Tasering - Austin TX - Thanksgiving 2006

[ryoder 1,396]

Read the paragraph below the video to see how differently the Austin Police Chief is handling this as opposed to the UT case:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x73230

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[skycop 0]

I absolutely agree in this case.

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

[Gravitymaster 0]

I agree. That cop was way over the top.

[Opie 0]

This is the same video that is posted in the "textbook tasering" thread.

[nerdgirl 0]

Thanks for the links – particularly to the CPL O’Connor’s affidavit.

There are clear cases where use of non-lethal/less lethal force is warranted, and ones in which it clearly is not. The tests are the ambiguous cases, of course; although, after reading CPL O’Connor’s own statement, it’s harder to make a case for the being warranted use of force, imo.

CPL O’Connor repeatedly maintains that the (e.g, bottom p.8 of the affidavit) use of force was “necessary.”

His estimation of his own demeanor as “very direct” is discussed (bottom p.9/p.10) and should be contrasted with the discussion of General Orders and Codes of Conduct (p.15) on patience, that “In the face of extreme provocation, we’re [law enforcement officers] are supposed to maintain a patient demeanor.”

CPL O’Connor repeatedly admits (e.g., p. 14) that he should have exercised multiple other options: “I’m definitely going to talk longer [before using a taser] next time, and let the calls [for additional officers] hold.”

CPL O’Connor explains/offers contextual material/excuses/rationalizes his behavior during the traffic stop because he was “edgy” from not having eaten (p. 11, top).

At one point there is a discussion of the CPL O’Connor’s assertion of “empty hand active [emphasis nerdgirl] aggression” by the driver. Initially, he asserts that was the verbal ‘resistance’ that the driver displayed. When the IAG interviewer points put that CPL O’Connor also indicated/checked “verbal resistance aggression,” CPL O’Connor then suggests that the first part was when “he reached his hand up towards me, right before I tased him” (p.10). “Aggression” or self-defense or surprise or automatic reflex? It’s hard to reconcile CPL O’Connor’s narrative with the video.

CPL O’Connor acknowledges handling prior comparable incidents differently – without escalation to use of less-lethal or lethal force – before he had a taser.

The NIJ just closed a solicitation for more “less lethal” technologies.

Does this suggest an escalation to use of less-lethal force or lowering the proverbial bar to use of force when previously control of the situation was dependent on the professionalism of the officer? Perhaps.

Are new technologies being used as a substitute or short-cut – that’s a little too pejorative of a characterization but hopefully the idea is conveyed – for good training and for maintaining professionalism in LEO? I don't think there's evidence to suggest that's the intent ... but it may be an unintended consequence.

Instead of valuing professionalism and judgment that comes from training and experience, is there a trend to short cut with technology? I hope not.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[78RATS 0]

Quote

I absolutely agree in this case.

there may be hope for you after all.

Rat for Life - Fly till I die
When them stupid ass bitches ask why