Taser use by police

[Moxie]

No such thing as a non lethal weapon. All weapons are lethal, only some are highly lethal (500Kg Bomb) and some are less lethal (my big toe) but by definition, all weapons are potentially lethal.

The better description of Tasers, Pepper spray etc is Less lethal weapons.....

LOL a spoon can be a lethal weapon if you stick it in someone's eye. Honestly this is a non-issue with me. I've seen a hundred pound drunk women repel three police officers, there is nothing more difficult than dealing with a drunk or someone jacked up on dope. They are often violent and irrational, to me an officer's safty is more important than wrapping a perp in "Bubble Wrap" lest we harm one.

[Black Dog]

I'd rather see cops use a tazer then cops get injured apprehending a criminal.

Here is a little secret I'll share with you all on how to avoid getting hurt or killed by a tazer...

...

DON'T FIGHT WITH THE POLICE.

At fairly typical apology for what seems to be the increasingly thuggish tendencies of our unaccountable police forces in this country. I'd be more inclined to buy this if there weren't so many cases of cops tasering people for, essentially, shits'n'giggles. Taser use by cops is a perfect illustration of the old adage: "When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

[g_bambino]

At fairly typical apology for what seems to be the increasingly thuggish tendencies of our unaccountable police forces in this country. I'd be more inclined to buy this if there weren't so many cases of cops tasering people for, essentially, shits'n'giggles. Taser use by cops is a perfect illustration of the old adage: "When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

So, when you have a gun, everything looks like a bull's-eye?

[Black Dog]

So, when you have a gun, everything looks like a bull's-eye?

Police shootings are relatively rare here in Canada, but not unheard of. Of course, shootings are a notch up the ladder from "non-lethal" taserings or the everyday, good ol' fashioned shitkickings cops dole out. Perhaps the paperwork is a deterrent?

[RedDaVinci]

I don't know. I might have said it was a question of biology... you know, giving his physical characteristics so we can see what a taser gun can possibly take down... that explains why they mentioned the age...

But his race?

In retrospect, people would visualize the event given a set of stereotypes. The cop was white and the perp was black, would be the common stereotype in this case. Then I suppose falsehoods about the story would be propagated from imagination alone.

Or it could just be that they're trying to make it seem like a "convention" so that they get to mention when the guy really IS black, making them more morally justified in mentioning this when it comes up.... and we all know how people scramble to read about harm caused towards minorities.

Human beings are vultures for a story...

[sideshow]

A taser is classified as an intermediate weapon-on the same level as OC (pepper) spray, and the collapsible baton. A firearm is a lethal force weapon.

Whenever force is used (any force, from hand to hand, to lethal) a use of force report is made out. There is essentially the same amount of paper work involved in a tasering as a shooting....at least for the officer involved. Albeit there is more investigations that take place later with lethal force encounters.

A taser is just one more tool to be used when lethal force is not justified, but a lesser use of force, such as grappling, is ineffective or ineffectual. And there are rules of use (such as not tasering someone in a moving vehicle, at the edge of high structure where they could fall and be injured).

You need three aspects to justify lethal force: a weapon, ability to use the weapon, and the intent to use the weapon. So if all these three aspects are met, then lethal force can be used. This decision to use lethal force is made, usually in a split second.

As for the taser, it is not a quick use/fast draw weapon. It is more of a controlled tool, used to difuse a threat where lethal force is not justified, but soft/hard empty hand tactics are/will not be enough.

And yes, sometimes three cops will not be enough to wrestle someone and diffuse the threat. But the taser when used completely immobilizes the suspect/regardless of their size or level of intoxication. So it can be used to cause the least amount of damage in some situations.

Its unfortunate, but sometimes people die from being tasered. Just like some people die from a small blow (like seen in the playground fight between children thats been in the news as of late). It can't be foreseen, can't be forecast.

If you don't want to be tasered, shot, or even wrestled to the ground by Police, it's very simple. When they ask you to do something, do it. If they have told you to do something that they have no right to do, you can argue it later through appropriate legal challenges. But don't argue/fight with them on scene. Yes sir, no sir, get down on the ground and put your hands behind your back.

They don't know you, and need to ascertain the facts in a safe controlled environment.

Just do it.

[capricorn]

But don't argue/fight with them on scene. Yes sir, no sir, get down on the ground and put your hands behind your back.

And if my mug is close enough to their boots, I'll give them a little peck. Who knows, maybe I look like someone on the most wanted list. The cops are just doing their job.

Criminal or not, I would prefer being tasered than shot through the heart.

[bush_cheney2004]

If you don't want to be tasered, shot, or even wrestled to the ground by Police, it's very simple. When they ask you to do something, do it. If they have told you to do something that they have no right to do, you can argue it later through appropriate legal challenges. But don't argue/fight with them on scene. Yes sir, no sir, get down on the ground and put your hands behind your back.

They don't know you, and need to ascertain the facts in a safe controlled environment.

Just do it.

This is very sound advice....peace officers are trained to establish control and anything you do to challenge submission during their legal detainment or arrest will be met with escalation to regain control. Yes sir...no sir...always show hands.

[M.Dancer]

Yes sir...no sir...always show hands.

And an officer of the court id is helpful too....

I have a friend who is a criminal lawyer who was at another fellows house for drinks when the police showed up answering a call from the host's ex wife. They were prepared for a violent response because of the details of the complaint she had made....when the lawyer fellow slurs "No occifers (shows ID) we've been here since a 1/4 to fifth....

The constables made calls and left the host with the lawyer with then understanding they were to remain there then night.

Had he not have been there the host would certainly been cuffed and frog marched to jail for the night.

[sideshow]

And an officer of the court id is helpful too....

I have a friend who is a criminal lawyer who was at another fellows house for drinks when the police showed up answering a call from the host's ex wife. They were prepared for a violent response because of the details of the complaint she had made....when the lawyer fellow slurs "No occifers (shows ID) we've been here since a 1/4 to fifth....

The constables made calls and left the host with the lawyer with then understanding they were to remain there then night.

Had he not have been there the host would certainly been cuffed and frog marched to jail for the night.

Not true. Reasonable Grounds for arrest/detention must be had before "frog marching him to jail". You cannot take an intoxicated person out of their own residence and detain them (at least in my jurisdiction) simply for being intoxicated. As well, an allegation must be supported by some sort of evidence to be sustainable for a detention.

For instance. If the ex says he hit her, was there a witness? When did she say it happened? does he have an alibi for that time? Are there marks on her? If Police cannot verify any of this, no detention/arrest will take place.

Example above.....an alibi.

[Topaz]

I saw the video today on the news and the guy was out of control and a bystander tried to help him calm down, but he only spoke Polish and I think the police should have try to get someone to speak to him in his own language before shooting him 2-4 X with the taser! In this age of WORLD traveller, ALL countries should have someone who can speak any language for this reason.

[M.Dancer]

Not true. Reasonable Grounds for arrest/detention must be had before "frog marching him to jail". You cannot take an intoxicated person out of their own residence and detain them (at least in my jurisdiction) simply for being intoxicated. As well, an allegation must be supported by some sort of evidence to be sustainable for a detention.

For instance. If the ex says he hit her, was there a witness? When did she say it happened? does he have an alibi for that time? Are there marks on her? If Police cannot verify any of this, no detention/arrest will take place.

Example above.....an alibi.

He wouldn't have been arrested for being drunk, he was to be arrested as a suspect for assault. His ex filed an assault charge.

You don't need a witness to claim you were beaten up alone....nor do you even have to have bruises...

His ex btw is a loon......

[Guest coot]

Having seen the video, the second tazer shot seemed totally unnecessary. He was already down and easily overpowered. I guess it feels good to administer them though. Very powerful.

[stignasty]

I've got to say that I'm just as concerned about the fact that the RCMP seems to be trying to cover this up than I am with the fact that they used the taser. If the video never existed we would still believe that the man was fighting with the police and the action was necessary.

[jbg]

Having seen the video, the second tazer shot seemed totally unnecessary. He was already down and easily overpowered. I guess it feels good to administer them though. Very powerful.

Apparently some consider it better to "TASE" a person out of control than shoot him (link to article in New York Times).

Report on City Police Shootings Urges More Use of Tasers Before Guns

Police recruits and veteran officers could benefit from more frequent firearms training and a wider use of Taser stun guns, according to a study of the New York Police Department’s shooting habits released on Monday. The study, by the RAND Corporation, was commissioned in January 2007, about seven weeks after a Queens man, Sean Bell, died in a hail of 50 police bullets. Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said at the time that questions about the department’s effectiveness and training required an independent review.

********

Edited June 13, 2008 by jbg