Tasing a ten year old... Wow!

Remove all ads!

Rahkir's post reminded me of a joke that I want to share to lighten the mood of this thread.

A little 5 year old boy went to a restaurant with his mother. The little bastard wouldn't eat his peas. So his mother saw a cop sitting at another table -- and not just any cop, an enormous 6'9" muscular cop who looked like he could break bricks with his pinkie finger. So she goes over to him and says "could you talk to my son? He really respects police officers and I think if you talked to him you could get him to eat his peas."

So the cop comes up and looms over the table. He says "Son, I am the toughest guy on the force, and I am the best shot on the force with handguns, shotguns, and rifles. I'm the best driver on the force, and I'm also the smartest guy on the force. There's not a crook I've ever gone after that I haven't run to ground. And I have never once eaten my peas!"

 

Physical harm isn't the only kind of harm, and if this is really a very emotionally troubled child then sending her to jail or a youth shelter, after shocking her with a taser... I don't think that is the road to recovery.

You're right, no lasting physical harm, thankfully, came from this, but you don't know what emotional state the girl is in now. Neither do I, but I know I wouldn't be happy after being tased and put in a youth shelter at 10. The whole situation could have been handled better, that's all I'm saying.

To relate it, maybe, to something you better understand; a husband who beats his wife but leaves no bruises. She isn't sent to the hospital, she's not dying or seriously wounded outwardly. The ten year old girl isn't being sent to the hospital, she's not dying or seriously wounded outwardly; but she's not in her home sleeping in her bed. She's in a youth center after being tased by a cop because she wouldn't take a shower. If you're so worried about her being emotionally unstable, then ask that the cop do something to help her, don't defend him tasing an unarmed 65 lb child.

Edit - that made me chuckle LKD. If only this child had met a cop who didn't believe in regular bathing!

 

Care to link? I've seen multiple re-hashes of the original story, about a dozen different ways of saying he got fired for violating departmental policy, and confirmation that the girl was not injured in any way. Nothing more. If you have more details, please share.

If you're right about no prior history, I'll agree with you 100%. This should have been a situation where the cop pulled up, assessed the situation, and said, "You're the mom, you deal with it."

Again, I've looked. I haven't seen anything new other than a cute photo of the girl in bunny ears.

1.) If it were my child, I wouldn't have called the cops until she was wielding a weapon (and she'd never have gotten that far).
2.) Iff the child had a real history of mental disorder and posed any kind of a risk, then no, I wouldn't.
3.) If police responded to some random call to my home and tased my child for no good reason, I'd have their *ahem* tails over the cooking fire in about 2 seconds.

... Wait, is it still disorderly conduct if it's in your own home? I mean, I suppose kicking a cop in the balls is assaulting a police officer, but disorderly conduct? From a 10-year-old? Really?

I think it's different with children. If you are the person's legal guardian, they have certain rights concerning your stuff and you have certain responsabilities to them.

 

could possibly have been handled better, all Im saying is that we dont know that.

Im going to take this even further back, I disagree with this comment, a child with undeveloped bone and muscle structure is far more at risk from restraint.

where has this come from? Ive seen "65lb" mentioned before in thsi thread but I havent found a news source which has weighed her.

being taught that the police are the figure of law enforcement and authority is a good lesson for a 10 year old.

yep, at 10 you are accountable for your actions, and yes, even if you live at an address you are accountable or disorderly conduct and breaching the peace.

and youre also covered by welfare against violent and abusive behaviour.

 

I posted it -- it was from an interview with her father. All you need to do is read the reference material.

 

t2, I want you to post a link to that, because the only website which Ive found to mention it releases her 'name' along with her weight ant height despite her being to young to be named by law, and its very interesing what country that source is from, weight irrelevant though as:

I also found this while hunting:

 

I think you are 100% correct here. It's completely legal to go home and trash your own house - I think disorderly conduct has to be done in public or cause damage to someone else's property. While the child is not the homeowner, it's not like the child is a tennant. The laws regarding property rights that apply to tennants and strangers do not apply to your children, provided they are still minors. Further, the homeowner would have to decide to press charges, which would be kind of silly, seeing as how it's their kid. A 10-year old does have any income, and so the fines would be paid by the parents... to the parents.

 

I cant speak for the US, but in the UK if I trash my house, make alot of noise and generally cause disorder within my home and a neighbour calls the police, If the officer decides I am causing alarm or distress I can be arrested.

fines arent the only punishment, Ive sat on a jury where a mother brought charges of assult against her 12 yearold son, he pleaded not guilty at magestrates so it went to crown, we found him guilty, he was locked up in a detention facility for 2 months.

 

It's obvious that the child is an out of control little <poop> who needs severe disciplining. Some kids are just like that. The mother obviously does not have the skills to discipline the child appropriately (with some kids, I don't believe that ANYONE, certificate from a university or not, has the skills to deal with effectively) so the mother called the cops. Not the best option around (I seriously doubt if the only issue was one of taking a bath and going to bed) but hey, on that one I'm willing to say "I wasn't there so I shouldn't judge that decision."

On the Taser issue, though, I don't buy that "we weren't there so we shouldn't judge." -- that decision is totally out of bounds. To my way of thinking, it is on par with if she said to the cop "you can break her nose if you need to." and the cop wound up and smashed the kid's schnozz with his flashlight -- no imaginable circumstance on the planet, whether I was there or not, justifies either what happened or my example. Those choices are too extreme to be justified.

 

Which still has nothing to do with tasing. Parents can press charges against their kids all they want and be justified in doing so. I'm for it if the child is an actual danger to someone. The child can be as wild as a boar, you still don't Tas a child. There are other means at hand for trained professionals to use, there is never any need to Tas a kid. Period.

 

why are we focusing on the officer? The police chief has openly said that the use of the taser fell within the guidelines for the department, the officer didnt do anything wrong except failing to attach the camera, if you have a problem with tasering children it needs to be dealt with by the policy makers, who probably wont care because if falls well within the safety guidelines for the use of the device.

I think its a brilliant method of dealing with them, saves the risk of breaking their underdeveloped bones or causing injury to their underdeveloped musclular structure.

 

Are you seriously contending that the chief is impartial? Of course he's going to back one of his officers unless there is overwhelming evidence that the officer's actions were illegal.

 

Electric Shock is what is used on animals. You'r condoning it's use on children too? How is cuffing a kid going to break their bones. Officers cuff people all of the time, they are trained to do so without breaking bones. That excuse is transparent.

 

Humans are animals.

more likely to injure a child cuffing them when they struggle against the cuffs then you are with a taser.

nope, never said or implied that, he said it was the forces policy if it wasnt he's now got his head in a noose. however, in my experience a ranking officer (inspector in the UK) is more likely to condem the actions of an officer if they have done something wrong, because their job hinges on their forces reputation, if it gets a bad rep, they get replaced.

 

But you clearly agreed with him. Usually if you are going to make an appeal to authority, you'd want an impartial source. And last I checked Arkansas wasn't located in the UK.

 

You have a better chance of convincing me the next Pope will be a Chinamen than you do of convincing me a trained professional can't cuff a 10 yr old GIRL without breaking their bones.

2 people in my town have been killed by Tasers from Police this year. They were adults. The new policy for the Police here in Rockford, IL is to not use them. Especially when the manufacturer changed their recommendations about their use after these occurences. Now they show you shouldn't aim at the chest, otherwise fatalities can occur.

 

I didnt say that Arkansas was in the UK, 'Inspector' was in brackets as I dont know what the highest ranking officer of a force in the US is I used the UK comparison.
There's nothing to agree or disagree with, its the forces policy, he said so, whats there to argue? its not his job to make policy only to enforce it.

Im sure he could have, still more chance of injuring her with physical force than a taser. Ive studied taijitsu for 10 years, the Bujinkan require a minimum age of 16 to train, due to the high risk of injury to younger people.

cool, lets start shooting people again.

Im going to post this again:

Im also going to point out once again that this was a drive stun taser which has no significant effect on the nervous system

 

Again, the taser is a lethal weapon and is supposed to be used in lethal situations. So the use of a gun when an officer's life is in danger isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Fine, I'll post these again.

The point is, and have been, that one study isn't enough. Specially since there might be a strong lobbying for their use, for a economic reason (the company who builds them want to make money). There have been precedents of producing contradicting studies to continue to sell the product (like for tobacco companies. And we're starting to see the same thing in the cellular phone realm).

There are clear evidence that the Taser hasn't been as harmless as it's been advertised. They should go back to the drawing boards to rework on it.

As for the topic, there is nothing in this world that would justify using a lethal weapon on a unarmed 10 year old girl. Nothing. He was kicked in the balls? She was a 10 year old girl, she wasn't a drug dealer in a shadowed alley. The mother of the child could have jumped in to try to protect the officer while he recovered.

And BTW, why aren't police officers required to wear a jockstrap or something? There would be many situation where it could save their life (as in not be incapacitated in an actual dangerous situation)..

 

Shoshino, obviously we completely disagree on this subject, but I respect your stance in general. I am all for the police having the ability to do their jobs and having the technology to keep themselves as well as others safe. I have a lot of cop relatives. I just don't agree on Tasers. They seem cruel and unnecessary. I know cops who feel the same way, though I also know they all don't feel as I do. I would rather not see them draw their handgun. But when not confronted with deadly force from an adult, a gun or taser, IMO, is only necessary in the most extreme of circumstances. Which leads to when the same situation is applied to kids, it is never necessary. But, whatever, the points have been argued round and round here, we'll end up going in circles if we continue.

 

I don't think anyone would describe me as 'soft on crime' or a 'bleeding heart liberal' but I have a problem with police using tasers, mace, batons, etc. on children. Period. We weren't talking about a teenager here who is a starting tackle for the local football team -- there was absolutely no threat this child (at 4'6" and 65 lbs -- see page 3 of this thread for the link) could have posed to the officer. Using a taser in this case was wrong.