posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 07:52 AM
I'm a long time lurker here, primarily because I typically have little to say about topics I've not thoroughly researched. But, in topics such as
this, I believe I can give a little insight to officer action when situations as this occur.
For starters, I am a former LEO. As part of my duty, I was formally trained in use of many less than lethal means, including the taser. The device
use in the video posted by the OP is the Taser International X-26. The same device I was trained to carry. The same device I deployed in the line of
duty, saving my own life on one occasion, and the same device I was exposed to with full effect as part of my mandated training.
I see a lot of comments asking why the officer simply did not chase her down and tackle her. To understand why he may have chosen taser deployment,
you have to understand the Use of Force Continuum currently in place. What I will cover is generally accepted nationwide.
Use of Force generally covers 5 levels of force as follows:
1) Uniformed Officer Presence
2) Verbal Commands
3) Soft Physical Techniques (i.e. escort, O.C., soft restraints such as a restraint chair, pepperball and Taser)
4) Hard Physical Techniques (i.e. strikes such as a punch/kicks, baton, throws or "tackles)
5 Deadly Force (i.e. gun, vehicle)
I will not attempt to speculate on anything.. There seems to be a lot of missing details, and I will only explain what happened from an LEO's
perspective based on what is shown in the video.
An officer is escorting a female prisoner for transport. At this point, the subject is already under arrest. Unless operating under Federal
guidelines, for example transporting Federal inmates, the Officer will walk behind the subject. While it is typically against policy to hand cuff an
individual in the front, officers will make exceptions for inmates for comfort. You give a little, you get a little, and it is generally overlooked.
When the individual attempts to run, this is not a case of fleeing officers. The female is already an inmate. They are attempting to escape custody.
So far as I know, this is a felony in every state. At this point, it does become a felony act in progress, witnessed by an on duty officer who is
bound by law to act in his capabilities to prevent the escape.
As shown, the inmate is hand cuffed in the front. This presents a serious risk to officer safety. From personal experience, any one striking you
with hand cuffs can cause serious bodily injury. Depending on the use, it can be considered a deadly weapon.
By opting for Taser deployment, he has chosen a lower level of force (2) in attempts to gain control of the situation. Statistically, the officer and
inmate are both at lower risk of injury when the taser is involved. This is generally favored by the court and department. With the circumstances as
is, taser deployment was the preferred means from an LEO perspective.
Probes were deployed and taser had full effect, referred to as Neuro-Muscular Interruption (NMI). If it is possible, officers will assist the subject
to the ground to prevent injury. With the subject on the run, cuffed in the front and in the act of committing a felony offense, this was
implausible. He decision was sound and his actions were lawful and well within his departmental policy.
For those of you who believe tasers to be weapons of torture, I beg to differ. I have been tased. ...numerous times. Exposure in training.
Exposure during an altercation where I simply rode the taser cycle with them, applying cuffs the moment the cycle ended and I was able to. My
instructor was tased 63 times in a single day while filming a Taser International training video. To the overwhelming majority, it is no more than 5
seconds of hell. But, given enough cases, you'll find at least one person that would die from drinking a can of pepsi.
I've also read many comments in this thread about siding with law, or siding with what's right. Our legal system is a product of society. When
frivolous lawsuits become rampant, every business, corporation, LE agency etc will take every legal measure to avoid the hassle of lawsuits. Whether
you agree with the officer actions or not, they are law within a system that has become a product of a society that has taken advantage of it. I see
complaint after complaint about how the government is taking away more and more freedoms. I can see Big Brothers side of things when in this thread
alone, members of THIS society will openly make death threats against those who's sole purpose is to protect it.
If you truly disagree with how things are, write your congressman, become a cop or even run for President. Until you officially renounce your
citizenship, you chose to live under the laws of this nation. If you want change, fight for it. Ranting on the internet about killing cops is no
worse than whatever even regime you think to rule the world and whatever else kids believe these days.