Another 12 year old tasered and update on recent incident.

[wprebeck]

People hear "12 year old girl", and think of a sweet little innocent girl with pigtails, a dress, and a cute smile.....


The last Amber Alert I remember from my state (about 2 weeks ago, IIRC), it was a 12 year old female. Physical description was about 5'4 and 160 or so lbs.

I also once was acquainted with a gentleman who's son was 5'9 and around 140-50 lbs or so....at age 10. Dad was 6'6, and the docs estimated his son topping at at plus 7'.

But, the media does its job well, and the vast majority of people simply think of the 12 year old Girl Scout down the street who sells those nice cookies every year, and don't realize that age means about nothing when someone is trying to hurt you.

Oh, and if people shouldn't be scared of a 50-60 pound animal that stands up to be in the 4' area, then why are they terrified of my dogs?

 

[ExMachina]

The LV officers were not injured by the TASER, but by the fall when they were zapped.

How is this kind of injury *NOT* because of the TASER?

If you take that line of logic a step further, you could then say that it wasn't the fall that injured them, but their resultant collision with the ground.

 

[TechBrute]

Ok, I'll explain it more slowly...

The TASER had nothing to do with what they landed on or how they landed? If the LVPD was mitigating or controlling the falls, then there wouldn't have been injuries. Falls can injure, whether they are caused by a TASER or a crack in the sidewalk.

When I did the TASER training, we wore padded headgear, fell on a padded mat, and had two people to control the fall. Out of approximately 150 participants, there was not one injury. The LVPD stats would dictate 2 or 3 injuries to a participant base that size.

Of course, people are injured riding roller coasters every year, too, so maybe anything with any inherent risk should be banned.

 

[Joe Demko]

Try restraining a 12 year old who is really bent on doing you some harm. Better yet, try restraining that same 12 year old without inflicting any harm on him/her. Some of you all need to take a job working in a residential treatment center for a while. They're always hiring because the pay is low and the work conditions suck. It'll be an eye-opening experience for you, I promise. After you've been bitten, struck, kicked, spit on, and scratched enough times, you'll understand that we're talking about restraining an out-of-his-skull 12 year old, not engaging in combat with one. You'll also understand that under those rules of engagement, tasering an armed and crazy 12 year old may well be the best solution as it results in the least harm to everybody involved.

 

[roo_ster]

tasering an armed and crazy 12 year old may well be the best solution as it results in the least harm to everybody involved.

And that about sums it up. Most folks don't want to go about tasering 12yo boys, willy-nilly. It just happens to be the best option available.

 

[Marko Kloos]

Well, as much of a rabid Libertarian as I am, I can't find anything wrong with the officers' actions.

If it is decided that physical force needs to be employed, and the use of that force is legit, then the level of force is irrelevant. Your interaction with the suspect has breached a level from which there is no increment once you breach it.

If you use your gun legitimately against a threat, then the way in which you employ your gun is irrelevant. Shoot him once, shoot him ten times...as long as your bullets don't hit anything or anyone else. Legally and morally, I see no difference, because the lethal force threshold has been crossed legitimately.

If you have the right and obligation to use physical force against an aggressor who is posing a threat to you or others, then the way in which you exercise that force is equally irrelevant, if that force is legit. Mace him, Taser him, use your PR-24, wrestle him to the ground...whatever it takes. You've already crossed the "physical coercion" threshold, and there is no increment possible once you do.

A knife or glass shard wielded by a 12-year old can cut your aorta just as well as one wielded by a 300-pound weightlifter. If your use of force is legit, then it makes no difference to me whether you taser the brat or rap him on the hand with an ASP. All things considered, the Taser is probably safer for all involved.

The only problem I have with Taser use is when the officer displays the "only tool in the box short of Mr. Glock" syndrome, and uses the Taser where no force is warranted. If you wouldn't use the old Act-Rite stick, or your Devastator spray, the Taser has no place in your hand, either.

 

[Nehemiah Scudder]

Have they done TASER tests on children? That's my immediate thought.

Whether or not the kid deserved it is kinda moot, and it appears that she isn't a drooling vegetable or anything.

But a developing nervous system is different from a developed one. I'm kind of curious to know if there are any problems related to developing nervous system.

 

[TechBrute]

But a developing nervous system is different from a developed one. I'm kind of curious to know if there are any problems related to developing nervous system.

That's a really valid point that I hadn't thought of. I, for one, would wonder how the tests would be conducted, but that's not my problem.

One also has to consider the alternatives to the TASER being used on the developing bodies of children. It would seem to me to that it might be easier to accidently use excessive force on a child. (Don't take issue with my wording of the last sentence, just try to understand my thought.)

I also have faith in God's design of the human body and its robustness.

 

[Azrael256]

But a developing nervous system is different from a developed one. I'm kind of curious to know if there are any problems related to developing nervous system.

If I had a nickel for every time I shocked the crap out of myself when I was a kid... I'd have about a dollar, but the point is that I *twitch* turned out *twitch* fine. *twitch*

Seriously, though, the taser doesn't give you a good solid head-to-toe shock, just a quick jolt between the two prongs. Path of least resistance and all. If you ever decide to do something idiotic, like letting your brother test his stun gun on you, you'll notice that the rather extraordinary pain is in the immediate area of the electrodes, not the rest of the body. You'd pretty much have to try to shock somebody in such a way as to interfere with CNS activity, much less to do any damage.