It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: 8 Month Pregnant Woman Assaulted by Police With Taser

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2005 @ 10:08 PM
link   
the cop was wrong.period .he could have let her go, but no he wears a badge so he is not going to take no for an answer.show me one good cop,oops sorry,i requested the impossible.




posted on May, 10 2005 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Nyg: Yeah, that's what I was saying earlier. The use of a tazer is authorized against the elderly, youths, and pregnant women, but only if circumstances seriously call for it.

subz: Hehe, that came out wrong, I meant "police brutality is extant in today's headlines, just not this one."

dgtempe: Man, cops are trained to handle this type of situation. They are arguably ALL trained negotiators. There were multiple officers involved and nobody could talk any sense into this woman. She was well aware of the danger she was getting herself into and it was probably no surprise to her son, either.

subz again: No one here is justifying the use of force against an unborn child. The actions of the officers minimized the possibility of harm to the fetus. The same could not be said for the reckless mother's actions.

Zip



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Nygdan
If its been shown to be safe, and, as it turns out, he probably only used a minor 'zap' mode, not the actual stun mode, then this woman is making a mountain out of a mole hill, just like she did with the ticket in the first place

Well - That's why I made the TO ME part clearly legible - I knew not everyone would agree...

Of course - Now I've left myself open to a witty response like - "TO ME I agree that we don't agree...."


I keep editing this...sorry...lol....But I'd like to point out that I think you entirely missed my liberal, whiney-pants, tree-hugging point...ahem...
....That violence is not the solution to violence....Regardless of in who's hands the baton rests.....

[edit on 5/10/2005 by EnronOutrunHomerun]



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 10:38 PM
link   


Speeding in a school zone and arguing with an officer that's just doing their job is one thing....We all agree on that right?

But using force on a pregnant woman over a minor offence is another thing entirely...

I don't care how much of an idiot some one is or how rash their logic may be at the time - TO ME, it still does not justify shocking a pregnant lady - I don't care if pregnant lab rats have been tested and passed with flying colors.....period...

If they had let the damn woman go with her unsigned ticket, things would have unfolded quite a bit differently, and I think she would have learned her lesson much better rather than being put in a situation where it was her ignorant attempt at protecting her ideologies...

Officers have a way of pushing people over the edge who simply need not be pushed.....Normal, calm, everyday people can be put into a situation where it's them against the world and not a damn thing is going to stop them

We humans are stubborn animals....We don't like being told things we don't want to her - Maybe she was late for work....Is that an excuse? No....But it's a button that can be pushed....

Confrontations are something we should all try to avoid...and maybe the officer should have just said - Okay mam, don't sign it....but you'll be hearing from us soon....I think that would have sunk a bit deeper into her skin than a 50,000 volt shock....



Point well made.....

Come on folks, is there no sense of proportion here? We are talking about a 12 mph infraction that could have resulted in serious injury or death to an 8mo old unborn child!

It is beyond me how anyone finds that acceptable.

Let me ask you this...If you had been her passenger, unculpable in any way, would it have been acceptable for the police to taze you in addition to her?!? Maybe not the best analogy, but I think it makes its point.




[edit on 10-5-2005 by loam]



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam that could have resulted in serious injury or death to an 8mo old unborn child!

Demonstrate that it can do this. We all immediately thought of some bloated pregnant woman writhing around (hair standing on end, her skeleton flashing in the lightening bolts, heck maybe th babies skeleton too), but, how accurate does anyone actually think that that is?


That violence is not the solution to violence....Regardless of in who's hands the baton rests..

I think it can result in a solution to violence, depending on who's skull is thwacking under that same baton.


If him and some other cops stopped her for speeding, in a school zone, when school was starting nonetheless and kids are everywhere, and she starts flippign out, and they can't physically pry her out of the car, is a minor zap from this thing really all that inappropriate? How violent is it? I'm not familiar with this other non-incapacitating mode.



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Demonstrate that it can do this. We all immediately thought of some bloated pregnant woman writhing around (hair standing on end, her skeleton flashing in the lightening bolts, heck maybe th babies skeleton too), but, how accurate does anyone actually think that that is?

Took me all of three seconds to google that question....




www.cfpc.ca...



I'm quite sure that you have never had children, based on how prepared you are to minimize the risk.



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 11:22 PM
link   
The above referenced article has nothing to do with tasers.

Furthermore, it is obvious that this thread has polarized people into two camps.

1) Those who think a pregnant woman should be able to get away with bloody murder. (This may have happened since she was charging through a child-populated school zone at breakneck speeds.)

2) Those who think that people who break the law should be punished.

The fetus was unharmed, folks. This happened a long time ago.

You wonder why she hasn't filed a civil suit? Wonder no longer. The evidence shows that the cops did everything right and she did everything wrong.

EDIT: Lol, I see this is an "ABUSE CRISIS" now. Hah!


Zip

[edit on 10-5-2005 by Zipdot]



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

That violence is not the solution to violence....Regardless of in who's hands the baton rests..

I think it can result in a solution to violence, depending on who's skull is thwacking under that same baton.


Very true....lol



If him and some other cops stopped her for speeding, in a school zone, when school was starting nonetheless and kids are everywhere, and she starts flippign out, and they can't physically pry her out of the car, is a minor zap from this thing really all that inappropriate? How violent is it? I'm not familiar with this other non-incapacitating mode.

It's not that that particular approach isn't one of the many potential branches on a vast tree of resolving the issue....The question as I see it, is did that officer "select the right branch" so to speak....

Heated moments call for heated decisions that often result in behavior that both parties may regret later down the road.....At it's very root, that's the whole problem here.....Adrenalin’s flying threw the air at a million miles an hour and logic is flying out the window....Now naturally cops are trained to learn to control and restrain what may be their natural reactions....But there's a difference between protecting yourself and flailing the idea about that you were also protecting the public from some loony pregnant woman....

Most of us here at ATS would have probably accepted the ticket and gritted our teeth and drove off doing 5 in 20....lol.....But who doesn't occasionally get that steely resolve in their stomachs - That voice inside your head that says "This is uncalled for! All I did was drop my kid off at school...So I went a few miles over...I was still being safe in my opinion...Who does this officer think he is telling me I don’t' respect the lives of these kids?! Why I otta...." And then all common sense is lost....

I've argued with a cop before...It's not a smart thing to do....Especially if you KNOW you're right and they're wrong, b/c then you get even more infuriated as the argument pursues.....Luckily in my case I was able to prove to the officer on the scene that I was right and we resolved our issue peacefully, and that officer actually thanked me for taking the time to argue my side....How often do you see THAT happen? BTW – I highly suggest against anyone ever doing this….lol

And that's what I'm getting at I suppose....Not that this lady actually had a point....lol....She was clearly in the wrong.....But there are other ways to go....Bring out a tow truck and move while she's in the car - See if that won't get her out....If not, she'll just get a free ride to the junk yard.....



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 11:48 PM
link   


The above referenced article has nothing to do with tasers.


The point I made was that there was an *unecessary* and *unacceptable* RISK in the event. What was challenged was whether there was any risk to the unborn child. The article demontstrates electric shock DOES pose such risk of injury or death.

Need I offer a slew of examples where a taser actually killed someone? Simply google "taser deaths" and tell me no RISK was posed to this child!



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 12:41 AM
link   
See, the big different is that in every tazer death I've seen, there's been three factors:

1. Suspect was highly agitated and resisting arrest.

2. Suspect has a condition, such as epilepsy, heart murmur, etc.

3. Officers used the full capacities of the Tazer device.

No one is telling you there's no risk. There's a very minimal risk. But hey, you want to resist arrest, that's your choice.

I've heard of asthmatics dying after getting tear gassed or pepper sprayed. They asphyxiated. Yeah, I feel bad for them, but tough luck. You broke the law, you knew the risks. It was your choice to disobey the law despite your infirmities, and to resist arrest.

What ever happened to personal responsibility for civvies? Having a badge doesn't mean you're automatically at fault if some punkass resisting arrest gets maimed or dead.

Hey, you level a piece at an officer, you're a dead man. Fight the cops, might take a baton upside the head. I feel no pity for those who resist arrest.

DE



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 01:39 AM
link   
this is indeed a hard case to decide on.

the woman WAS SPEEDING and should have followed the law.ok most apriciate that point.

now why was she so agitated as was stated? i don't have much experiance with pregnant women but i do understand that they do have some hormonal isues. so that may have been part of the problem to start off. a hormonal imbalance can cause diverse reactions to seemingly normal situations. my mother suffered from hormonal imbalances as part of her medical condition. it can be quite freaky to behold, she went from happy and joyous to overly upset and crying for no reason at all. my dad and i had to treat her with kid gloves. dureing this time she was very difficult to deal with as the SLIGHTEST misconception on her part could cause bouts of tears or even a rage. and man were her rages scary to behold. but we UNDERSTOOD that it was not realy HER FAULT.

another valid question is; how was her day going? ordinarily this realy makes no differance. but if a person is haveing hormonal problems to begin with how much worse can it be if these situations had possibly occure? running late for some reason=added stress, a very likely possibility when she was speeding. had she been haveing problems with her other child? again added stress not good. many things could have made a significant impact to the situation. ordinarily these things should not make a differance but if she was haveing hormonal imbalances along with it then it can get quite bad.

add to that the very real fear that many already have of police brutality and you have set the stage for a VERY bad situation. the police WERE out of order on this. as soon as she got set off that should have clued them into what was possibly comeing. these police probably could do with some training on problem prevention. they should have seen that she was very possibly pregnant, add to that her reaction. they shouild have had SOME training on what may be going on and how to defuse the situation.

the superviser was called and presumably filled in on the situation. he should have either gone himself or even better sent someone with training to deal with it. there were many better options to deal with the situation. you will note that a taser has been seen as a LESS lethal weapen instead of a gun., so if they didn't have the taeser would they have shot her? after all a taeser is a less leathal type of gun. what would they have done with out it? that is what they should have done. a taeser just like a gun should ONLY be used as a last resort. in this case someone with phycological training could have been able to calm the situation down. she wasn't going anywher was she? yes a cop's time IS valuble, but that does not mean that they should risk lives by useing a weapon as a shortcut.

now as to what caused this mess in the first place. why should you have to sign a ticket? to make sure you go to court? that is stupid. the way it works here is they give you a ticket. you have 4 options you can use after that (no signature required by the way). options:1) pay a volintary fine slightly reduced fine if payed within 2 weeks of the incident. 2) mail in the ticket or go to court to set a trial date IF YOU want to fight it. 3)pay the higher fine at your lesure. 4) waite untill it is time to renew your licence or plates to pay, you are volintarily convicted of the ticket if none of the above steps are used (you may even have to pay an extra fee for this) i believe you have 2 or 3 months to decide after that you are convicted. now you can even go to a judge AFTER this if for some reason it wasn't you or something. ie: at the roadside. "here is your ticket, (slight explanatiuon of how to deal with it), have a nice day. problem solved ahead of time no confrontation is needed. if you don't like it you can choose to fight it.

there are just so many ways that this could have been resolved without a taeser. a taeser should be treated EXACTLY like a gun, last resort option ONLY.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 01:57 AM
link   
I swear, you break the law and don't expect punishment? The few times they let leeway is things like rushing to the hospital case your water broke or you are seriously injured and no ambulence is available at the time. Hell, several times they turn the sirens on to help the person get their faster. But this? Why everyone on her side is beyond me, almost as bad as spilling coffee on yourself then suing cause it was hot.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by drogo
there are just so many ways that this could have been resolved without a taeser. a taeser should be treated EXACTLY like a gun, last resort option ONLY.


Firstly the ticket is an appearance notice. It is a legally binding document that is provided to those who have commited non-violent, relatively minor felonies, such as speeding or shoplifting a candybar. It is meant as an alternative to arrest and detention. Basically, what it states is 'Yes, I broke the law, and I will go to court on X date as an alternative to being cuffed and led away.' You don't take the alternative, well, I hope you enjoy the back of a cruiser.

Tazers are intermediate weapons, period. They are not lethal, or at least any more lethal than a baton. Hell, if you want to do away with tazers, that's fine. I'd love to see cops get back to their roots- batons, truncheons, blackjacks and sap gloves. Then you whiners might have a reason to complain, maybe. I don't know- when a police officer pulls out a cosh, and tells you to let go of the damn sterring wheel or he'll break your hands, you tend to listen. Then, we wouldn't have incidences like this.

DE



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Fine, next time instead of tazer just take a baseball bat to her skull. I know, why not shoot her with a tranq dart. Or is using a chainsaw to cut her arms off a better choice?

People, a tazer not on full mode will do as much as a shock collar, make you tingly. Some can cause pain, but again, like a shock collar on full. It hurt like hell, even more since it was collared on, but I wasn't "hurt". Now, a tazer on full mode will drop you like a sack of potatoes. Hell, on Distraction they had the contestants shocked by a tazer when trying to answer to distract them, the one guy barely flinched! He stood there, could see his arm jumping, muscles and all that, but never said a word. If it had been on full, he would have been crying like a baby, if he could....



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 02:30 AM
link   
electricity will effect differant people differantly. heck i used to stick my fingers into outlets and live lightbulb sockets. to ne it was only a cool sensation to others it might kill them.

it's disgusting the way that taesers are used. the fact that it MIGHT NOT kill you is NOT an EXCUSE to use it as a CALMING device whenever a cop gets out of his depth. this is police brutalization just as senslessly clubbing someone is. yes there IS a valid use for force. THIS WAS NOT IT.this was police brutality plain and simple. the taeser was used inapropriatly to subdue someone who WAS NOT A THREAT. boo hoo she wouldn't get out of her car or sign a piece of paper, what an EXCUSE to use possible lethal force on her. ok so it shouldn't have harmed her at that setting, well she was not the only victome to it's use. even at a LOW setting it could possibly HARM the BABY.

cops should have the necisary TRAINING to deal with a NON-VIOLANT situation non-vilantly. now had she tried to take off MABE then they should have considdered useing it. as it was she was not going anywhere and she WAS NOT A DANGER to the oficer. as such there was no REASON to employ that type of FORCE on her. they used this weapon plainly to make their lives simpler not to protect themselves or anyone else. THAT IS THE PROBLEM. a weapon is not a shortcut is is to PROTECT against harm to themselves or others.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 02:53 AM
link   
So, cops should have done nothing, instead? They tried talking. Would you rather use The Spray, and get the kid too? Maybe she should have thought about her kid before she decided to resist arrest.

Oh, and you forget the fact she was sitting in a car...which means she wasn't unarmed.

DE



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 03:10 AM
link   
oh so anyone in a car is in possetion of a weapon then. nice to know that. IF she had tried to do something like run them down THEN they should have used force. but aparently she didn't do that.. therefore she WAS NOT A DANGER.

what should they have done? well getting someone trained to deal with problems without useing force would be a start. we don't know what the cop was acting like here either, cops tend to be very confrontational, when dealing with people. this in it's self may have caused the situation. i know many i have delt with are. cops need to remember that they are NOT GODS demanding instant obediance. cops do have to deal with many circumstances. they need to be trained to deal with them. also they need to call for help when they have problems like this not just use force when dealing with a difficult situation.

there was no need for force, just someone trained to deal with situations such as this. these cops oviously were either untrained in negotiations or incapable of dealing with it. as such they should have had someone come that was better suited to dealing with this type of situation. heck if they wanted to they could have remved the womans keys from the ignition. she was not a threat in the least. what she was, was rather upset, and possibly suffering from a hormonal imbalance, ie: not mentaly right. the cops SHOULD have realized that and delt with it acordingly. NOT just useing a weapon on her.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 03:30 AM
link   
Its incredible really. Tazers over a speeding ticket...*shakes head*..unbelievable what this world has come to...and with that mentality of "oh well that will teach her not to argue with a cop"....."oh well she should of OBEYED the police"....whats going on?......how many heads are buried in the sand here.....its a damned tazer over a speeding ticket.....get real.....people do that to their citizens????...Welcome to the Machine...............you must obey otherwise we will tazer you

I don't know if you can see it from this side of the fence..and I like to stay here cos be hell if I was tazered over a speeding ticket...thou must obey...... but really if that is freedom for all...and democracy and and.... You can keep it.



[edit on 11-5-2005 by Mayet]



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 05:20 AM
link   
I think dgtempe said it best when she reiterated my point that a woman officer should have been called to negotiate with the woman.

If they police damanged that unborn child that is Police Brutality in a new demension.

They cannot demand the baby step out of the vehicle but the can the mother. The mother says no but maybe the baby said yes...so the cops taser them both anyways.

Speeding Ticket / Pregnant Woman / Taser

Just the sound of these 3 things together is sickening.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zipdot
The woman put her unborn child in danger by speeding and then again by getting herself into a physical confrontation with an authority that had the right to smack her down. She should be ashamed of herself.

Zip


Exactly.
If there is someone guilty of endangering the baby, then it's the woman herself.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join