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.

 

Ohio Woman Tasered 5+ Times, Plus kicked

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 12:19 AM
link   
That woman was totally out of control. She needed to be subdued before she hurt herself or someone else.




posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 12:33 AM
link   
I got tazered a few times

it's painful all over



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by jpm1602
That woman was totally out of control. She needed to be subdued


Was she out of control because she got teased so often?

Have a view at this angle: Video clip on the Sydney Morning Herold



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 01:07 AM
link   
Looks to me like a fat, lazy, and uneducated guy wearing a police uniform trying his best to do the least possible in order to do his job. This woman may have been nuts, but come on! That fat guy could have detained her without much of a fight.

If in fact he is a trained Peace Officer there is no way he would have had to put up much of a fight to get her under control. I mean look at these two. A big trained Peace Officer (albeit fat, stupid and lazy), and ONE, 110 (or so) pound woman. This is without taking into consideration that he was not the only Peace Officer there.

You can almost see the expression on his face. Ill venture as far to say that it almost looks as if hes thinking to himself, " Ill just shock this chic until she passes out and then I wont have to ACTUALY do anything to demanding". God fobid he actualy has to break a sweat before lunch.

To be honest I cant actualy hold this guy fully responsable. He seems too stupid to understand what it was he was doing. Ill bet somewhere along the line he was given the impression or instruction that this is how his job is supposed to be done.

Accountability.... Who is accountable for this kind of action? Where is the oversight?

EDIT: Some Spelling

[edit on 9/22/2007 by xout1]



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 01:13 AM
link   
Please review my former posts more carefully. I clearly said tasing someone over and over 5/10xs was clearly over the top and sadistic. If I wasn't a fat f cop that didn't want to do his job right I would have dropped and detained her properly without regard to getting a few scratches or punches.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by section8citizen
Also reported, this officer is on PAID administrative leave.


In some circles that's known as PAID VACATION. Maybe I'm in the wrong line of work! The supoosed job description is to defend and serve... and preserve the Constitution. Imagine messin up that bad at your job and getting a paid vacation.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
 


Thats just the thing though.... Ill bet that most Peace Officers have never even read the Constitution. They dont even know what they are supposed to be defending.

So much enphasis is placed on tactical training in how to most efficiently take down a criminal that the fundamental reason for them to be out there is lost. These tactics are applied without thought. To them it doesnt seem to matter that they are violating the very rights they are supposed to be protecting, as long as "it" gets done with the least amount of effort.

Look at the guy in Florida. Four plus cops on this guy and they couldnt get him turned over and cuffed??? They had to actualy shock him to detain him at that point??

Laziness!!! To lazy to properly educate themselves, and to lazy to do thier job properly. The people Who train these Peace Officers are just as much to blame as the Officers are.

Damn my spelling!
[edit on 9/22/2007 by xout1]

[edit on 9/22/2007 by xout1]



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 05:22 AM
link   
It's plainly obvious this guy didn't know what he was doing. Anyone that out of control should have been in handcuffs from the start. Why would he try to lead her around by taser instead of handcuffed? Stupid and lazy cops give the rest of us a bad name. The taser should be used to avoid injury to cops or others, not to control. If you can't handle an out of control woman, you need to find a different line of work.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by icubitis
 



I agree with you. No reason why he should not have been able to handle her. Interesting to note, she was tazed before and after being handcuffed.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by apc
 


yES Tazers are considered a non-lethal method and are authorized for use if and when the officer determines/feels it is needed.

Hell a SOME new cell phones powered by a lihtium battery has been known to kill pepole also, should we ban them too.
www.news.com...


Keep in mind had she not protested and or gone out of control the officer would have had no need to use any kind of force lethal or non-lethal would he?


apc

posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 11:23 AM
link   
That is exactly the problem. They must ONLY be authorized to use tasers whenever they are actually physically threatened. Now police are authorized to use them whenever they feel it is necessary in their opinion. In my personal experiences the opinion of a cop is worth less than the mud on my boots. One I took to court and won because their lies fell through when they refused to present the dashcam video.

But a bullet is "non-lethal" too. You have to hit a major organ to kill someone (talking about the bullet itself not a wound left untreated). Tasers are exactly the same. They have to affect a major organ to kill someone. Which is what they do - they cause heart attacks.

Would they have been justified in shooting this woman instead?

If you are out of control or resisting arrest, but not attacking the officer, the officer has every right to break your arm, blind you with mace, or whip out the billy club. They do not have the right to put your life in danger.

Then there's the aspect of being "out of control." Does allegedly kicking at or out a window justify being tased? Does that justify placing her life in danger? I saw the woman going crazy because she was being electrocuted. If you were being shocked to death do you think you would just lie still and take it? Do you think you would have a choice about it?

Your reaching for some unrelated and completely irrelevant defective cell phone to support your position shows that you are starting to doubt the validity of your argument. Why don't you admit that this is simply wrong to be happening in this country?



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
That is exactly the problem. whenever they are actually physically threatened.


No not true, they can also use them so the individual who is detained does not endanger their life.



If you are out of control or resisting arrest, but not attacking the officer, the officer has every right to break your arm, blind you with mace, or whip out the Billy club.


With that I disagree at no time should an officer be allowed to pull out a Billy club and beat anyone. pepper spray and mace and tazers by all means they are considered non lethal methods.




They do not have the right to put your life in danger.



Correct but at the very same time they are required by law to do whatever is within their power to make sure you or the individual who has been detained does not injure themselves while in their custody.



Then there's the aspect of being "out of control." Does allegedly kicking at or out a window justify being tased?


Absolutely justified. Once they placed the hand cuffs on her she should have stopped resisting, she did not which opens the doors for police to use alternate means.




Why don't you admit that this is simply wrong to be happening in this country?


And right back at you why not admit this would not be happening if they did not resist?





[edit on 9/22/2007 by shots]



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 01:44 PM
link   
How is she resisting AFTER being handcuffed??

I am not saying she should not have been tased, from what it looks like to me it was deserved. However this cop abused that weapon. Secondly, Tasers are no longer referred to as NON LETHAL it is now called LESS LETHAL. Lets be honest, Taser have and do kill people.

So how does a person resist after being handcuffed? Police Procedures say that when an officer handcuffs you, you are to be handcuffed BEHIND YOUR BACK. So with that in mind, are you going to tell me the officer was in such a danger that he HAD to tase this women AFTER she was handcuffed?

I love you guys who defend these cops, but yet you have all ignored that one simple question.


apc

posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots
No not true, they can also use them so the individual who is detained does not endanger their life.


"We're going to kill you so you can't hurt yourself!"

Right. So now your argument is they were trying to keep her from hurting herself? Because a person in handcuffs can so easily commit suicide.

Answer this question:

Since you think people who get tased deserve it, did the people who have died deserve to die?



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc

"We're going to kill you so you can't hurt yourself!"


No and kindly stop trying to put words in my mouth. What I meant was they are under obligation to prevent the individual from causing harm to themself while in police custody.



Since you think people who get tased deserve it, did the people who have died deserve to die?



Again stop putting words in my mouth never did I state anyone deserved it. All I have stated is if they continue to resist the police are allowed to use NON Lethal force or as pointed out above less then lethal force.

Another link to a more complete video showing she was out of control






[edit on 9/22/2007 by shots]


apc

posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Apparently this lady like some others do not feel the tazers thus deserve everything they get for not obeying the officers. I mean she was in hand cuffs so she sould have known better then to resist further.


...

How about this question:

Since a bullet won't kill you if it doesn't affect a major organ, just like a taser won't kill you unless it affects your heart, would the officers have been justified in shooting her?



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by section8citizen
So with that in mind, are you going to tell me the officer was in such a danger that he HAD to tase this women AFTER she was handcuffed?



I never said he was in danger so stop putting words in peoples mouths. What I said was she continued to resist/committed crimes when she kicked the windows in the car. Also it is my undrstanding once you are in custody the police are under obligation to make sure you do not injure yourself while you are in their custody.

My guess is if she had acted as she should have the officer never would have shot/tazed after she was in the car the first time, however she went ballistic when the 2nd officer arrived on scene once again and was asked to get out of the car into what I assume was a paddy wagon or more secure cruiser. watch the new video I posted

www.youtube.com...





[edit on 9/22/2007 by shots]


apc

posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Oh! That poor car! How dare she try to hurt the car! She so deserves to die for that!

...

Please answer the question: Would they have been justified in, say, putting a bullet through her knee? That's not going to kill her. Or maybe giving her AIDS. You know these days that won't kill you either, right?

There's a well proven and truly non-lethal way to control someone who's out of control: hog tie (pun intended).



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 05:42 PM
link   
He was angry and worried about what his supervisor would say about his busted up zone car. So many ways that entire sit could have been handled better.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
Oh! That poor car! How dare she try to hurt the car! She so deserves to die for that!


You words not mine, I never stated she deserved to die for anything




Please answer the question: Would they have been justified in, say, putting a bullet through her knee? That's not going to kill her. Or maybe giving her AIDS. You know these days that won't kill you either, right?



You are acting like a 10 year old I never said or implied she deserved any thing. What I stated was she should have stopped acting the way she did and the officer would have stopped.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join