Police used Taser on pregnant driver

Status
Not open for further replies.
TASERS ARE A COMPLIANCE TOOL!!!

That is exactly what they are. They are a tool to gain compliance in completing an arrest or for defense against a combative subject. Where is the confusion on this? If you have any questions about it simply go to your nearest police department that uses tasers and ask for information on the use of force policy and information on the effect of the taser.

I can only speak for my department but we are authorized to use the taser even in situations where pepper spay is not authorized. At least here, if you resist arrest that is grounds for being tased.

As I stated earlier I can gain compliance for an arrest 99% of the time through verbal commands and explanation alone and if not I choose to go hands on before relying on the taser. However that is my personal choice and I do not have to. Some Officers may choose to use the taser before going hands on. That is their choice and they have the right to protect themselves as they seem necessary as long as it is within legal and department guidlines.
 
so ....she says she is worried about the police hurting her baby.....ahhhh guess SHE forgot she was pregnant....no responsibility there.
 
The biggest tragedy is that poor unborn child is going to be raised into adulthood by that idiot.
 
Blackburn & Combat-Wombat,

Call a taser a "non-lethal" weapon if you want but they are a compliance tool. I explained the reasoning for this in my post. If you have any confusion on this feel free to pm or email me and we can discuss it without changing the discussion of this thread.
 
It's a sad state...

There are two tragedies here:

1) The Officers actions.

2) That ANYONE thinks that the officers actions are the least bit reasonable or acceptable.

So she refused to sign - BFD. Many communities across this nation issues 10's of thousands of tickets each year with nothing more than a couple of photo's as proof. No tickets are signed until possibly received in the mail. In this instance, the cop should have simply dropped the ticket in her car and left.

As for those yelling "yea but it was a school zone." - maybe we should just ban those evil cars all together in school zones, you know, "for the children".

Carry on.
 
Angry Pregnant Women

About a year ago I was involved in a road rage incident. I accidentally (honestly) cut off a car while changing lanes. (A witness later reported that her car was speeding and weaving in and out of traffic) I checked my mirror and nobody was there, as I was halfway into the lane I heard a horn.. and seeing a vehicle I returned to my lane. The vehicle pulled up next to me and I expected a gesture or salute or whatever. The windows on the vehicle were tinted so I couldn't see the driver. I shrugged and mouthed the word "sorry" trying to make amends. After a few seconds, the car swerved into me and ran me off the road into a convenience store parking lot. Smashed up the drivers side pretty good. After catching my breath I called 911 to report the incident. I ended up driving a couple of blocks to the police station so an officer could look at my vehicle and take a statement. Guess who was already there! A huge angry woman complaining of being attacked by a "white guy." The lobby was in chaos as this woman tried to incite a riot. Every time an officer tried to calm her she went crazy. I was talking to a dispatcher on my phone as I walked in and she went off on me as "the white guy with the cell phone!" (I don't talk on the phone and drive in case you are wondering if my cell phone contributed to my inattention) From that point on she raved about the "white guy with the cell phone".... he started it and he gets nothing...you are coming after me because I'm black... An officer finally told her that her skin color didn't make a difference. Her word meant as much as his (mine) in his book. But...a witness had called in reporting the incident and verifying my version of events. Well then she really got bent...yelling and hollering about how unfair it was after all..."He started it!!" He tried to tell her that part(my actions) appeared to be accidental while her actions appeared to be intentional.

The officer explained that she was going to be arrested but that they would immediately release her on her promise to appear at a hearing. That set off another tirade. She was eventually charged with felony assault, driving without insurance and a few lesser charges. She acknowledged that she had a temper and did in fact have a prior conviction for assault. BTW...turns out that she was 8 months pregnant but she was so large that you couldn't tell by looking at her. I was carrying that night and if that crazy woman had cornered me I would without a doubt have shot her. She was flat out scary. Incidentally, I had to leave my weapon in my my car as the police station is posted.

I am not making excuses for the police in this case... I wasn't there. I do know that I will never assume that a pregnant woman is NOT dangerous :)
 
Last edited:
I guess I have no problem with the initial actions of the police and the decision that she was to be arrested. Arrests happen quite a bit when you argue with officers and get combative with them. There is nothing new about this. If anything, officers are under more limits now than they ever have. Common sense says you should remain polite and do what they tell you. There is plenty of time to complain about rights later.

Maybe someone can correct me, but here are the choices I see that the officers have once arrest is resisted.

1. Shoot her..
2. Beat her with a nightstick.
3. Beat her with their hands.
4. Use a stun gun or a taser.
5. Surround the car and leave her until she calms down.

I seriously doubt #5 is an option short of a hostage situation in most cases. As for the first 4, only one of those is very unlikely to cause injury. What would you rather see in headline: Police Beat Pregnant Woman or Police Taser on Pregnant Woman? I think the officers would be more likely to get in trouble using the first 3.

Basically, if you have a problem with all this, nailing the officer to the wall is not the answer. Getting the Govt to change the procedures for using stun guns or writing tickets is the thing to do.

I guess I am picturing the alternative here as something like the Rodney King video. A little extreme maybe, but the taser to me is the officers only real alternative to physical violence that could cause serious injury.
 
Akusp.... that was a good story, and you told it in a funny manner (hope that was your intention)...guess it just goes to show, the worse the experience...the better the story.
 
[There doesn't seem to be any dispute with the lawfulness of the arrest. ]-Jeff White


I will go ahead and opin that the arrest was unlawful because the speeding ticket was wrong due to the fruit of the poisnous tree principle/doctrine (I infer a lack of direct endangerment/imminent danger from the article, "late dropping off a school kid", and the lack of a endangerment charge) .
Let me be the first to point out that issuing a speeding ticket (and the speed-limit law) is morally wrong: It is an arbitrary tax without representation and motivated by greed in my book if the citing officer cannot legally get the driver for reckless driving and/or endangering others.

Speed limit laws (as opposed to rules against reckless driving) on all levels of government has only resulted in a get-even/get-ahead mentality in this driver. The first ever ticket set me behind and I could never be made whole. So I consider every yard driven at some speed above the posted speed limit to be an attempt to try to restore myself.

I have a dim view of speed limits in light of its ineffectiveness at inducing me to *want* to slow down and its uselessness at preventing/punishing those reckless drivers weaving in and out of traffic. I'm trying to express a sense of getting picked on as in: "I don't see the reckless drivers pulled over but I do know that I'm pulled over for driving the speed of traffic in a group of fast cars."
 
Blackburn said about tasers being compliance tools;

No, they aren't, and I said that they aren't back around page two.
Click to expand...

Excuse me, but I'd be curious to know who died and left you in charge of writing use of force policy for every police department in the country. Because we never did get the memo that you were in charge where I work. :banghead:

Let me tell you something right now my friend, just about every tool an officer has in his tool box is a compliance tool. You, our employer have given them to us so that we can do our job and enforce the laws you pass. You,our employer have given us the statutory authority to take people into custody for violating the laws you passed (through your elected representatives) and bringing them before the courts to answer for their actions.

Yes, those tools are for our personal defense, but most often they are used to make someone comply with our request that they accompany us to the jail. Believe it or not, many people don't want to go to jail :what: ! I know, shocking isn't it... :uhoh:

So when someone fails to comply with a request that they sign the ticket, then that person has escalated the situation their own free will, It looks to me that just in case the woman had a problem with the officer who originally made contact, they sent a second officer to explain it to her. Then they sent a supervisor. So now after 3 officers explained the procedure to her, she still was going to refuse to comply. At that point, the decision was made to arrest her. It's here that most of you think the officers should have just folded their tent and went home. Why? Because she was pregnant? Because it was just a speeding ticket. You know I looked and my copy of the vehicle code doesn't exempt pregnant women from the school zone speed limit laws. In fact, it's not even an affirmative defense.

So we are at the point where the woman who by her own decision decided that she was going to take a ride to jail instead of signing the ticket, is told that she now has to step out of the car and come with the officers. And she refuses. So the officer can go hands on, and bodily drag her from the car. So perhaps you'd prefer if they broke a couple of her fingers prying them away from the wheel. Or an officer could have used pressure point control techniques, perhaps he could have placed his knuckle under her nose and held her head with his other hand and cranked in the pressure on the infra orbital pressure point. He could have lifted up and her body most likely would have followed her head out of the car. Or they could have opened the door and used batons as come alongs to get her out of the car. Perhaps a shot or two of OC. But they used an evil taser. I would bet that we'd have never heard about this arrest if they had used any other method to effect the arrest. Tasers are evil, a torture tool of the devil, so says Amnesty International...so you can guarantee that any use of that will look bad will get plenty of press.

The same campaign was run against OC, by these very same people. After a few years OC became an accepted rung on the force continuum ladder. I have no doubt that once all the coddlers have had their say and all the handwringing is done, the taser will be just as accepted.

Jeff
 
I wasn't there so I don't know for certain what happened, but her pregnancy is not the responsibility of the authorities. She had choices, whether or not to speed, resist arrest, etc. I'm not aware of any law giving pregnant women free license to do anything they please. Most have the common sense not to push their luck under the circumstances.
 
Very interesting for sure....I still say comply with what an officer requests of you, providing it is a reasonable request, and you'll drive away....it has always worked for me.....tom
 
yy said;
I will go ahead and opin that the arrest was unlawful because the speeding ticket was wrong due to the fruit of the poisnous tree principle/doctrine
Click to expand...

How did they get the evidence she was speeding illegally? Last I checked, you didn't need a warrant or even probable cause to hit a vehicle with a radar beam or laser.

(I infer a lack of direct endangerment/imminent danger from the article, "late dropping off a school kid", and the lack of a endangerment charge)
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with anything?

Speed limit laws (as opposed to rules against reckless driving) on all levels of government has only resulted in a get-even/get-ahead mentality in this driver. The first ever ticket set me behind and I could never be made whole. So I consider every yard driven at some speed above the posted speed limit to be an attempt to try to restore myself.
Click to expand...

I think in some places you could make a case that driving 32 mph through a school zone, where young children may run out into the street was in fact reckless endangerment. Why don't you try to fight the next ticket you get on that basis? :neener:

Jeff
 
I've learned two good lessons lurking on this thread...first, that we should interpret violations of the law, including violations of the civil codex, in an absolutist fashion. Breaking the law is breaking the law, and jaywalking should be handled with the same force as battery. Second, if we question the actions of an officer of the law in the questionable handling of a minor civil offense, we are cop-bashers...

What a kafkaesque load of tripe
 
Anybody with even the basic joint lock training that police get at the academy could have pried her hands off the wheel with relative ease, especially since there were two officers - one for each hand. The article didn't say she was violently resisting (throwing punches, etc.). Heck, I learned some painful, non-damaging finger locks that would have done the trick on my second trip to a dojo :rolleyes:

Obviously, since I wasn't there this is just speculation, but based on the information provided and the officer's quote I don't see the necessity of the Tazer. Now, if they had curled her fingers up a bit and she started biting or something, Taze away. Maybe they tried this and the article didn't mention it, I don't know. Just a thought, and at least I recognize that I'm not an expert :)
 
Blackburn, posting something in a thread in big multicolored letters doesn't make it so. Every less lethal tool they give us is to gain compliance with. The threat of use of the lethal tools are also used to gain compliance.

It would be nice if everyone was civil and always complied with things like signing tickets. This woman is not the victim here. She made a consious choice to take the actions she did. And she paid the price.

Like I said in my earlier post, if almost any other tool but the taser was used, no one would have heard about this incident. It wouldn't be news.

Why don't you guys all go petition your state legislators for a law granting women immunity from the consequences of their own stupidity for the terms of their pregnancy. Or better yet, make them immune from prosecution for high crimes and misdemeanors during the term of their pregnancy. We surely can't have them getting in confrontations with the law during this time of their lives and since some of them don't have the sense not to do it on their own, lets just keep the police from interacting with them, lest it upset the unborn child.

Jeff
 
This being america, with everyone free to have their own opinions, and this being a forum which allows any idea to be posted free of charge.... here is an idea...for those speaking from theory, why not go out, and live these words you speak.... if you think speeding is acceptable.... go for it, and when your stopped, refuse to sign the ticket, taste the tazer, feel the handcuffs, get booked, eat the jail food, see the inside of the courts.... speak of your personal interpretation of "your" rights, to anyone ... go for it !! Theory stops, where experience begins.. Go experience ...it will be GOOD for you !!!!
 
This being america, with everyone free to have their own opinions, and this being a forum which allows any idea to be posted free of charge.... here is an idea...for those speaking from theory, why not go out, and live these words you speak.... if you think speeding is acceptable.... go for it, and when your stopped, refuse to sign the ticket, taste the tazer, feel the handcuffs, get booked, eat the jail food, see the inside of the courts.... speak of your personal interpretation of "your" rights, to anyone ... go for it !! Theory stops, where experience begins.. Go experience ...it will be GOOD for you !!!!
Click to expand...
Ahh, genius speaks... :rolleyes:

What does getting arrested have to do with "your" rights? If you ask me, this sounds like a commercial by a cop saying, "If you are thinking of acting out, you'll only do it once. Then you'll be too afraid to think you have rights, anymore."
 
Tech.... real simple THEORY vs EXPERIENCE, might want to read ALL the words in the post, take notes if needed.
 
I've read this from the start and I have an idea that might have worked.

Placing someone under arrest entails restraining them, but maybe not by handcuffing them and putting them in the back seat of a patrol car.

A bit of inginuity could have settled this without violence of any kind. Since there was time to call in another officer and a supervisor, call in some older police vehicles, or city service trucks, then simply roll the vehicles up against the sides, front and back of her car and block her in. There, she's restrained. She can't move her car, she can't open the door, she can't leave. Sure she could try to ram her way out, but that just adds charges to the list.

Tell her the blocking vehicles will be moved when she surrenders and not untill.

With a child in the back seat who will soon be crying and screaming at the top of his lungs, a baby in her belly pressing on her bladder, it won't take long for her to realize just how much she's hurting.

As long as the officers are pushing her, she pushes back, so if they back off and give her time to think the situation can be settled.

I've noticed though that most LEOs cannot wait. They seem to have to use force as soon as possible. The idea of securing the are the person is in, the backing off and letting the perp think it through is disapearing from the tactics books.

Just a thought .........

Joe
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Taser Lawsuit (gun/LE shooting related)
Replies
22
Views
2K
Erik
E
M
  • Locked
As Shocks Replace Police Bullets, Deaths Fall But Questions Arise
Replies
10
Views
1K
Leatherneck
L
J
  • Locked
Cop tasers partner over soda dispute
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
jsalcedo
J
T
  • Locked
Police use Taser on pregnant woman
2 3
Replies
66
Views
2K
O.F.Fascist
O
D
  • Locked
(MI) Laingsburg cops test TASERs on high schoolers
Replies
21
Views
2K
Hand_Rifle_Guy
H
Back
Top