Police Taser, Kill Teen Acting Strangely In Horse Pasture

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've never been tased...but...

From all the episodes of COPS I've watched and what I've read about the product, I'd rather be shot with the taser than be:
a) shot with the officer's handgun
b) beat with the officers' batons/flashlights
c) sprayed in the face with pepper spray

Of course, being the non drug crazed, upright, law abiding citizen that I am, I'll probably never be confronted with any of this stuff.

I guess tasers are somewhat dangerous...but I would offer that it's non-compliance with the police that is dangerous.

I wonder if tasers are considered 'deadly weapons'...whereby lethal force is justified in defending against them? I guess I can see the potential for the police demanding compliance where a free citizen might not actually want to comply.

Either way, it's still better than being beat with a mag light.

Oh and by the way vernal: do you have any original thoughts or do you just post stories you read on the internet?
 
So, I don't get it. We are trying to implement something that is less lethal than a firearm, and people complain that it is still too deadly.

Whacking someone upside the head with a baton could also be deadly.

Throwing yourself onto someon to restrainand cuff them could be deadly.

Whenever you have to get forceful with someone, you run the risk of someone getting hurt/killed. The perp is usually the one that forces the hand, too.

Think getting tasered is not a good thing? Don't act strange, stumbling around in someone's livestock while mumbling about killing someone and then charge someone holding a taser.
 
well first off- gotta say very interesting an apparent lawman posting this-
in favor of tasers or not?

anyway- i have limited sympathy for people on hard drugs .

i've done my fair share of hallucingoens.

so my take would be this after reading the article=

i don't get it. if he was on PCP or meth, or ecsatsy type drugs, yes, that would definitely contribute.
other hallucinogens- lsd or mushrooms- no they dont affect you in ways that would cause death like that.

seems like they hit him too many times in part. i guess i start to wonder why cops dont shoot to injure in these cases but whatever.

seems like really what is happening is some people have minor heart problems that would never be noticed, and they get to be the unlucky victis of the taser, and the general LE feeling is "well sucks for them".

i dont know. i also suspect the cops were unable to keep a crazy moron from "getting to them" so they hit him more times harder than necessary to try and teach a lesson to someone incapable of learning at that point.
 
One of the first legal hurdles of the Texas CHL was a case several years ago where a guy shot a man who was beating the snot out of him with fists. The Courts ruled that "serious bodily injury" included pummeling by fist since that can cause serious bodily injury. "Serious bodily injury" is a justification for deadly force in Texas where it is not in other states.

All that aside, a trespasser acting weird, talking about killing someone, and charging an officer: Justified use of deadly force. Even though deadly force was not intended by the officer.

Where is the argument here?

Had to add: There is not such thing as "shoot to wound." It is deadly force. A wounded man can die just the same as a man shot through the heart.
 
I wonder if tasers are considered 'deadly weapons'...whereby lethal force is justified in defending against them? I guess I can see the potential for the police demanding compliance where a free citizen might not actually want to comply.
Click to expand...
1. Is using a Taser on someone considered Deadly Force? No. It is a less-lethal weapon, and the police using it in situations where deadly force is not authorized is OK. It is actually contraindicated in deadly force scenarios, with some exceptions (like the suicide-by-cop standoff with a knife-wielding nutjob- but even then there is almost always an officer on hand with deadly force ready to go if something happens).

2. Is having a Taser used on you a deadly-force situation? Probably yes. Why is it being used on you? They guy isn't asking directions, he's getting you utterly at his mercy for 5 seconds (and with the capability to extend that in 5-second increments until the battery dies). If you are carrying concealed and a robber Tasers you in the course of a robbery and you can get to your gun, I'd say that you'd be A-OK to shoot for the X-ring and straight to slidelock. Same thing as if someone came at you with a baton/baseball bat/2x4.

Mike
 
2. Is having a Taser used on you a deadly-force situation? Probably yes. Why is it being used on you? They guy isn't asking directions, he's getting you utterly at his mercy for 5 seconds (and with the capability to extend that in 5-second increments until the battery dies). If you are carrying concealed and a robber Tasers you in the course of a robbery and you can get to your gun, I'd say that you'd be A-OK to shoot for the X-ring and straight to slidelock. Same thing as if someone came at you with a baton/baseball bat/2x4.
Click to expand...

Not to be disrespectful, but has there been any caselaw on this subject?


Interestingly, I learned that some people are somewhat immune to Tazers. How'd I learn this? I was shot with one. It really, really hurt. I yanked out the electrodes, and cursed for a couple minutes. My leg was all kind of twitchy too. (MP training exercise. I was a bad guy and volunteered to get zapped. I was curious what it felt like and I was assured it was non-lethal, usually.)

Still, I was surprised. I suppose it's similiar to hype regarding super-duper anti-terrorist rounds, certain types of hollowpoints, etc. I didn't immediately drop to the ground and do the funky chicken dance. It hurt, a lot, but I'd have no problems continuing my assault if I had a weapon. No offense to whatever company the Tazer is made by, but I'd never trust my life to it.
 
AFAIK, no, there has not been caselaw to that effect. So, that's a good point to raise. I, however, know that I will be shooting the holy heck out of anyone who grabs my Taser, and I believe firmly that I would be justified in doing so (as does my PD, and they have trained us accordingly). Likewise, I think you'd be on solid legal ground in capping someone who attacked you with one, though IANAL and all that. It's never fun to be the point man in caselaw.

RevDisk, what type of taser were you shot with? A lot of the people who state (truthfully) that they can still move/function while being Tasered were hit with older versions of the weapon. The newer ones have a much lower rate of failure to incapacitate (assuming proper deployment), though it can still happen.

Mike
 
I'm not in law enforcment, never have been. So I'll give a civilian's take on the same situation.

I think if I found a man in my back yard mumbling incoherently, appearing drugged, I'd feel very ill at ease. I've had personal experiences with people tripping on various and sundry substances, and I avoid that **** and the people that use it like the plague. If same individual charged me, I would certainly feel threatened. I'd at least have used pepper spray on him if I couldn't run. If might have tasered him if I'd had one. If I had CCW and he started to attack me, some might say I had sufficient justification to shoot him. In some states, it's probably quite legal.

Why wouldn't an officer be justified for trying to using less than lethal means to subdue the individual? He was probably more at risk statistically by using whatever he snorted/injected/ate than he was from the tazer. Why is the officer less able to defend himself/herself than I feel that I am? Anyway, that's just the thought running through my head, what if it had been me?

Akron is just south of here, but I haven't heard this on the news. I don't own a TV, but radio hasn't reported it much. I think it's unfortunate that the young man was killed. I'm sure the officer doesn't feel any better about it.

jmm
 
AFAIK, no, there has not been caselaw to that effect. So, that's a good point to raise. I, however, know that I will be shooting the holy heck out of anyone who grabs my Taser, and I believe firmly that I would be justified in doing so (as does my PD, and they have trained us accordingly). Likewise, I think you'd be on solid legal ground in capping someone who attacked you with one, though IANAL and all that. It's never fun to be the point man in caselaw.
Click to expand...

I'd prefer not to be the test subject, heh.


RevDisk, what type of taser were you shot with? A lot of the people who state (truthfully) that they can still move/function while being Tasered were hit with older versions of the weapon. The newer ones have a much lower rate of failure to incapacitate (assuming proper deployment), though it can still happen.
Click to expand...

I don't remember exactly. I looked over Taser's website, and I think it could have been either an M18L or M26. It had yellow on it in about the same spot as those two.

I'm not sure if it matters, but I zapped myself a good number of times working with electricity in the past. (I'm a Signal geek.) Not sure if that's built up a resistance (har har) or just that I've dealt with that level of pain before.
 
So let me get this straight...

a big, muscular, drug using, angry, antisocial badazz is removed from the gene pool because of his own actions;
BEFORE he could spawn more badazzes with one or more of his many "girlfriends".
And this is a bad thing?

I am sorry for the cop chick. But this was righteous.

He was lucky he didn't meet that crooked white guy cop from all the TV shows; he would have been beaten and tortured first and then executed by a single shot to the back of the head. :uhoh:

G
 
I have seen a couple people state that the officer should have just "shot the victim in the leg." The problem with this is that anytime an officer fires their weapon it is considered by law to be use lethal force whether or not they intend to shoot for a leg or center mass and there must be justification. It is also much safer to be tased than it is to be shot in the leg. Officers are taught specifically to avoid "shooting to wound" because many accidents can happen under stress. I know, I know, the people who type "shoot for the leg" are unaffected by stressful situations and would shoot in just the right spot so as to not hit the femoral artery, any major nerves, or break any bones, but the officer might not be that lucky. The fact is if there is no reason to use deadly force then a gun should not be fired. However a less than lethal weapon such as a taser could be used in a dangerous situation where deadly force may or may not be justified. It is no fault to the officer that the idiot was hopped up on drugs and died.
 
From all the episodes of COPS I've watched and what I've read about the product, I'd rather be shot with the taser than be:
a) shot with the officer's handgun
b) beat with the officers' batons/flashlights
c) sprayed in the face with pepper spray
Click to expand...
Well you have more common sense than a few people here, and ironically what you figured out on your own, is what most experts in use of force consider to be true of the TASER. Most consider the TASER to be less force than the three options you gave, and most also consider it to be less force than attempting "empty hand" controls.

So for the others with less common sense, let's really get to the heart of the matter.

While there have been a few deaths associated with the TASER (Vernal's post claims 18 since 2003), that is a small fraction of actual uses of the TASER, and those deaths have all been tied to people having pre-existing risk factors for cardiac events. Guess what? Being high on coke, meth, and several other drugs creates a risk of having a cardiac event! Abusing your body with many drugs will damage your heart (often permanently) and mean you have a greater risk of a cardiac event.

Regardless, let's leave out the thousands and thousands of uses in the field of the TASER, and remember most agencies require officers who want to be certified to carry the TASER get shocked themselves. I personally know officers that have been shocked more than once, and two that have been shocked at least three times in training. AFAIK, there has never been a death of a LEO who has been shocked with a TASER in training. Thousands of training shocks, and not one death. Thousands of uses in the field and only 18 deaths, and most if not all, associated with pre-existing risk factors for cardiac events.

The problem is those people susceptible to cardiac events are just as likely to have a cardiac problem from any other type of use of force. Let's say the cops go "hands on" rather than use the TASER. Do you think in the ensuing struggle the suspect's heart rate and blood pressure will elevate extremely?

Which takes us back to the real heart of the matter. What's the better option for the officer?

1- Don't use the TASER and go hands on possibly ending up with both people seriously injured, and/or dead?

2- Use a baton and again possibly end up with both seriously injured or dead. Remember, most expandable batons are 16" to 26", I personally use a 21" baton. There is a much greater likeklyhood of injuring the suspect when using a baton, than there is using a TASER. Also, it requires being employed at much closer range, increasing the danger of getting tangled up.

3- OC Spray, the affects of which can last longer than an hour, and through which some people can still fight, again increasing the risk of a struggle where both end up injured and/or dead.

4- Just shoot him.

5- Use the TASER whose affects only last 5 seconds per use, has rarely resulted in serious injury or death, can be employed at a much greater range than options 1 - 3, is much less likely to result in serious injury or death than option 4.

Hmmm, I wish my agency would let us have a TASER so I could have option 5. What do I know though, I'm just a dumb cop.

Again, neoncowboy kudos to you for approaching this topic with a great deal of commonsense.
 
Hey, Spock!

"This is the second time someone has died in Summit County after being shocked by a Taser gun."

Hey, Spock! Did you set that thing on stun or kill?

rr
 
My Two Cents

I run a private security company. I have seen stunguns used over the last fifteen years and they usually work, but...

On one occastion, one of my officers tried using a stungun on attacker. He laughed at him and said those don't effect me. He was right, he had no reaction to the stungun.

A friend of mine worked at Pelican Bay, and one night durring a cell extraction he told me a inmate was Tazered TWICE and both times he pulled the probes from his body.

There are some people on whom electricity has a reduced or no effect.
 
The idea of the Taser is less than lethal, not non-lethal. There is a very large difference between those two terms.

Looking at the total number of people on whom the Taser has been used (LEOs in training, and LEO uses), only 18 have died out of the thousands of uses.

That strikes me as a much, much lower percentage than would have died had a firearm been used.

Seems to me that when there is a violent situation in which the effort is to restore order without great physical damage, the Taser has proven to be successful.

But nothing is perfect. Never has been; never will be.

Art
 
Actually the term is "less lethal". Either way it is quasi-legalese for "We don't think this thing will kill you but it could under the right set of really rare circumstances".

Heck, we just had an in-custody death subsequent to a macing, so ain't nothing 100%. We've also had suspects who just plain went along with the program keel over dead, too. Handcuffs cause death, news at 11:00. :rolleyes:

I'm not sure if it matters, but I zapped myself a good number of times working with electricity in the past. (I'm a Signal geek.) Not sure if that's built up a resistance (har har) or just that I've dealt with that level of pain before.
Click to expand...
Well, the muscle incapacitation and the pain are independent of one another. A properly deployed X26 Taser will have the probes impact several inches apart (the more the better), and the effect of the current arcing through bodily tissue (read: major muscle groups) is what causes the incapcitation. It's not so much that it hurts like a sonofagun (it does), it's the fact that your muscles just don't obey your brain for 5 seconds. For instance, a drive stun (where you jam the Taser against the body and pull the trigger) hurts just as bad (some claim worse), but there is zero incapacitation except due to pain (which can be overcome). The same effect exists when the probes impact close together...there just aren't enough muscle groups affected to cause the neurological logjam that a well-deployed Taser creates.

Of course, nothing is 100%, and some people can function reasonably well even against a properly deployed Taser. I've heard of about three instances from reliable sources (defined as someone I know personally who witnessed the event) where a subject either managed to draw a gun, pull out the probes, or move far enough to break wires while the Taser was cycling. So, it can and does happen. But most of these instances occur either after the Taser cycles, or during the cycle, but only due to the random funky-chicken thrashings of someone getting juiced.

As to shooting the suspect "in the leg"...

We don't do that, except under the most utterly unusual of circumstances. And the "we" refers to either the police or private citizens. If you're shooting someone, it is deadly force. If it is time for deadly force, you need to be shooting COM or head, for a multiplicity of reasons that are off-topic for this thread (but still worth discussing elsewhere).

As to the Taser being used in lieu of other options...

Taser is similar to Mace/OC on the use of force continuum in most places. Many PDs (mine included) would MUCH rather you mace or Taser someone than end up in a wrestling/hitting match with them, because the chances of either an officer or the subject being injured or killed is an order of magnitude higher in a physical confrontation. There is a strong tendency of officers to want to stand off and mace/Taser people who are physically much smaller than they are (women, for instance) because, let's face it...if someone really truly does not want to go in cuffs, you're not going to get them there one-on-one without injuring them. There is no magical training that allows you to overcome all resistance without hurting the resister. A good officer would much rather use mace or a Taser to get a woman in cuffs without an injury than they would use physical force and end up dislocating a woman's arm.

Before anyone asks, I have seen officers break the arms of physically small resistive suspects in the course of a completely reasonable use of force. I dunno about you, but I would say that mace or Taser would be preferable to that.

Mike
 
As to the Taser being used in lieu of other options...

Taser is similar to Mace/OC on the use of force continuum in most places.
Click to expand...
Thank you for that... I've been curious as to where the Taser fits in the continuum of force. Does it vary much between jurisdictions?

I'm a career Marine, and our preference is to shoot first and... well shoot first. For the career LEO, I'm curious if there is a concensus among LEOs as to what is preferred, chemical, electrical, or physical, in a less-lethal response? I've had limited force continuum training, and I tend to think in lethal terms, so I'm probably off track, but I'd think you'd go verbal, chemical, electrical, physical, and lethal (firearm).
 
I tend to think that the Taser belongs "lower" on the force continuum than chemical agents due to the minimal aftereffects. From what I've seen once the current stops the recipient is pretty much good to go - in demos I've seen guys pop right up with no ill effects. Gas, on the other hand is pretty much a mess afterwards and it is difficult to gauge the level of real distress and possible complications. The Taser also allows a relatively reliable estimate of "dosage" whereas with gas there is really no way to tell how much the recipient got into their system, especially with the bawling and puking and general expression of discontent.

Most agencies I am aware of would prefer the use of the Taser or OC over going hands on - there is much less risk of physical injury to all parties involved with the use of intermediate weapons.

Dont the Marines have some neato civil disturbance kits now that go with the MEUs on cruises?
 
Thank you for that... I've been curious as to where the Taser fits in the continuum of force. Does it vary much between jurisdictions?
Click to expand...
I would imagine there would be variance, yes, as each jursidiction makes up its own rules (subject to caselaw and possible legislation). I would imagine that most places would place electronic devices above empty-hands manipulation techniques (joint locks, simple holds) and below impact weapons (baton). Where they rank vis a vis Mace/OC, empty hand strikes/kicks and forcible grounding/wrestling would vary.

What is worth noting is that you need not go through all the steps of the continuum to get to the appropriate step...so you don't have to use commands THEN attempt to grab someone THEN attempt to Mace someone THEN attempt to punch someone THEN attempt to Taser them. You merely have to be able to justify the level of force you selected.

Mike
 
I would imagine that most places would place electronic devices above empty-hands manipulation techniques (joint locks, simple holds) and below impact weapons (baton). Where they rank vis a vis Mace/OC, empty hand strikes/kicks and forcible grounding/wrestling would vary.

What is worth noting is that you need not go through all the steps of the continuum to get to the appropriate step... You merely have to be able to justify the level of force you selected.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm with you; thanks Mike.
 
You'd think.

>>Of course, being the non drug crazed, upright, law abiding citizen that I am, I'll probably never be confronted with any of this stuff.<<
(Note: That's just like.. "Who needs privacy, I have nothing to hide, right?")

Uh-huh, till some jerkwad cop decides that you match a suspects description, or just wants to give you a hard time - and you legally resist being messed with.

And mind you, in all the uses I've ever seen of a taser in the hands of a LEO, never ONCE have they stopped at one zap, never - it's like some sadistic component kicks in and they just keep going with it.

You ever have to hear a 19 year old friend scream in agony for the horrible sin of demanding to know why he's been stopped and hassled ?
"You will cooperate, or I will taser you!"

Yeah, that line's become a little TOO frequent lately, because instead of trying reason and negotiation, they reach straight for the little yellow box because their training and egos push them to absolutely control the situation, instead of defusing it.

That being said, yes there's a place for such a thing, but poor training, and serious ego issues are causing so *many* incidents lately that the whole concept is getting a bad name - and lawmakers are revisiting whether or not to trust police with these things (which is kind of idiotic on the surface, since we trust them with guns, even if they do hose 200+ rounds at folk in suburban neighborhoods for no particular reason), and the best hope we can get out of it is better training to deal with the issue of when to, and when NOT to, taser somebody.

Because no one is going to convince me that demanding to know what probable cause, suspected crime, or what have you, is by itself sufficient cause to taser a friend of mine - not at *all* an uncommon experience, from the information available, either.

For myself, I've been hit twice, and will not detail the circumstances, but in both cases it was unwarranted and could have resulted in a lawsuit against the department if it were someone inclined to sue.

I don't think there's any problem with the weapon, but there's HUGE problems with the training and field use, because when it comes down to cops tasering people for asking questions or demanding (and this is their RIGHT under the law) to know what crime or probable cause they've been pulled for - that's over the line, and this will boomerang on both police in general, and the taser itself, watch and see.

-K
 
Yeah, that line's become a little TOO frequent lately, because instead of trying reason and negotiation, they reach straight for the little yellow box because their training and egos push them to absolutely control the situation, instead of defusing it.
Click to expand...

I agree, the major problem with taser deployment today is that it is most often not in a defensive capacity, but one of compliance. If an officer is in direct fear of his life (or even general physical well-being) the taser may be an appropriate tool. Unfortunatly, it seems that the majority of taser deployments come from a JBT, "I'm the alpha male here" type of mentality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
GA Police Chiefs Back Use of Taser
Replies
12
Views
605
Joejojoba111
J
R
  • Locked
Taser in every home?
Replies
7
Views
404
petrel800
P
T
  • Locked
Police use Taser on pregnant woman
2 3
Replies
66
Views
2K
O.F.Fascist
O
J
  • Locked
Autopsy shows man died from cocaine, not taser
Replies
15
Views
858
flatrock
F
A
  • Locked
Rutland, VT police sued for use of taser
Replies
10
Views
1K
Jeff White
J
Back
Top