NorCalBusa
Member #294
And unfortunately those in that (or a mental) condition don't wear a sign that let's you know.
-
There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.
Taser use correct? What do you think?
- Thread starter Warrior Princess
- Start date
And unfortunately those in that (or a mental) condition don't wear a sign that let's you know.
NorCalBusa
Member #294
However the repercussions of you making a mistake aren't a threat to your life or others. You merely bring out a rev/patch and go on about your business.
arnoha
New member
Um, yeah, exactly. And if I have to face that scrutiny when life isn't at stake, shouldn't those that do face those stakes have even greater scrutiny?
NorCalBusa
Member #294
It does Armen, and I agree that's a good thing. The point I'm making is its important that that scrutiny is by people versed in the topic, people getting the entire story and perspectives, not some armchair bunch watching YouTube and thinking they know anything.
Warrior Princess
Freedom Equity Group
arnoha
New member
Well, sure, if the scrutiny also carried consequences, but we're chatting on a damn motorcycle forum here!
I've stated in most of my posts on this topic and others that I don't know everything that happened and that I'm just going from what I can see. I can almost always be convinced otherwise with the right argument or evidence. My values on this topic are pretty firm, but my opinion on the exact incident is quite fluid. I'm not pretending I know everything...just relating my opinion. I also make a point of trying to defend my opinion and not just throw it out there as a stupid +1.
I try to do my best to make my posts respectful and thoughtful. I hope I've never made the impression that I believe law enforcement is bad/corrupt/evil in any way, since I don't believe that at all. In this case, the evidence I've seen suggests to me that this officer on this day in this case used a bit more force than was useful. He's as human as I am, and I make mistakes, too. (Fortunately for me, someone has always caught them before my mistake plasters my company's name across the news.)
Not that I'm a saint, either. I believe my first post in this thread was less than kind. But it wasn't directed against any of the LEOs.
afm199
Well-known member
There is no doubt there are some pretty fucked up crazy violent individuals out there. In this case I did not see that. In this case I saw an instance where a guy continued to tase a non violent non resisting individual, to punish him until he obeyed an order. As kids who skip school are delinquent and breaking the law, would it be appropriate to tase them to make them go back to school? Of course not. Would it be appropriate to tase a shoplifter who was sitting on the floor sobbing, regardless of their size? Well of course not. What makes this guy different? Tase him until he obeys? No, not if he is sitting on the ground sobbing and crying. Unfortunately, LEO's have to deal with complex human beings, for whom one size fits all does not work all the time.
Again, the taser is a great deal and it works. I personally thought Oscar was fighting on BART and unfortunately got shot for his attitude. In this case I did not see anything like that. And, as some say, there may have been many things I did not see. All I saw was a guy continue to tase a sobbing man with his hands cuffed. So unless there were extenuating circumstances, it does not look good for him.
The issue is NOT just LEO rights. It is also civil rights and whether cruel and unusual punishment is going to be tolerated.
I will try to shine a different light on the situation. When I was growing up, in the fifties and sixties, Cops were a lot more physical than they are now. Butt kicking ( I got my butt kicked once by an LEO) was common, beatings, and other physical stuff. That has changed. Remember Rodney King? What that said was it does not matter how bad the guy is, 10 cops can not stand around him and kick him endlessly. Does anyone think tasing is different? Does anyone think it less offensive to endlessly TASE a HELPLESS man? What is the difference between doing that and beating him? I have been tased, it is not fun, and tasing someone who is not struggling or resisting is a cruel and unbelievably vile thing to do. It is morally about the same as the Rodney King beating. Yes I know King was resisting arrest. That does not present the right to punish ANYONE in a cruel and unusual manner.
Again, the taser is a great deal and it works. I personally thought Oscar was fighting on BART and unfortunately got shot for his attitude. In this case I did not see anything like that. And, as some say, there may have been many things I did not see. All I saw was a guy continue to tase a sobbing man with his hands cuffed. So unless there were extenuating circumstances, it does not look good for him.
The issue is NOT just LEO rights. It is also civil rights and whether cruel and unusual punishment is going to be tolerated.
I will try to shine a different light on the situation. When I was growing up, in the fifties and sixties, Cops were a lot more physical than they are now. Butt kicking ( I got my butt kicked once by an LEO) was common, beatings, and other physical stuff. That has changed. Remember Rodney King? What that said was it does not matter how bad the guy is, 10 cops can not stand around him and kick him endlessly. Does anyone think tasing is different? Does anyone think it less offensive to endlessly TASE a HELPLESS man? What is the difference between doing that and beating him? I have been tased, it is not fun, and tasing someone who is not struggling or resisting is a cruel and unbelievably vile thing to do. It is morally about the same as the Rodney King beating. Yes I know King was resisting arrest. That does not present the right to punish ANYONE in a cruel and unusual manner.
Last edited:
This isn't about "perfect practices"; it's basic civil rights. There's absolutely no reason to use a taser on a non-violent individual. Even if a cop has a hunch or suspicion that he might get violent, there is no reason to use a painful weapon until there is concrete evidence that the individual is acting violently.
NorCalBusa
Member #294
Please enlighten us with your qualifications to determine police practice, risk and policy.
My qualifications are that IT'S WRONG TO TASER NON-VIOLENT INDIVIDUALS. Those are the standards that I hold the police in my community to, and I hope that other people do the same in theirs. The only qualifications required are to be a concerned citizen.
By the way, those cops you like to brown nose to, they also said that they or their departments wouldn't have tased the guy.
As a LEO, I would not have used that type of force as our policy also prohibits TASER use on a passively resisting suspect. I would have found another way.
bluedragon
Help me Tom Cruise
Yup....pretty much.
This guy should've remembered all the times he got away with whatever he was getting pulled over for and count his lucky stars he was only getting this one ticket.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2008
- Location
- Bay Area
- Moto(s)
- Kawasaki Versys 1000LT,
Work: BMW R1250RT-P
Prior: Honda 600RR Graffiti, Kawi 650R
- Name
- D
Just because I, or other officers, would not have TASERED the suspect in that situation, does not necessarily make the officer's actions on the video a criminal violation. This did not occur in California (nor is it moto related) :|, but here is the California law.
835a P.C. Any peace officer who has reasonable cause to believe that
the person to be arrested has committed a public offense may use
reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape or to
overcome resistance. A peace officer who makes or attempts to make an arrest need not
retreat or desist from his efforts by reason of the resistance or
threatened resistance of the person being arrested; nor shall such
officer be deemed an aggressor or lose his right to self-defense by
the use of reasonable force to effect the arrest or to prevent escape
or to overcome resistance.
So force IS justified by police to overcome resistance, at least in CA. The only real question is IF that use of force by TASER would be considered objectively reasonable by another officer, under the similar circunmstances, similar size and weight, and similar training and experience as the officer in the video.
My opinion, based only on the small portion of video, is that use of TASER as
pain compliance to overcome the passive resistance IS objectively reasonable. It may not be my choice, it may be against some policies, and it may not be the best choice, but it is NOT "torture" (read assault under color of authority), it is pain compliance to try and overcome resistance. I also stated previously, and still believe, that it is right up to the "fence" of what I would consider reasonable with the limited information I have. (The other side of the fence being a criminal assault.)
Florida also has different laws than California, which I am not familiar with.
MellowYellow
New member
one thing in this whole thread I dont see any talk of is that everyone assumes that taser is not lethal. It can be. You do take a risk by tasing someone. I could not get the video to run ATM so I can comment on the specifics of the video. I will say that the less then lethal force should not be pulled out just because someone is not complying. I am sure most LEOs are trained in that aspect. Though has anyone seen the video of the russian in canada airport tased and died? All because people did not take the time and figure out what the problem really is. In that situation no one was in danger a few more minutes to evaluate and try to find a better solution the charging in tasing and arresting.
It is always hard to second guess some ones actions and reactions in situations. I still think it is a combination of social breakdown and police being desensitized with training. You watch how police act and they assume the worse of people and forget the humanity aspect. ( And I am not saying police should not assume the worst it keeps them alive). But somewhere there needs to be a balance of humanity in all this.
Dont forget we are the #1 country that arrests and incarcerates. that alone says a lot. Too many laws too many anti social behavior and to much para-military training for law enforcement. The day to day civility has gone.
I would like expand on AFM199 point about the old days and police teaching a "lesson" to people. In a very weird way I dont think that is all bad. A teenage kid mouthing off to a LEO gets a little lesson and on his way. Not a bad thing. (I am not talking about a real beating here just a "lesson" no first blood ) Back in those days there was mutual respect police and people. A natural balance would form.
No longer, it is becoming a rare thing to see police show up somewhere and not have someone carted off. Sometimes because of mandatory laws, and other times just because they can. (yah I have seen it and have heard stories).
What I am trying to get that is that LEOs have a rough job and because of that it seems many forget that they are hired by the same people they are interacting with. And treat everyone like a criminal. there has to be a balance with training and procedures AND some social issues must swing back to where the police are not called out every time someone is call a Bi@tch ( and yes I know someone who was arrested for supposedly calling their ex wife a Bi@tch he had to plea out because the DA wanted to go all the way to trail and he did not have the 6000 for an attorney).
LE is not the answer to fix social ills yet we treat them like it many times. They are to enforce the laws and try and keep some sort of order
okay done with my rant. beat me up now because I know many will take my post as anti LEO- though I dont mean it to be.
It is always hard to second guess some ones actions and reactions in situations. I still think it is a combination of social breakdown and police being desensitized with training. You watch how police act and they assume the worse of people and forget the humanity aspect. ( And I am not saying police should not assume the worst it keeps them alive). But somewhere there needs to be a balance of humanity in all this.
Dont forget we are the #1 country that arrests and incarcerates. that alone says a lot. Too many laws too many anti social behavior and to much para-military training for law enforcement. The day to day civility has gone.
I would like expand on AFM199 point about the old days and police teaching a "lesson" to people. In a very weird way I dont think that is all bad. A teenage kid mouthing off to a LEO gets a little lesson and on his way. Not a bad thing. (I am not talking about a real beating here just a "lesson" no first blood ) Back in those days there was mutual respect police and people. A natural balance would form.
No longer, it is becoming a rare thing to see police show up somewhere and not have someone carted off. Sometimes because of mandatory laws, and other times just because they can. (yah I have seen it and have heard stories).
What I am trying to get that is that LEOs have a rough job and because of that it seems many forget that they are hired by the same people they are interacting with. And treat everyone like a criminal. there has to be a balance with training and procedures AND some social issues must swing back to where the police are not called out every time someone is call a Bi@tch ( and yes I know someone who was arrested for supposedly calling their ex wife a Bi@tch he had to plea out because the DA wanted to go all the way to trail and he did not have the 6000 for an attorney).
LE is not the answer to fix social ills yet we treat them like it many times. They are to enforce the laws and try and keep some sort of order
okay done with my rant. beat me up now because I know many will take my post as anti LEO- though I dont mean it to be.
masameet
Rawr!
Well, can anybody guess who the old guy in the picture is?
That's Jack Cover, who invented the Taser stun gun. Last Sunday he died. He was 88 years old.
That's Jack Cover, who invented the Taser stun gun. Last Sunday he died. He was 88 years old.
Jack Cover's LA Times obituary
NorCalBusa
Member #294
Ah- none. Got it.
afm199
Well-known member
It's called the constitution. It was written to prevent the "state" from enacting practices ( torturing individuals) that were common in Europe at that time. LEO's represent the state and must be held accountable for their actions.
And there was no resistance. Resist means to react. The guy was not resisting anything. He was just not cooperating.
NorCal, before you go any further down this road, you might want to ask yourself if you want to live in a world where you get stopped for a violation, have an emotional breakdown ( yes it happens to anyone) and start crying, and discover some guy tasing your ass and yelling at you.... Or maybe your kid or wife getting the same.
NorCalBusa
Member #294
That sound you heard- was my point whoosing over your head.
afm199
Well-known member
You did not make a point.
How about you lay out an opinion or argument instead of resorting to ad hominem attacks?
LongGoneJohn
Gone
I have a question that might help clarify and keep this thread on track.
Is the amount of pain a TASER delivers the reason that so many feel that it is unreasonable force for the crime of resisting arrest (albeit passively at that time)?
If so, would it be considered more reasonable and acceptable to place the subject into a pain compliance control hold to attempt to gain compliance? Perhaps pepper spray?
Most TASER policies consider TASER's to be at the same "level" of force as pepper spray, or an asp, or fist/leg strikes. So if the amount of pain a TASER delivers is what is causing this to be considered unreasonable by some, should we make use of force be a ladder, rather than the circle that it is? (As in, do A before B and before C, under all circumstances?) Or, should departments consider a TASER to be slightly above pain compliance, but on par with pepper spray and ASP still?
It is a slippery slope to begin traveling down and I'm not sitting here saying I have the answers, because I don't. I'm merely trying to keep this discussion going in a positive and productive manner. People have made some good points and concerns on both sides of the coin, but it's starting to slip and slide and I don't want to see this thread end just yet.
Is the amount of pain a TASER delivers the reason that so many feel that it is unreasonable force for the crime of resisting arrest (albeit passively at that time)?
If so, would it be considered more reasonable and acceptable to place the subject into a pain compliance control hold to attempt to gain compliance? Perhaps pepper spray?
Most TASER policies consider TASER's to be at the same "level" of force as pepper spray, or an asp, or fist/leg strikes. So if the amount of pain a TASER delivers is what is causing this to be considered unreasonable by some, should we make use of force be a ladder, rather than the circle that it is? (As in, do A before B and before C, under all circumstances?) Or, should departments consider a TASER to be slightly above pain compliance, but on par with pepper spray and ASP still?
It is a slippery slope to begin traveling down and I'm not sitting here saying I have the answers, because I don't. I'm merely trying to keep this discussion going in a positive and productive manner. People have made some good points and concerns on both sides of the coin, but it's starting to slip and slide and I don't want to see this thread end just yet.