reply to post by gimme_some_truth
reply to post by fragmatic
I am a guy so no worries there. Thanks for the kind words as I am sure in addition to me all the other LEO's on this site appreciate it as well. I
have had the unique privilege of serving the community I have lived in, in 2 different states now. Our experiences will always greatly vary from
location, to state laws, departmental policies, officer background etc etc etc. The info I volunteer in these types of threads will not always be
correct, again depending on local laws, training, agency etc. You will also find officers who think my answers are out of the ballpark batsh#t crazy
as well, and it all part of the job.
One of the biggest disconnects I see in my job is the communication between the community we serve, and the Police deparment. The citizens know they
can pick up the phone and call 911 and will have officers respond. They know if their is an accident or medical emergency / fire they will have our
response. Just because we are there does not mean we are all on the same page though.
This is one of the reasons I try to give more info than I normally would when responding to threads like this. Unless you come from law enforcement or
a military background, chances are anyone who watches us could perceive our actions as excessive use of force, coming across as a bully etc etc. As
far as the negative comments about Law Enforcement its a given, and there is not much we can do about that except to try to answer questions in hopes
of a better understanding, on both sides.
I equate it with a person going to a resteraunt for the firt time and having a really bad experience. Chances are you wont be going back , and anyone
you talk to at some point, will tell them to stay away because of the bad exepreince. Law Enforcement is going to be the same way. Chances are contact
with us is not going to fall on the side of chance encounter but because of a law violation.
Everyone loves the Fire department, because they dont say no. When they have to say no, they use us to relay the message - no you cant go back in, no
you cant remove anymore personal items, no we cant get the fish etc etc etc.
The tools we use also fall into that category of knowing what it is, and having a basic idea of how it works, but without a full understanding people
can reach the wrong conclusions. Again it goes back to communication disconnects, and the only way to get over that is to communicate, answer
questions and try to explain why we do what we do. It does not mean you will agree with it, but at the very least it gives people a better
understanding of this line of work. Even then there will be those people who hate us no matter what, and there is nothing we can do to change that,
and that is just the nature of the beast.
As far as this topic goes, here is a link to the entire lawsuit. The incident occured in January of 2009, so I am not entirely sure why its just now
making the news.
Dallas PD Trainee Goes a TASER Too Far
Court documents allege negligence on behalf of Taser International, which the suit says had reason to believe the application of its products
could cause serious injury, but that the company misrepresented the danger to the DPD trainees:
Butler, who is in his 30s, is seeking damages for "conscious physical pain and suffering" as well as physical impairment, disfigurement, lost
wages and medical care. Butler's lawyer, Mark Haney out of Fort Worth, says his client's injury came directly from the Taser-induced muscle
contractions in Butler's back and that Butler will have "problems in the long term." Butler has already undergone surgery, Haney tells Unfair Park,
and "has made as good a recovery as he is going to make."
There is risk in everything we do, and all of the tools we use, from car accidents, to electrical fires from the computer terminals in the cars,
chemical burns from pepper spray for those of us who have light skin, injuries from defensive tactics, baton training, weapons training, etc etc
A Taser is a good tool for us to have and use, even with the issues that surround it. To me making an argument about the number of people injured by
taser would be no different than people who drive vehicles. There is danger in everything. Absent a Taser, we will go back to pepperspray and more
agressive hands on procedures, which again, will result in more injuries for both, the people we deal with, as well as ourselves. Supreme court has
said we need to end an encounter as quickly and safely as possible, using the least amount of force we can.
I have a question for people on the ohter side of the fence, well more like a scenario question for you.
You are a police officer, patrolling the west side of your city. Its about 40 degrees outside with spring right around the corner. Dispatch contacts
you on the radio with a call. They are sending you priority (code - lights/siren) to a fight in progress between 2 possibly drunk people, unknown if
weapons are involved. The caller did not want to be identifed, as has hung up on the call taker at dispatch.
You are the closest officer, but you do have other units responding as backup, but they are going to arrive approximately 5 minutes after you arrive
on scene, by yourself (they are running code as well, but are on the other side of the city).
You find one of the suspects in the middle of the road, no shirt on, bloody, no obvious signs of a weapon. The guy is babeling incoherently, mumbling
to himself, walking in circles. You get out of your car, and the guy sees you and starts walking towards you. You give loud clear repetitive commands
for the person to stop and show you his hands. The guys is still coming at you, and you realize the guy is pretty muscular, and is still ignroing your
commands. You quickly scan the area, and it appears the only person around is the guy bearing down on you.
You are still by yourself, and need to act.
On your duty belt, you have access to a collapsible baton, pepper spray, Taser, Pocket knife and your duty weapon (Glock 22).
What would you do?
edit on 23-1-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)