Cops at it again, 'protecting and serving'

Remove all ads!

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81087138/

Elderly cancer survivor with a heart condition falls down steps and injures himself.

Rings 911.

Says that he is in so much pain, he would 'shoot himself'.

Police force their way in to house.

Demand that old man come with them to have an assessment for suicidality.

Old man politely refuses, and says that he just injured himself and is tired.

Police demand he put hands behind his back to be handcuffed.

Old man tells them to get the **** out of his house.

Police tase the old man not once, not twice, but three times.

While he is screaming in agony, the pig... err, I mean police, keep telling him not to resist.

Ahh, tasing a man who is injured and who you claim may be suicidal. The police are at it again, protectin' and servin' the people!

---------- Added 0 hours, 6 minutes and 3 seconds later... ----------

By the way, just in case you think United States police have a hatred for old people in particular, here's a scenario which disproves that notion:

http://onemansblog.com/2008/08/11/cops-tase-boy-with-broken-back-19-times/

"What? You keep passively resisting arrest because you have a broken back!? Gee, guess we'd better tase you again."

Giving American police any sort of offensive weapon is like letting a monkey fly a plane.

 

Seems like the police are going to have to have tasers taken off them. I know not every copper is going to be that stupid but it's not worth the risk. These people need to learn a bit of responsibility and the meaning of 'protect and serve'

 

The problem I have with tasers is simple - since they are viewed as less lethal than firearms, police are more likely to use them. However, I still think they only should be used when the person poses some level of threat to the police, not just because they are being unruly. (Remember the thread we had a while back with a girl about 10-years old being tased?)

This strikes me as somewhat similar. The guy wasn't armed, je didn't want to go to the hospital, got tased and ended up spending the night in bed. I fought it sad that they charged him with "resisting arrest", when there was nothing they were arresting him for. Last I checked, you cannot make someone go to the hospital if they don't want to. I have to wonder what happened to the police who did this?

I don't know how good of an idea that is - they may use firearms instead. (And pretty much all police officers in the US carry firearms.)

 

If they can't control themselves with a taser then they sure as hell shouldn't be allowed a gun!

 

From mordea's second link:

That's a pretty broad generalization, but it certainly seems to be the case in these scenarios.

 

My Dad is getting old and a little senile as the days go on. I pray to God that he doesn't end up meeting one of these sorts of cops. I know they are a tiny minority, but tasing a senior citizen who poses no physical threat is an assinine thing to do. And I'm usually Pro Cop!

 

Well, I'd say that it's better than making a generalization about broads...

 

I think tasers are a wonderful tool, I say tool because I dont see them as a weapon, and better training is needed before their deployment, in the UK only dry stun tasers can be issued to standard officers, and the only with formal training. Barb tasers are only deployed by specialist units and firearms units.

The US needs to reign in its policy on tasers, and provide officers with education and training into the nature of their tools.

 

Tasers are essentially used to force compliance. Using raw pain to force compliance, what is that called again? Hmm, can't remember, wait, it's coming to me...

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/torture

*You* paid for this, folks. You paid for these services with your tax dollars. You paid for a 'protection agency' which will force their way into your home after you have been injured and electrocute you for not being handcuffed so that you can be 'assessed' for suicidality.

Why doesn't this enrage people? I know people in the previous generations who would kick a stink when a toaster wouldn't work as advertised. But they just let this slide?

---------- Added 0 hours, 2 minutes and 20 seconds later... ----------

If they are used as an alternative to lethal force, then yeah, I agree. Unfortunately, the fact that they are considered 'non-lethal' means that American police are rather trigger happy with them.

 

I'm willing to wager that, on balance, tasers are more often than not used appropriately. I'd further wager that incidents involving inappropriate use more often speak to officers who aren't worthy of their badge than to officers who have been inappropriately trained. I'm open to being proven wrong on this tack, but everything I've seen has thus far indicated that, at least in recent years, police departments nationwide already have the proper policies in place, are disseminating the proper information, and provide sufficient training to their people as to how their policies should be applied. Officers employing the taser inappropriately clearly violate their own policies, and I'd wager that they do so knowingly.

Perhaps they do it out of bad judgment in the heat of the moment, or perhaps such officers are merely those few "bad apples" that are found in every profession. The results are ultimately the same, so the distinction makes little real difference. Our response to such incidences should be swift and proportionate. These incidents are really no different than any other type of excessive force employed by an officer, and we should treat them as such.

 

I agree to an extent, you will always have bad apples in law enforcement, I think however that alot of the problem with tasers is that many officers dont think that the taser can actually harm its target, and that is why you cant get people tasered 6 or 7 times.

officer threatens to taser person if they make (any) movement, they make a slight movement, he tasers them, they move again, he tasers them, they move again, he tasers them, they move again, he tasers them, they move again, he tasers them, they move again, he tasers them - they sue the police force.

 

The guy who got tasered in that video sounded pretty pissed off to me...

Some are. I agree with Drew that most aren't.

I happen to have a friend who is a police officer. His training is that use of a taser is one step below a firearm. He's been a police officer for 9 years now, and in that time, he has never had to shoot his firearm (other than for training at the range), and has used his taser twice. In both instances, the guy was drunk and took a swing at him, and rather than trying to wrestle the drunk idiot to the ground, he tased his ass.

 

I'm going to go out and kill some policemen. Mordea, you've inspired me!

 

I suppose it's like plane craches. You only ever hear about the few planes that crash every year, you never hear about the millions that land safely.
However, I still think that some these people need their firearms, tasers and shoelaces taken off them before they kill someone with their stupidity. In fact, the officers involved in the two stories on here should only be allowed plastic spoons to play with until they get re-trained

 

I would be enraged if these examples were actually considered to be officially appropriate uses of tasers, but they're not. OK, so maybe I'm a bit enraged, but my rage is narrowly focused at the few who abuse the device. I agree with Drew that the vast majority of officers know what is and is not an appropriate use of a taser gun.

 

I suspect that the officers in question here did not have evil intent, and that taser use in this context was somehow in accord with department policy ... which is where the problem lies, imo. I assume they showed up because there was an emergency call made, just like the EMT's, but as long as no crime was being committed, I can't see as how they were not obligated to leave when the home owner ordered them out, much less use a taser on him to get him to comply with an order they (imo) had no authority to make, and particularly without the guy being violent in any way. (To be clear, you're most definitely supposed to obey when a police officer orders you to "sit here" or "stand there," etc., but that only applies when they are legitimately involved in some situation; e.g., a cop can't randomly walk into your home and order you to stand on your head. In your home, your authority actually trumps the police officer's, as long as there is no crime being committed. And unless I'm greatly mistaken, suspicion of being suicidal != crime. It might be different if he was waving a weapon around or something.)

So anyway, in other words, blame the department policy and not the taser. Credit them with using 'taser-cam' though, so we can all see what actually happened instead of idly speculating about it.

 

In this instance the man could have easily been detained without the use of the taser.
further to "the officers have no authority"

it all depends on the officers perception of a situation at the time, legally, the officer believes that the man has made an offence (the threat of injury to himself), and has ordered the man to a medical facilty for evaluation, the man refused the order, the order is repeated with the threat of taser, the man refuses, the officer carrys out his threat.

a simple rule to remember, if your told to do something by a police officer: DO IT!

if your innocent, you will be released without charge, if evidence is found that you are in breach of the law, you will be charged.

 

I guess I agree, although the question becomes, is the threat of injury to yourself a crime? Maybe it is. But there's also a standard to be applied. If someone said "Shoshino's acting weird," would that be reason enough to send you in for an evaluation?

My take on it was that he was tased for getting up off the couch, not for refusing to go get evaluated (although I guess they did threaten that earlier). When he started to get up, they said "sit down," and he didn't.

 

Shoshino IS weird. I vote we tase him

 

Gaear, dont take me wrong, Im only slightly playing devils advocate, Ive mae it clear that I think the use of the taser in this situation is wrong.

It is an offence in most countries to commit acts of harm againt one's self, in the UK it is covered by the mental health act, acts of serious self harm or threat of suicide are arrestable offences. If the US has a similar law (which I would imagine) then the officer is indeed in authority.

The taser in the US seems to have replaced simple restraint, some officers simply taser a suspect instead of gripping them, which is lazy and potentially dangerous.

got the T-shirt