Won't sign a traffic ticket? That's a tasering!

[DSE 3]

Quote

Note the exchange between the cop and the motorist just before the tasering, then compare that to the story the cop told the other cop at the end.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fae_1195587967&p=1

As an update, the police officer was found justified in his actions. On the flip side of it, several officers were heard saying how immature the officer is, and pointed out why he's not been promoted in a long time. He's been on leave, not because of the tasering, but because of the death threats he's been receiving as a result of the YouTube posting. it's been suggested that now that he's been "acquitted" that he should probably resign.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

As an update, the police officer was found justified in his actions. On the flip side of it, several officers were heard saying how immature the officer is, and pointed out why he's not been promoted in a long time.

Now there is a major DUH for ya.....they can get away with anything in most places.......

More of the THEM v US..

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

there is much anger in this monk.

I wonder if he's done time?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[DSE 3]

Quote

Now there is a major DUH for ya.....they can get away with anything in most places.......

More of the THEM v US..

I don't see it that way. I don't care for a lot of police officers because as we've seen, many of them aren't decent human beings. Same can be said for any profession that puts their life on the line every day for the benefit of society; it goes quickly to their heads and it's about the underpaid glory. But it *is* very dangerous work that can seriously screw with your head.
Ever seen anyone shoot themselves from an up close and personal perspective? Held a child in your arms that has just died because you were seconds too late or didn't have proper gear? Cleaned the tears from the face of a little girl who has just been sodomized by her father/uncle/brother/someone she trusted and loved? Have you daily faced the monsters that live under our beds and in our closets?
It's bound to have a negative impact on you. Some joke and say "I work for the sanitation department, I keep the streets clean." Others find a bottle, still others hide it inside and it eats at them like acid. Anger is a normal reaction. Still others manage it very well, and end up being promoted off the streets and become heroes to the newbies coming into the "sport."
It's so easy to depersonalize these guys, and that's the biggest problem, IMO. We give them tools they can't use because they're too powerful, we give them tools that are dialed back, or we give them no tools at all. Problems are bound to occur from time to time.
Look at this scenario differently; the kid gets back into his car and attempts to drive off, the officer could pull his weapon and fire on the car. Then the headline is "Police Officer Fires on Pregnant Woman" or something similar. Or worse, the officer kills or wounds an occupant in the car, all simply because the person being stopped can't obey a few basic rules of a traffic stop.
OK, the cop is/was an asshole in the stop. Exactly why?/we'll never know. But at the same time, your life isn't a constant skydive into a bigway with the "bad guy" threatening you every 1000 feet, and your landings aren't crosswind/downwind every time either. You have predictable elements in most skydives, and when the wind is blowing hard, you get the choice of going up or not. A police officer "jumps" whether the wind is bad or not.
My perspective is to cut em' some slack (and hopefully this karma will protect me next time I'm pulled over).

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

My perspective is to cut em' some slack (and hopefully this karma will protect me next time I'm pulled over).

Great post.

.

[VincentVL. 0]

Quote

I don't care for a lot of police officers because as we've seen, many of them aren't decent human beings

//Proclaimer// Many of them are decent human beings who genuinely want to do good.//Proclaimer//

Now then. I can't speak for the entire world, and I really mean what I said in the disclaimer. But I know for a fact, that a significant amount of the people who become cops, do so because they:
1. Have run out of other options (read: they're utterly useless)
2. Are power hungry

I know of at least one guy who is a combination of 1 and 2. As in: drug taking, fight picking, ignorant and arrogant piece of shit who wasn't able to do a goddamn thing with his life until he casually strolled through the selection procedures for becoming a copper. Note: he hasn't changed a thing. Only now he can shoot people and get away with it.

I once walked into a gathering of police candidates (they were waiting to take their exam). I can tell you I got chills running down my spine when I saw what a bunch of fucktards were gathered there. So the fact that a cross section of the corps shows you a lot of brown spots, and the fact that some cops (possibly these spots) feel the need to be arrogant ALL the fucking time, tells me that the selection process needs to be a hell of alot harder.

Now before I get any death threats, I personally know some decent cops. And I'm a big supporter of law enforcement and all those decent cops who try to make a difference. Which is exactly why I'm disappointed that we, as a society, are not able to weed out the trash.

[shropshire 0]

Where's there a Serpico when you need one? Cops should cut out the minority shite from their own ranks.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[DSE 3]

Quote

Quote

I don't care for a lot of police officers because as we've seen, many of them aren't decent human beings

//Proclaimer// Many of them are decent human beings who genuinely want to do good.//Proclaimer//

Now then. I can't speak for the entire world, and I really mean what I said in the disclaimer. But I know for a fact, that a significant amount of the people who become cops, do so because they:
1. Have run out of other options (read: they're utterly useless)
2. Are power hungry

I know of at least one guy who is a combination of 1 and 2. As in: drug taking, fight picking, ignorant and arrogant piece of shit who wasn't able to do a goddamn thing with his life until he casually strolled through the selection procedures for becoming a copper. Note: he hasn't changed a thing. Only now he can shoot people and get away with it.

I once walked into a gathering of police candidates (they were waiting to take their exam). I can tell you I got chills running down my spine when I saw what a bunch of fucktards were gathered there. So the fact that a cross section of the corps shows you a lot of brown spots, and the fact that some cops (possibly these spots) feel the need to be arrogant ALL the fucking time, tells me that the selection process needs to be a hell of alot harder.

Now before I get any death threats, I personally know some decent cops. And I'm a big supporter of law enforcement and all those decent cops who try to make a difference. Which is exactly why I'm disappointed that we, as a society, are not able to weed out the trash.

a)If you're going to quote me, quote ME, not someone else. I didn't say "I don't care for a lot of police officers because as we've seen, many of them aren't decent human beings"

b)Maybe in Belgium there is a high percentage of low-lifes. Isn't the same (at least in this part of the world) based on my experience.
There are a few scumbag skydivers that seem to be very visible, very loud. Should all skydivers be judged by the actions of those few?

[VincentVL. 0]

Quote

a)If you're going to quote me, quote ME, not someone else. I didn't say "I don't care for a lot of police officers because as we've seen, many of them aren't decent human beings"

Ok. If you say so. Something must be wrong with my eyes. Sorry about that.

Quote

b)Maybe in Belgium there is a high percentage of low-lifes. Isn't the same (at least in this part of the world) based on my experience.
There are a few scumbag skydivers that seem to be very visible, very loud. Should all skydivers be judged by the actions of those few?

No. There isn't a high percentage of low lifes in the Belgian Police Force. I was probably overreacting (I'm pretty sure some of the people at that exam have become great cops by now).

The reason as to why I'm overreacting, is because they are COPS. They are not skydivers, or clowns, or actors. To watch over our safety, they are given authority and the means to defend that authority with deadly force (and rightly so). I suspect this power to be given to decent human beings only (or that the rotten fruits are dealt with accordingly)

[skycop 0]

Quote

Ever seen anyone shoot themselves from an up close and personal perspective?

Yep, after he took his whole family hostage. He let them go, stepped on his porch and blew his brains out in front of us (I was a SWAT guy at the time).

Quote

Cleaned the tears from the face of a little girl who has just been sodomized by her father/uncle/brother/someone she trusted and loved?

Very frustrating when you have a 3 year old girl with her hymen broken and you can't prove shit, all the while the family is covering for each other. The child is too small to tel you who did it.

Quote

Held a child in your arms that has just died because you were seconds too late or didn't have proper gear?

A four month old infant I tried to give CPR to, the child was gone, but still alive enough to aspirate in my mouth. We had a bridge jumper and another attempted suicide going on at the same time. It was two hours before I could clean up. And that only happened because I was at the hospital checking on the suicide attempts.

Your post was better than I could have ever put it.
The above examples have all happened personally to me, most of them within the last six years I've been a supervisor. I have plenty more, these are the ones you touched on. I'd make this post longer but I've got to leave shortly.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[skycop 0]

WOW,
I hear crickets now on this thread. DSE did a service to detractors by speaking the truth.
The one thing common in all these threads is compliance. Some are incapable due to mental issues, that is another thread. Others choose to argue or fight, again a losing proposition.
Yesterday in a nearby town, a troubled young man drew a knife and came at the police. A taser was deployed and was ineffective, the kid kept coming and got shot by the officers. Luckily a non-fatal wound. This is a the perfect scenario for taser use. My guess would be the taser malfunctioned or electrical continuity was lost, that is just a guess.
The kids lawyer is already claiming excessive force, soooo........it's the proverbial shit sandwich, and guess who is the meat.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

WOW,
I hear crickets now on this thread. DSE did a service to detractors by speaking the truth.
The one thing common in all these threads is compliance. Some are incapable due to mental issues, that is another thread. Others choose to argue or fight, again a losing proposition.
Yesterday in a nearby town, a troubled young man drew a knife and came at the police. A taser was deployed and was ineffective, the kid kept coming and got shot by the officers. Luckily a non-fatal wound. This is a the perfect scenario for taser use. My guess would be the taser malfunctioned or electrical continuity was lost, that is just a guess.

the crickets are because the thread ran its course.

This anecdote seems like another reason against tasers - they're clearly not reliable enough. They don't work, putting the officer in grave danger in this case, and they kill lots of people when they do work.

[skycop 0]

Quote

This anecdote seems like another reason against tasers - they're clearly not reliable enough. They don't work, putting the officer in grave danger in this case,

No, shows they are not perfect however the alternative is worse.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[kelpdiver 2]

I got no issue with cops shooting an attacker coming at them with a knife.

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

I got no issue with cops shooting an attacker coming at them with a knife.

How about a cop using a tazer on a guy charging him who is a lot bigger than he is? Without a knife or gun.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[skycop 0]

There is a great video taken in Yuma Az dealing with that issue. A REALLY big drunk guy and a smaller deputy, the deputy keeps retreating as the big guy says "I'm going to kick your ass". The big guy says shoot me as he advances, finally the bad guy says "fuck it, I'll shoot you" and walks toward his house. The deputy hit him with the taser, and game over.
I had my jaw broken in 1989, after the bad guy broke my jaw, he got me in a head lock. I started to get dizzy and I thought I was going to pass out. I assure you, I was about half a second from shooting this guy when I got real pissed. I shook loose and we duked for a while before my backup arrived. I ended up breaking his collar bone with nothing but my arms and fists.
Now I WOULD get sued for that.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[n23x 0]

I'd think quite the contrary. Your cruiser's camera would have caught the action, and we'd give you a big thanks and a "glad you didn't die".

I don't think anybody's disputing the fact that a less lethal weapon can and should be used to defend an officer's life. Particularly if they are in a situation where the odds are against them!

I do, however, think we're seeing an influx of situations where the general public views the officer's situation as NOT being to that point, and thus feel it is an example of incorrect force escalation. The general feeling is that the tazer should only be used in the same situation that you would use your firearm.

Opinions?
.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

[n23x 0]

http://www.kwch.com/global/story.asp?s=7446220

This one said he was tazed when he didn't comply (due to deafness). On one hand, I see they say "he wouldn't show his hands": he could have been holding a weapon. On the other hand, I read that as: There were multiple officers there that couldn't, all together, control a man without tazing him.

Does that make sense/Different opinions?

.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Quote

I got no issue with cops shooting an attacker coming at them with a knife.

How about a cop using a tazer on a guy charging him who is a lot bigger than he is? Without a knife or gun.

Both situations warrant DEADLY force - ie. a gun. We need less taser use on people who are simply "uncooperative" and more gunfire on the real criminals.

I tend to question authority, and don't particularly like 'officer friendly', but I am not a criminal.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[Richards 0]

Quote

The general feeling is that the tazer should only be used in the same situation that you would use your firearm.

No, the firearm should be used in the same situation that you should use your firearm.

Granted using tazers as a compliance tool when frustrated with a situation is unreasonable. It is not a cattle prod. Perhaps in a situation that has escalated to a point where you are in danger but not yet at the point where you need to use lethal force; like the one described by skycop.

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[KelliJ 0]

Quote

I'd think quite the contrary. Your cruiser's camera would have caught the action, and we'd give you a big thanks and a "glad you didn't die".

All fine and dandy as long as he could convince his assailant to attack him in front of the camera.

[KelliJ 0]

Quote

http://www.kwch.com/global/story.asp?s=7446220

This one said he was tazed when he didn't comply (due to deafness). On one hand, I see they say "he wouldn't show his hands": he could have been holding a weapon. On the other hand, I read that as: There were multiple officers there that couldn't, all together, control a man without tazing him.

Does that make sense/Different opinions?

.jim

It really makes little difference how many officers are on the scene. If he won't show his hands then they have a choice to make- play it safe and taser him, or rush him and hope he isn't holding a weapon because if he is he will almost certainly injure an officer before they subdue him.
I vote for taser. Too many of our cops get hurt as it is.

[n23x 0]

Well, I think you're wrong. Being passive doesn't mean being a threat. Being non-compliant doesn't mean being a threat.

A tazer shouldn't be used, in my opinion, unless someone is actively moving to harm an officer, i.e, advancing with a weapon, or advancing on a single, smaller, weaker officer.

A tazer should NOT be used as a compliance tool because the cops (plural, in this case) are incapable of doing their job, or don't want to get hit. (You signed up for it, expect to take some knocks during your employment).

Lets review this case: Say the man doesn't show his hands, the cops don't have a tazer but they have their gun, they draw their gun and order the deaf guy to show his hands, he doesn't comply. What's the next step? Shoot?

.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

[KelliJ 0]

I never said being passive or non-compliant was being a threat. However, non-compliant is not passive and is, in fact, only a step away from being an active threat.
Yes, cops signed on the bottom line knowing full well they could get hurt doing their job. In this case, though, they had every reason to suspect the man was holding a weapon since they were responding to a shooting and had no knowledge at the time that it was a hoax. To them it was very, very real.
"Lets review this case: Say the man doesn't show his hands, the cops don't have a tazer but they have their gun, they draw their gun and order the deaf guy to show his hands, he doesn't comply. What's the next step? Shoot?"
If we suppose there is no taser then it is not an accurate review of the case but instead a different case entirely. In the events you describe the only option is to wait it out. The guy isn't going to stand there forever.
Luckily they had the option of a taser to neutralize any threat he may have posed without having to wait and see if he was hiding a weapon and taking a chance someone could get hurt by him. (BTW, getting stabbed or shot is a bit more serious than taking some "knocks")
I stand by my opinion that the officers used the taser responsibly and as intended.

[n23x 0]

I don't think there is much of a difference between the theoretical replacement of "gun only" in my tazer or gun scenario. Is there a reason why the 2 officers could have "waited it out" as they would have with the gun? You yourself said the "guy isn't going to stand there forever".

Could one of the officers covered the suspect with a weapon while the other moved in to physically subdue the suspect? Absolutely 'yes', in my mind.

Nobody is saying that officers shouldn't be safe. We are disagreeing with the fact that the tazer was labelled as a safe, non-lethal weapon, and due to the safe portrayal, officers have been more likely to use it in situations where they were not necessary. Now we're seeing that it can in fact be lethal, but still seem to find cases where more and more officers are using in an unnecessary fashion.

.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC