his wife who had been assaulted by the LEO. Maybe the thinking was as Tom said: "only use it if it looks like a major fight is coming up or I might hurt the suspect more by not using it." We don't know as that information isn't in front of us.

Again, we weren't there, and the information is sketchy. However, in this case those who do have more info did find cause for discipline, so we must assume that something was wrong there. In the original post on this thread, was anything ever found out or settled? (Sorry haven't read the whole thing so if it was posted, I missed it)

:asian:

 

[OULobo]

I didn't see anything since it happened.

 

[Tgace]

Dont take departmental punishment as "proof" of guilt. Although in this case it may be....Sometimes you can get hung out to dry just to save the dept. the bad press even if you were within policy and training.

As to the cell phone...if Im driving and yacking to a friend while driving than yes I may be a hypocrite if I ticket the next person I find doing the same. However the car is our office. Sometimes I may be going to a violent domestic when a dective may call me to tell me to be aware of the fact that the guy there is involved in a gun/drug investigation etc. Some guys do get the hands free kits, but I dont like the idea of wires around my neck when rolling with a suspect.

 

[Chicago Green Dragon]

The problem here is we are only hearing a partial story of what happend. We do know there was a problem the police we dispatched. The responding officers ended up placing someone in custody and that person when cuffed was tased.
The officer made a judgement call during the time he was dealing with the situation. I know it sounds cruel and unusual punishment but I think we need to hear the whole story and both sides before passing judgement. So many things LEO (Law Enforcement Officers) do out in the field might not sound right when only a partial view is written.

I would like to hear what the RO's (Reporting Officers) have to say about what happend and why they used the force they did to understand what happend.

I dont know how many people have ever had to deal with a mental or mentally challenged person but its sometimes not as nice as you think.

I say we need to hear more evidence before passing judgement on right or wrong.

Just my opinion.............

Chicago Green Dragon

:asian:

 

[OULobo]

The problem here is we are only hearing a partial story of what happend. We do know there was a problem the police we dispatched. The responding officers ended up placing someone in custody and that person when cuffed was tased.
The officer made a judgement call during the time he was dealing with the situation. I know it sounds cruel and unusual punishment but I think we need to hear the whole story and both sides before passing judgement. So many things LEO (Law Enforcement Officers) do out in the field might not sound right when only a partial view is written.

I would like to hear what the RO's (Reporting Officers) have to say about what happend and why they used the force they did to understand what happend.

I dont know how many people have ever had to deal with a mental or mentally challenged person but its sometimes not as nice as you think.

I say we need to hear more evidence before passing judgement on right or wrong.

Just my opinion.............

Chicago Green Dragon

:asian:

I'm sure you are talking about the original article, but what about the second article posted (about four posts ago) with the old couple. In this case the officers were not called out, they were in the cruiser on the phone. In that case the department itself took the outlook that the officers were wrong. I understand Tgace's opinion about the department's opinion not being proof of guilt, but we aren't talking necessarily about a crime as much as about gross abuse of less-than-lethal force in a situation that would require a less radical method. It seems to me that it is within the current rights of the officer to use a taser for any situation he sees fit. I personally would like to see that the situations they can legally apply this force be spelled out and reasonable, and not at the whim of the officer. Right now it seems to me that they can go around tasing people for simply cussing at them or flipping them the bird despite that fact that neither is illegal or a threat that calls for the applied force of a taser, whether it is less-than-lethal or not. Usually the department covers for their officers all the way, so when they condemn an action, then it must be pretty bad.

 

[Chicago Green Dragon]

I'm sure you are talking about the original article,

Yep i was refering to the original article. I ended up joining the discussion late on this topic...........

I havent had a chance to reply to any other items in this group.

Chicago Green Dragon

:asian:

 

[Tgace]

Right now it seems to me that they can go around tasing people for simply cussing at them or flipping them the bird despite that fact that neither is illegal or a threat that calls for the applied force of a taser,

I dont know that thats entirely true. Are you saying cops are tasing people and walking away? I believe that there is always going to be a custodial (arrest or forced hospitalization) issue when any force of this nature is used. The issue is what level of force was required to effect that arrest.

BTW: If those actions are done in a public place where other people can see them than they are illegal (at least in my state). Its called disorderly conduct. And honking your horn for any other reason than "a reasonable warning nor be unnecessarily loud or harsh" is a vehicle and traffic violation (Illegal use of horn). Not that any of that justifies zapping a 66 yo lady. Just making a point.

 

[OULobo]

I dont know that thats entirely true. Are you saying cops are tasing people and walking away? I believe that there is always going to be a custodial (arrest or forced hospitalization) issue when any force of this nature is used. The issue is what level of force was required to effect that arrest./QUOTE]

agreed

BTW: If those actions are done in a public place where other people can see them than they are illegal (at least in my state). Its called disorderly conduct. And honking your horn for any other reason than "a reasonable warning nor be unnecessarily loud or harsh" is a vehicle and traffic violation (Illegal use of horn). Not that any of that justifies zapping a 66 yo lady. Just making a point.

I'm sure it was a state case, but they actually had a trial to prove that "flipping the bird", while a rude gesture, was not illegal. I'll try to see if I can find the case. As for the horn, most of the time around here it would fall under noise ordinances, but I'm sure there is an officer somewhere that would try to use a "cover law" like disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace. Those cases around here get fought and thrown out all the time, at least for the people who actually show up to court to fight it.

 

[Tgace]

Most misdemeanors get reduced to Dis Con here...its only a violation, not a crime.

 

[Tgace]

I found a similar topic (taser and use of force policy) in another forum I frequent.
http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?threadid=279359
Like I mentioned before, I dont carry one so I wasnt familiar with its place in the continuum. I would have thought I would have been near intermediate weapons (impact). These guys say otherwise. I must admit that I can see their point. OC is nasty, long lasting and not as effective in all situiations. I dont know if its a fact, but I would say there have been many more fatalities to OC than taser, even with length of service taken out of the equation. The real issue IMHO is one of appearance than actual danger. Show all the studies you want, but when force of any type needs to be used, the odds of injury/death are present.

All the same, would these officers have OC'd this lady if taser wasnt available???

 

[OULobo]

All the same, would these officers have OC'd this lady if taser wasnt available???

Good point. It strikes at the motivation, not the method. If OC and tasers are generally on the same level of the use of force continuum, then they could've used OC. If having a grandma convulsing on the ground while her husband is watching and two officers are there making her jump is a bad image, how bout a grandma with a swollen face and burning eyes that gets no relief for hours; all because she honked her horn and argued a bit. Whether or not it is abuse, it sounds like the poster child for a movement against letting individual officers make choices about applying force.

How about civilians decide what the force continuum is and leave the officers liable if they screw up.

 

[Tgace]

it sounds like the poster child for a movement against letting individual officers make choices about applying force.

How about civilians decide what the force continuum is and leave the officers liable if they screw up.

I have to disagree...the officer is always the one who decides what level of force to use, hes the one dealing with the situation. What would you have the officer do, call into the station to ask approval for a force level? Things happen too fast...As it is there are many officers who have been killed because they were unwilling to use deadly force soon enough. Out of fear of lawsuits or bad training I dont know. Strict ladder continuums where the officer had to exhaust every step on the way up have been ditched long ago. What if a guy 2X your size is beating the @#$% out of you with his bare hands? A strict policy may say deadly force will not be used on an unarmed subject, or you would have to try unarmed tactics/OC/Baton in order before shooting...So when the cop shoots the guy, because a disarming and being shot with your own weapon is bad, hes hung out to dry.

The real lesson is do what your told and you wont get force used on you....

 

[OULobo]

I have to disagree...the officer is always the one who decides what level of force to use, hes the one dealing with the situation. What would you have the officer do, call into the station to ask approval for a force level? Things happen too fast...As it is there are many officers who have been killed because they were unwilling to use deadly force soon enough. Out of fear of lawsuits or bad training I dont know. Strict ladder continuums where the officer had to exhaust every step on the way up have been ditched long ago. What if a guy 2X your size is beating the @#$% out of you with his bare hands? A strict policy may say deadly force will not be used on an unarmed subject, or you would have to try unarmed tactics/OC/Baton in order before shooting...So when the cop shoots the guy, because a disarming and being shot with your own weapon is bad, hes hung out to dry.

The real lesson is do what your told and you wont get force used on you....

I was led to believe that the "use of force continuum ladder" is not a method of "ramp up" to force as much as it is a list of available appliable force options presented in relation of class to the other options. IE you aren't required to travel up the ladder to reach an appropriate action, only know what reaction is appropriate for the victim's . . . er. . . suspect's (j/k) action. I'm not suggesting that the police call to get approval before using force in all situations, only that they be held legally and proffesionally liable for actions that exceed what is laid out in said ladder, and that the ladder be drawn by the citizenry to be a hardline set of true rules, not just a policy suggestion. I'm not advocating binding the officer's hands, I'm only holding that they be held responsible for flawed decisions, like the rest of the people they are patroling.