Police Tasings Might Finally Be Ruled Brutality

Police Tasings Might Finally Be Ruled Brutality

gizmodo.com

Taser International warns against using tasers on pregnant women because of potential damage to the fetus, but luckily, Brooks' daughter was born healthy. She sued the officers for using excessive force and last fall the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that the officers had indeed crossed line. The justices also said that Brooks couldn't sue because the law wasn't clear at the time of the incident.

But for cops around the nation, it wasn't enough that the Seattle cops weren't liable—they've asked the Supreme Court to take up the case to see if they can get the

(visit the link for the full news article)

They tasered a pregnant woman because she refused to sign a speeding ticket...

They then decided to arrest her for this... she refused to get out of the car... but really. The cops that do this kind of crap should be thrown in jail.

I have in times passed tried to defend LEOs but this poop is getting out of hand. Too many are using it for to little reasons... and it has been documented a million times over here on ATS all the stupid reason they are using it... elderly man telling them to get out of his house because he didn't want to goto hospital, child for not going to school... on and on... this is ridiculous.



gizmodo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Its torture and they have no right using it at all. I don't believe in tasers. If they had an alternative to guns, then the only use of it would be in the very rare circumstances when they would ever be allowed to use a gun, which is not for tickets, not for refusal to be arrested. It means an armed person is really trying to kill them period.

Jeez, it's like people don't know how dangerous a 7 month pregnant woman is... Lucky these cops got away with their lives.

reply to post by pianopraze



Currently the States that fall within the 9th circuit court of appeals are subject to their ruling. The court has ruled / established guidelines for the use of a taser and the threat that must exist in order to use it (along the same guidelines for use of pepper spray / guns etc etc).

Outside of the 9th circuit its left to agency policy, individual state laws / state appeals / supreme court rulings.

In general a signature on a ticket is not required. All it does it says the person signing the ticket promises to appear in ocurt to deal with the citation and nothing else. Tasering a person over a refusal to sign seems a bit excessive (sarcasm) and to use one a pregnant individual is about bone headed stupid.

Granted I dont know the specifics of what occured so my comment is based on jsut the info I read and my personal opinion.

reply to post by pianopraze

Criminals may choose one of two of the options listed below:

1. Be tased (or tazed) as they are committing a crime (and most likely live).

--or--

2. Be shot with a firearm as they are committing a crime (and most likely die).

Tasers/tazers are considered non-lethal means to apprehend criminals or stop them from committing violent and potentially deadly acts. Non-lethal, meaning a less than deadly force option to resolve a situation. Sure, there are risks when you confront a law enforcement officer trying to keep people safe. So, either don't confront a law enforcement officer in a threatening way OR count yourself lucky if he/she tases/tazes you instead of putting a bullet (or three) into your center of mass.

Originally posted by GhostLancer
reply to post by pianopraze

 

Criminals may choose one of two of the options listed below:

1. Be tased (or tazed) as they are committing a crime (and most likely live).

--or--

2. Be shot with a firearm as they are committing a crime (and most likely die).

Tasers/tazers are considered non-lethal means to apprehend criminals or stop them from committing violent and potentially deadly acts. Non-lethal, meaning a less than deadly force option to resolve a situation. Sure, there are risks when you confront a law enforcement officer trying to keep people safe. So, either don't confront a law enforcement officer in a threatening way OR count yourself lucky if he/she tases/tazes you instead of putting a bullet (or three) into your center of mass.

Yep, that's why they need to taser pregnant women for refusing to sign tickets and 9 year olds for refusing to goto school...

Interesting...no one can force you to sign anything, and then to be tazed for it? Very Very wrong..

Are all people drug dealers?

Are all people speeders?

Are all Whites coc aine dealers?

Are all people who live in trailer parks trash who are on welfare?

Is it neccessary to take an incident that never should have occured and apply it to all police? Stereotyping cuts both ways and perpetuates the problem, which is an us vs them mentality.

reply to post by GhostLancer


There's no excuse for using tasers at all, in my opinion.
They should be banned and should never been introduced into our police forces.
It's gotten out of hand the way they are used against the public.

reply to post by pianopraze


Do you guys really think the supreme court is going to rule on the side of citizens? This supreme court??

This supreme court says the cops can strip you, and I'm sure they think they can taze you as well.

Originally posted by LDragonFire
reply to post by pianopraze

 

Do you guys really think the supreme court is going to rule on the side of citizens? This supreme court??

This supreme court says the cops can strip you, and I'm sure they think they can taze you as well.

I do think this Supreme Court will rule on the side of the citizen.

Secondly if you are going to suggest the Supreme Court said soemthing, maybe you should not only read their ruling but understand it before making a claim that is not true.

What the Supreme Court ruled was a person who is arrested and booked into jail, can be searched in the exact same manner all other inmates are searched in by jail corrections staff. A Jail / Prison is a controlled enviornment.

Contrary to popular belief there is a difference between the functions / laws / procedures of a road officer and those of a corrections officer.

The Supreme Court ruling you are referencing applies to jails, not police.

reply to post by lambros56


I do agree that some officers have gotten out of hand with tazers. However, it is much more effective than mace and causes far less injury than a baton or bullet. When you're facing a 6'3" 320lb professional weight lifter that has snorted a gram of coc aine, it is a great tool to have.

A lot of people that in the 1980s would have been hospitalised with batons are walking around injury free because of tasers. The proper use of force spectrum should be taught and enforced. Tools don't need to be taken away, abusive cops need to be fired. Start making examples out of the bad ones and the others fall in line or get out.

reply to post by GhostLancer


Except that guns are not fired off legally, for talking back to an officer, or resisting arrest or supposedly conducting a crime. In Canada all use of firearms especially if there is a death of someone, nearly always ended up before committees because there are limited and very restricted times when you can use them, ie. extreme danger to the officer by someone armed and basically shooting to kill you or another. Oh and that certainly didn't mean a mentally challenged teen ager with a butter knife, who's situation was already known by the local cop shop.

Disagree...the taser is very efficient BUT it needs to be used appropriately. Unfortunately some cops do abuse their power with it but it is very effective in subduing someone who may be at risk to the public or the police officers. Generally 1 taser shot will drop a person. If they drop the taser then will it be back to billy clubs in which would take multiple hits to subdue someone?

Oh, you mean they might finally not be able to taze somebody five or six times and get away with it? Or pull a tazer on an unruly small child?

Only took about a decade or so.

Some of the comments below the article in the OP's link are as scary as the use and abuse of the taser. I see "contempt of cop" comments littered throughout the personal comments. The badge must come with an ego as big as a bus!

reply to post by Xcathdra

I do think this Supreme Court will rule on the side of the citizen.

I agree, I think they will side with the people also. There have just been way too many incidents where people have been tazed by cops that resulted in serious injuries. Anyone with a heart problem could suffer a fatal attack, myself inclusive. This is compounded by my big mouth and working knowledge of the Common Law. So far, I have had no problems, but.....
Come on, Supreme Court, do the human thing here.

reply to post by GhostLancer


Tasers are a toy used by deadbeat cops that don't understand how to diffuse a potentially violent situation.

They should be taken away.

You don't punish the entire group for the bad actions of the few or the one, you punish the few or the one, and if they don't learn, get rid of them.