Tasing a ten year old... Wow!

Remove all ads!

Since this thread has now clearly run its course Ill say this:

I dont agree with any of it, I dont respect American law enforcement for reasons such as this, a "strike now, make excuses later" culture has been adopted where officers seem to often take pleasure in the suffering they can inflict on others as they often see themselves untouchable. The thought that a supposedly highly trained officer who has the power to weild life and death doesnt have the mental or emotional capacity to deal with a simple domestic with a young, thought possibly messed up girl is staggering, I hope the FBI does intervene and raise serious questions about the quality of training of these officers.

This thread was posted in the debate forum and a debate where everyone agrees with eachother is frustrating, but Im now sick of trapseing through websites to find information to support it.

I do however support tasers, I think they are valuable weapons which have probably saved alot of lives when competant officers use them as an alternative to pulling the trigger - taser dropped me in a second and Im a trained professional, while I argued that it didnt hurt that much, being that I have served in the forces and now work regular door security, I am no stranger to pain and Im sure that it will effect regular people with harsher results.

 

Unless I'm mistaken, you only posted a single source (off a wikipedia page which also presented citations to support the ban of tasers).

 

If I hadn't repped you recently I would for that post Shoshino.

 

I'll second T2. I am a big believer in Tasers, and any tool given to police officers that help keep us safe. But I also believe that like any other dangerous tool, there needs to be limits and rules regarding their use.

 

Tri, while I only posted a single source about tasers which , while it was funded by the US justice department was an independent study, Ive searched through atleast 30 websites concerning ths incident we have discussed. regarding tasers though, I found plenty of 'concerns' about their use but no actual scientific evidence that they have been directly linked to these deaths, starting that they effect the rhythm of the heart is a no brainer, as tasers which effect the central nervous system are going to do that, but then, smoking, drinking, sprinting and the side effects of god knows how many prescription drugs effect the rhythm of the heart.

The UN raised questions against the weapon as a torture device to which taser replied:

I agree, like I said, give me the taser any day over CS, becoming a 'snot monster' for an hour or 2 is not pleasant, the CS irritated my skin for days as I have eczema on my face.

and lets not get started on amnesty international who would rather police carry flowers.

T2, LKD, thanks for that, your rep's earlier helped balance out the 2 bad reps I got for this thread, as I said to you guys, as far as Im concerned we're just having a debate

 

I'm fairly certain their policy on this issue would be a matter of public record. If he's lying, someone would catch him in it. It's not something about "he said, she said" or anything. It's a factual claim.

Ok, for one thing, sedatives are also used on animals, and surgory, and pills, and vaccines. Should these never be used on people simply because they're also used on animals? Your arguement is the transparent one.

As for breaking arms, the issue is less with the police training and more with the child's actions. At that age, the child may well be capable of exerting enough pressure by themselves to break a bone. Any restraint would run risks. And yes, I have heard of cases of children breaking bones while trying to wriggle out of cuffs. Purely anecdotal, though.

Triactus, that's an excellent point. Unfortunately, none of your posts even amounted to the level of a study. At best, they're out-of-context statistics. For example, that last one is great, but how many people were tased over the course of those 6 years (nationwide, worldwide, whatever)? At worst, they're reactions that an individual or small group did, without any analysis of why.

I'll give you a hint. Given the definition of "lethal", his hands were a lethal weapon. By the act of touching her, he's using a lethal weapon on her. Actually, given what we know, her foot could be considered a lethal weapon (injuries to the groin, even from rather minor hits, can be lethal, depending on what they hit).

... That's a very good question. I certainly would.

Shoshino, you posted something about Medlock reporting the police had been called to the house before. Could you link to the source? Did you find anything more than that? I think the biggest issue here is one of what the prior conditions were. Was an officer simply being called to a girl refusing to take a bath? Was he responding to a site that had been a problem hot-spot for years? Did the girl have a record of serious violence, or was she just a 10-year-old girl?

 

Unfortunatly not enough information in the articles, it is straight from her fathers mouth:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2389073/posts?page=7

http://www.4029tv.com/news/21638427/detail.html

http://www.officer.com/web/online/Top-News-Stories/Ark-Officer-Uses-Taser-on-10-Year-Old-Girl/1$49375

as you can see, the quote

is universal across the articles.

it is mentioned here too, interestingly most of the posters here support the officers use of the taser:

http://www.fazed.net/view/?id=17490

and this one is 100% for the use of the taser, and attacks the father as "an absolute joke"

http://www.politicalbyline.com/2009/11/18/stupid-10-year-old-girl-gets-zapped-by-a-taser/

 

I think you misinterpret the meaning of the father's statement. He is referring to the mother being inadequate and using the police to be the parent. It's truly a shame the officer responding did not have adequate judgement to understand the dynamics of what was happening.

In your last link the author states:

The author lost ALL credibility in my eyes. The guy is a nutcase spouting hate and venom and using religious belief to justify his extreme bias -- he really doesn't care about anyone exept himself and having his word get out to others like him. This guy is ever further right than Beck and Limbaugh -- what a loser. The article actually detracts (greatly) from your argument.

 

that article was never part of my argument, or I would have posted it earlier, the guys a nut job

 

NOG, Of course they are also used on animals. Everything you listed above that is used on animals can be used to help them. Electric shock isn't. It is to control them and not in a humane way either. So the comparison doesn't relate to it's usage on children. Electric fences aren't solving any health issues with your dog or horse. It's there for obedience. Would you put an en electric shock collar on your kid too? I know you wouldn't, but do you see the point? The shock they provide scares them. Shocking a child into submission does not teach them or help them understand anything but fear. Christ, it is almost a torture. Almost.

I doubt the effects of the experience of a broken wrist would match up to being tased. I am not just talking about the physical pain, but the traumatic effect as well. That will linger. To me, the choice of tasing as opposed to trying to handcuff a 10 yr old girl is a no-brainer. A 20 yr old hostile man is another story. They should no better to begin with and should also know the dangers they represent when showing hostile force to policemen. I highly doubt there is a 10 yr old girl out there that thinks they can hurt a cop physically with their hands and feet.

If giving the choice, would you rather be tased or punched in the stomach by a grown man? I would take the punch anyday. The results of the punch is ten times worse than trying to cuff a kid.

 

The guy's a hilarious nut job, though! What a rant!

I empathize with him to a degree -- kids today get away with a LOT more than I would have ever dreamed of when I was a young 'un. But is a taser or lethal force the answer? Only if you are a purely emotional jerk. As a 10 year old boy, I was kicked several times in my ding a ling and it never killed me (though it did contribute to my current negative attitude toward women!)

 

I think we can all agree that that particular writter needs a dose of his own medicine.

The other articles do bring up some interesting questions, though. Is the father spoiling an emotionally damaged child? Is the mother the one with the problem? What were the past calls to the house about? What resulted from them? What is the police's record with this girl and her family? There obviously is past history here, and I think it's important to know what it is before passing judgement.

 

dont be so quick, I had a mate in school who broke his wrist playing rugby, after 6 weeks he was still in incredable pain and after seeing a specialist they came to the conclusion that he had a trapped nerve and required emergency surgery, he lost an estimated 20% use of his right hand and making matters worse he was right handed, he could no longer write and any prolonged use brings him pain, even today he still struggles, he's having trouble with jobs and driving - all because he fell playing rugby.

---------- Added 0 hours, 3 minutes and 53 seconds later... ----------

I think we all agree that this situation in all probability could have been handled better, but beyond this the use of a taser on a child by a 'trained' professional is wrong, there is obviously more to the story which isnt going to be released in a media report
I think the thread has taken us in another direction towards the discussion of tasers themselves, a civillian taser is legal in 43 states of the US, so the US government obviously doesnt have a problem with them, where as the UK holds them alongside firearms and strictly controls them by highly trained officers.

 

That situation really sucks for your friend Sho. I empathize. But I don't think that falls into the norm. Most breaks are just breaks. Not nerve damaging as well. At least, through my experience. But good point. I have had several breaks on my body, I played hard in my teens and early twenties. Alot of skiing and snowboarding, with many breaks. Both ankles, my right Ulna, 2 fingers and my nose twice. I don't even bother these days, I am too daring, still don't know my limits when it comes to having fun and now that I am getting a bit older, I just don't feel like dealing with the pain. I prefer comfort now. I'm getting lazy!

I would think that kids are bit more resilient than you think. But you and NOG bring up good points about hurting the kid, I just feel cuffing is still a lesser evil than the taser. Even if the whole story ever prints with non-bias, I still doubt I'll be convinced tasing is the right thing to do when dealing with kids. But that's just me being dad I guess.

 

Blades, take your own statement and look at it for a second. You recognize that a broken wrist can ruin someone's life forever and, in extreme cases, can even kill them (indirectly, from secondary infections or blood clots or whatever). You dismiss this because they are statistical anomolies. There are probably tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of such broken wrists in the US every year, and yet the majority of them make a full recovery.

I have no problem with that, and I agree 100%, but now look at the information presented on Tasers. The only real study that's been presented shows that Taser deaths are also a statistical anomoly, and extremely unlikely. Others have posted about numbers of deaths connected with Tasers, but haven't even detailed how those Tasers were involved (did they die of shock, or from a fall, or something else), much less the statistical significance of those deaths. So 200-some-odd died, how many were Tased? If that was out of 400, we have a serious problem on our hands. If it was out of 400,000, I'm shocked it's not more.

If the choice is between physical restraint that has significant odds of causing injury, with slim odds of life-long impacts or even death, and an electrical shock with no significant risks, but similarly slim odds of life-long impacts or even death, the choice seems obvious to me. If you can show that Tasers are statistically more risky than, say, cuffing, then you have a real arguement.

Unfortunately, my own Google search has come up empty. I've found plenty of stories about people dieing after being tased, but never any details. I've found plenty of numbers of people who have died after being tased (especially from Amnesty International), but never anything about the statistical likelyhood of it. The only thing I can say is that, in 6 years of use in the US, 245 people died. I'm betting a great many more than that were tased all told durring those six years. Probably in the tens of thousands at least, quite possibly much more.

I also think we all may need to recall back when Palin was running for VP, and word came out about a little scandal involving her and a trooper who tased his nephew (or son-in-law, or something). Many of you who are attacking this act now defended his. After all, he only used the training setting, and the boy had literally asked for it. Yet even the training setting holds many of the same risks that a full blast does when it comes to death.

 

I personally would like to see cuffs replaced with zip cuffs, but.... cuffs arent just about restraint, theyre about the pain too, you know your cuffed, there's a program in the UK called "brit cops zero tolerance" and one inspector on that program said "there's nothing more satisfying then placing cuffs on a person who needs to be in them", if every law enforcement tool was based on safety... what would they have?

.
.
.
.
flowers

 

Well, in a nation where 99% of adults can legally purchase a firearm, they obviously are not going to have a problem with tasers. Regardless of how likely you are to be killed by a taser, the odds would have to be a heck of a lot lower than being shot.

The only point I would argue is that I do not think that there are "significant odds" of causing any serious injury (like a broken bone) when trying to physically restrain a child. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I'd say the chance of anything more than some minor bruising is not going to happen most of the time.

If you can show that Tasers are statistically more risky than, say, cuffing, then you have a real arguement. ... The only thing I can say is that, in 6 years of use in the US, 245 people died. I'm betting a great many more than that were tased all told durring those six years. [/QUOTE]

But lets continue that line of reasoning a bit. I would think that far fewer than 245 people died in the last 6 years from complications due to a broken wrist. Sure, there is the risk of infections or blood clots, but neither of those things are necessarily (or even likely to be) fatal if you have access to a medical facility. Additionally, I'd think that a far greater number of people suffer a broken wrist in any given period of time than have been tased.

I know my own experience is purely anecdotal, but out of hundreds of people in my family, friends, work associates, etc., that I have known personally throughout my life, exactly one of them has been tased. However, I know of about half a dozen broken wrists.

 

I think the disagreement may be in our definitions of "significant odds" and "injury". I'm not saying the majority of people suffer serious injury, but that upwards of 10% (just a guess) suffer some sort of injury more serious than a slight bruise.

You may want to look at secondary infection statistics in US hospitals.

Spoiler

In the United States, hospital-acquired infections alone afflict nearly 2 million patients and kill approximately 90,000 people annually, more than diabetes or influenza/pneumonia.4,5

Admittedly, those are terrible sample sizes, but combined with other statistics it seems that neither one is terribly risky.

 

There is no doubt that antibodic-resistant staph is running rampant in a ton of hospitals, and I would not dispute your claim that 90,000 die every year because of them. I'm just unsure how to extrapolate those numbers to other injuries. Surely if 2 million people are coming down with infections in the hospitals, then many times that many actually go to a hospital to receive treatment every year.

We would need at least two more additional data points to draw some corrolary. We would need to know what percentage of people get an infection when at the hospital. And we would need to know what percentage of people go to a hospital because of a broken bone suffered by being restrained by a police officer. The second of those two percentages is almost certain to be very small, which would be made even small when multiplied by the first percentage, but whether or not it is more than or less than 245 over a six year period is impossible to determine from what we know.

I will concede that the possibility of killing someone either by physically restraining them or tasing then is remote.

 

... and there is alway the possibility that, while restraining her, the policeman could have fallen knocking her headfirst into the toilet and drowning her. That would have been bad.