Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Police Tazer - Judge for yourself

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by TechBrute, Jun 9, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TechBrute

    TechBrute Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Location:
    DFW, TX
  2. red_devil1469

    red_devil1469 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Messages:
    40
    Location:
    RDU, NC
  3. Spreadfire Arms

    Spreadfire Arms Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,312
    i see there is an Air Taser for sale to civilians in Texas. i also see the police model which is smaller, has the laser and light, and has more voltage. it is also smaller.

    Taser International's policy is for sale only to LE agencies and individual officers.

    what is the law in Texas? can a citizen have the "police model," since it is not restricted by law to possess or use? the D.A.'s office in Travis County stated that all uses of the Taser will be judged in accordance with the same legal scrutiny in regards to whether or not DEADLY FORCE was justified if you use a taser as a citizen.

    but they did not say it was illegal to possess either model. any opinions?
     
  4. George Hill

    George Hill Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,842
    Location:
    Uintah Basin, UT
    That woman has no dignity or self respect.
     
  5. chopinbloc

    chopinbloc Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    2,242
    Location:
    sweet home arizona
    i'm pretty sure that's not the company policy as there are several stores in the phoenix area that sell both m-26 (larger, older model) and x-26 to civilians. one has to fill out a form with all your vital information and show picture id when buying the cartridges, though. my friend has the x-26.
     
  6. TechBrute

    TechBrute Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Location:
    DFW, TX
    Yeah, but she has enough attitude to go around...

    Steve, I'm not really sure what the laws are. I've never looked into it. If I carried a Taser in addition to the gun, mag, BUG, flashlight, keys, etc, I'd need a full-up duty belt.

    Interesting, because that's sure not the criteria they are holding police to.
     
  7. TheFederalistWeasel

    TheFederalistWeasel member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    Messages:
    796
    Location:
    Tennessee
    I’m sure Texas has similar statues like GA has which apply to general use of force and force used to effect an arrest.

    Georgia Code – Title 16-3-21.
    (a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

    Georgia Code – Title 16-3-23.
    A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other’s unlawful entry into or attack upon a habitation; however, such person is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if:
    (1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence;
    (2) That force is used against another person who is not a member of the family or household and who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using such force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred; or
    (3) The person using such force reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.

    Georgia Code – Title 17-4-20.
    (a) An arrest for a crime may be made by a law enforcement officer either under a warrant or without a warrant if the offense is committed in such officer’s presence or within such officer’s immediate knowledge; if the offender is endeavoring to escape; if the officer has probable cause to believe that an act of family violence, as defined in Code Section 19-13-1, has been committed; if the officer has probable cause to believe that an offense involving physical abuse has been committed against a vulnerable adult, who shall be for the purposes of this subsection a person 18 years old or older who is unable to protect himself or herself from physical or mental abuse because of a physical or mental impairment; or for other cause if there is likely to be failure of justice for want of a judicial officer to issue a warrant.
    (b) Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict such sheriffs or peace officers from the use of such reasonable nondeadly force as may be necessary to apprehend and arrest a suspected felon or misdemeanant.
    (c) Nothing in this Code section shall be construed so as to restrict the use of deadly force by employees of state and county correctional institutions, jails, and other places of lawful confinement or by peace officers of any agency in the State of Georgia when reasonably necessary to prevent escapes or apprehend escapees from such institutions.
    (d) No law enforcement agency of this state or of any political subdivision of this state shall adopt or promulgate any rule, regulation, or policy which prohibits a peace officer from using that degree of force to apprehend a suspected felon which is allowed by the statutory and case law of this state.
    (e) Each peace officer shall be provided with a copy of this Code section. Training regarding elder abuse, abuse of vulnerable adults, and the requirements of this Code section should be offered as part of at least one in-service training program each year conducted by or on behalf of each law enforcement department and agency in this state.


    16-3-21 and 16-3-23 is applied to civilians who use force

    16-3-21, 16-3-23 and 17-4-20 is applied to officers who use force while in the line of duty or in GA if they use force while off duty when it is reasonably established that they had properly identified as a Peace Officer.
     
  8. Spreadfire Arms

    Spreadfire Arms Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,312
    you're right about Travis Co. DA's office's opinion that a taser used by a civilian is justified only where deadly force itself would be justified, but not when it comes to the police using it. im sure a half-brained defense attorney could pull up the use of force policies for every LE agency in the area in regards to the taser and tear apart the case the DA's office had anyway. they could also get Taser International's sales presentation material and show that its purpose, when used correctly, is not to inflict deadly force.

    remember the Travis Co. D.A. Ronnie Earle is an anti-gun democrat. he probably believes that Tasers are equivalent to firearms.

    so if an FFL sold a Taser to a citizen does it involve a 4473?
     
  9. Specialized

    Specialized Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Messages:
    204
    Location:
    Indiana
    Yeah, but she has a newfound respect for electricity, I reckon! :)

    I about laughed myself silly watching this video, especially the attitude change. Whoever said 'the best defense is a good offense' clearly hadn't taken into account Tasers!

    There are times when the Jesse Jackson approach just ain't gonna fly. 51 in a 35 and DWLS/R is one of them.
     
  10. jamz

    jamz Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Messages:
    1,772
    Location:
    Seacoast NH
    Hehehe. Stupid indeed hurts. :)

    -James
     
  11. Godfather

    Godfather Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Messages:
    139
    Location:
    The Granite State
    Had to turn down the volume after she got the zap... friends thought I was watching some "entertainment" in here.

    Police are allowed more leway with weapons. They can point their gun at you without being threatened yet.

    I heard about this clip about a week ago, some debate over whether or not the cops should use it.

    "Put your hands behind your back!"

    "I can't!"

    yeah, right. I've seen guys tazered, and once the user shuts it off, you're pretty mobile as soon as you're entirely aware again.

    And cops have to have non-lethal weapons used on them before they can carry them (mace, tazers, etc.) so they know when that kind of force is needed.

    The only real civilian use I've seen for these so far is teachers using them to restrain suicidal kids since they aren't alowed to touch them with their hands. I think the cop at my school might too, but I'm not sure.
     
  12. cidirkona

    cidirkona Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    1,182
    Location:
    Tucson, Az
    Hahaha, remind me not to make phone calls while getting pulled over and talking back to the cop!

    -Colin
     
  13. AK-74me

    AK-74me Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2005
    Messages:
    339
    Dealing with alot of people similar to her in the past i can appreciate that.
     
  14. Mad Man

    Mad Man Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    587
    Location:
    USA
    I really don't see the police doing anything wrong in this situation.

    Of course, I wasn't there, I've never been a cop, I don't have all of the facts, there may have been other factors, blah blah blah.

    Therefore, I have no right to judge the actions of these officers...
     
  15. one45auto

    one45auto Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    1,196
    Location:
    Somewhere out there
    I found that video extremely disturbing. :uhoh:
     
  16. Strings

    Strings Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,031
    Location:
    30 miles from Everywhere, right in the middle of N
    I had seen an abreviated version of that video (omitted the first bit, picked up when he's telling her to put the phone down). I'd say the officer was justified, although I'm not sure I'm comfortable with Tasers being used as a compliance device...

    Don't get me wrong: I understand that SOMETHING needed to be done. I can just see this being seriously abused.

    As for civilian carry: I'd consider adding one to the "Bat-belt". Or would, if WI "allowed" mere serfs to carry...
     
  17. Coronach

    Coronach Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    11,109
    I'm on a borrowed computer, so I'm not going to go to the Bigboys site. Is this the one from a few days/weeks ago where she is placed under arrest and she refuses to exit the vehicle? An officer then reaches inside, something happens, and he pulls back, then Tasers her?

    If so (just going on the facts in evidence and providing some color commentary based on experience)...

    1. Cops are very loathe to start wrestling matches with ANYONE still seated at the controls of a motor vehicle. One motion with the hand and one with the foot and the whole affair can turn into a 0-60 event with a cop and possibly the suspect being seriously injured or killed (to say nothing of other motorists/pedestrians).

    2. If it is that one, the female allegedly struck the officer when he was leaning into the car.

    3. Officers are also more likely to use a Taser on combative suspects who are physically smaller than them (especially women) because Tasers don't cause injury (injuries from falling excepted), whereas any wrestling match with a really motivated suspect will result in bruises, at the least. (A note on taser deaths: we've had deaths from wrestling for years now, and deaths from macings, too. All appear to be associated with cardiac frailty and/or drug use, and IMO (unscientific) if you are at risk from the Taser you're at risk from wrestling with the cops, too).

    Mike
     
  18. Sergeant Sabre

    Sergeant Sabre Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    Messages:
    1,202
    Location:
    Michigan
    She was driving with a suspended license, so she was going to be arrested one way or another. The officer said that she took a swing at his back-up officer (we can't see from the video). The suspect was obviously uncooperative. The options were to either A: Taze her, or B: Forcibly arrest her. In option "B", both the suspect and the officer(s) are at risk of physical injury. Not so with option "A". I agree with the officer's actions.
     
  19. jefnvk

    jefnvk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,938
    Location:
    The Copper Country, Michigan
    Conorach, yes that is the one.

    She was given AMPLE time to comply. By about the fifth 'I'm gonna tase you if you don't get out of the car', she should have gotten the idea. If not, well, I could make jokes about beauty pagent contestants and intelligence, but they really wouldn't be jokes ;)
     
  20. ExtremeDooty

    ExtremeDooty Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    410
    Location:
    Rifle, CO.
    She had to know that her license was suspended and thought she could bully the officer into letting her go. Wrong. I have no sympathy for her as she was given several opportunities to comply.

    Until we have "phasers on stun" the tazer is a good non-lethal option for cops to have. She'll have her day in court without needing a trip to the hospital.
     
  21. landon74

    landon74 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    350
    Location:
    DFW
    My wife and I heard this on the radio today, and I was certain that it had been staged, but I didn't know there was video on the net....

    Watching the video makes my father's advice about dealing with LEO's even more sage, comply with their requests and call them 'sir'......

    I'm sure the lady is happy they decided to use the taser rather than their night sticks....
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2005
  22. TarpleyG

    TarpleyG Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    2,981
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Hmmm. Very interesting sequence of events. We can Monday morning quarterback this to death guess. I honestly believe that a tazer would have needed to be employed at some point during this altercation just because of the way this woman was acting from the get-go but I believe it occurred too early. The officer never once told her why he was arresting her before he tazed her. Doing so may have de-escalated the situation. Again, I ask, what did we do before OC spray and tazers???

    Greg
     
  23. pythonguy

    pythonguy Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    234
    Location:
    Long Island, New York
    What the hell is wrong with people? The officer pulls her over for speeding, broken windshield, tail light out, runs her license and it is suspended, asks her to exit the vehicle, and she's talking on the phone? She then takes a swing at the second officer and finally get what she deserves, lighting on a string. She wasn't going to cooperate, that Tazer saved an escalation of the situation and they were able to cart her off. She needs psychological help if you ask me, plus a major fine and some correction facility therapy. I'll bet anything she sues the police and a racial descrimination charge is leveled. I feel for all the police, they get royally stressed and then screwed.
     
  24. SlabSlinger

    SlabSlinger Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Messages:
    33
    That incident occurred in Delray Beach, FL. I live in the vicinity and can say from experience that, in general, people have very little respect for authority down he-uh. Having moved from Illinois (Land of Lincoln) at one time, I call South Florida the "Land of Litigation". The disposition of the general population could be characterized as cantankerous, people seem overly focused on "their rights", and many folks seem to think that the law only applies to other people. In light of this and considering that the PO-lice have to forsake any form of pleasantry down here in order to get a modicum of compliance, I think he was very professional.

    Good job, officer! I would have been tempted to wear down the batteries on that thing, which is why I would not make a good police officer. :D
     
  25. lysander

    lysander Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    585
    Higher Power forbid that anyone would get tangled up in the mortal sin of being "overly focused on their rights." Why you'd think that people might want to live in a place where they can go about their business and all... :neener:

    That being said...this is an event that deserves blame placed on both sides. The woman driving is in the wrong on many levels (license suspension, speeding, windshield, tailight, etc), however...you sure get the sense that once the officer decided it was time to drop the hammer on this lady...that he wasn't interested in having his authority challenged. Why escalate? Let the lady vent, cite her for her violations, and have a bench warrant issued for her arrest. On some levels it is the policeman's job to take guff from the citizenry, if you expected otherwise you shouldn't take the job. Having the scenario turn out like this,and then end up in the public eye, does nothing but add fuel to several burning fires.

    For example:
    1) The police are racist and where is Jesse Jackson to help me fire.
    or
    2) The police are statists and I am aghast at their use of a taser as a brutal compliance tool fire.
    or
    3) The I can't believe this stupid woman she should just follow the rules like everybody else and I'm glad she got zapped fire.
    and lets not forget the ever present
    4) I was doing it to protect the children fire.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page