Were the Police right this time.....

Police use stun gun on 6-year-old

MIAMI, Florida (AP) -- Police used a stun gun on a 6-year-old boy in his principal's office because he was wielding a piece of glass and threatening to hurt himself, officials said Thursday.

The boy, who was not identified, was shocked with 50,000 volts on October 20 at Kelsey Pharr Elementary School.

Principal Maria Mason called 911 after the child broke a picture frame in her office and waved a piece of glass, holding a security guard back.

When two Miami-Dade County police officers and a school officer arrived, the boy had already cut himself under his eye and on his hand.

www.cnn.com...

The officers talked to the boy without success. When the boy cut his own leg, one officer shocked him with a Taser and another grabbed him to prevent him from falling, police said.

"By using the Taser, we were able to stop the situation, stop him from hurting himself," police spokesman Juan DelCastillo told The Miami Herald.

If a taser would have been used, I would say yes.

Edit:Apparently the story does say Tazer. A little missleading they are two diffrent things.

But they used a stun gun, If they were close enough to use the stun gun, they could have subdued a 6 year old child.



[edit on 12-11-2004 by SpittinCobra]

I actually agree with this one. Had the cops stood by an the 6 year old hurt themselves or another, we would be comming down on them hard for thier lack of action. This way the kid experineces some pain, but does not have to be shot. Its an acceptable alternative.

hmmm

I am okay with the way this situation was handled.

I just read the article again......... in one instance they call it a stun-gun, another they call it a taser... and to be honest I didn't know if they're 2 different things or not...


Fred, you're right, if the child had been allowed to hurt himself any further all we would have heard is "the cops didn't do anything".. .wah wah wah...



[edit on 12-11-2004 by elevatedone]

IMO, the police were right in what they did. They have a civil duty to protect the peace. They did thier job. Im sure the officer who had to stun the child feels lower than ant poo right now. Im wondering what the ethnicity of the child is? Could this be a factor in people claiming the police abused thier authority?

Having been personally hit with a stun gun (a friend bought one, and bet me $10 I wouldn't do it...I made $10 )...I don't have a problem with it. The way it shorts your nervous system is an excellent way to keep someone from harming themselves, as they lose muscle control.... It did sting like a bitch, but wore off fairly quickly....

kidfinger... while in this particular story it doesn't say that anyone is claiming anything against the police, and doesn't say what ethnicity the child was, usually it is a factor in these types of cases... sadly enough.

I think we're all overlooking the bigger picture here too, what a sad story, a 6 year old child doing this to himself... what possibly has gone wrong or is going wrong in his life that he would do something like this ?

I'd like to know more about his home life and background...

Originally posted by Gazrok
Having been personally hit with a stun gun (a friend bought one, and bet me $10 I wouldn't do it...I made $10

)...I don't have a problem with it. The way it shorts your nervous system is an excellent way to keep someone from harming themselves, as they lose muscle control.... It did sting like a bitch, but wore off fairly quickly....

So thats why you keep turning streetlights off and on Betcha 10 bucks you wont lick your finger and put it in a wall socket

www.taser.com...
Taser

electronics.howstuffworks.com...
Stun gun

They are not the same.


Stun gun's effect on kids potentially dangerous
Zapping a 6-year-old with 50,000 volts of electricity could cause permanent damage to the heart depending on the size of the child and other genetic factors, an expert in pediatric cardiology said.

www.miami.com...

thanks for those links...

however, they basically serve the same purpose....

Stun Gun - you have to be close to the person to use

Taser - shoots the wires into a person from a distance (15 - 20 ft )

Both giving pretty much the same result....

The range was my argument.

Tasers are less dangerous, the voltage is spread more evenly through out the body, not entering all at one point.

yea..... regardless... I don't think that I want to find out what it feels like...

Gaz, what happened when you were hit with it.. how long before you could get back on your feet ?

It took about 5 minutes to get back on my feet...I can't recall what the voltage of it was...as they vary.

So thats why you keep turning streetlights off and on Betcha 10 bucks you wont lick your finger and put it in a wall socket

Happened way before that... I'm more inclined to think it's a result of being indirectly hit by lightning 3 times, hehe... The first time, was actually the surge arcing out of a light socket, so no thanks on the bet, hehe...

Besides, I was a stupid kid back then...when I worked at a grocery store, during high school....

Tasers are less dangerous, the voltage is spread more evenly through out the body, not entering all at one point.

Voltage doesn't kill/hurt it is the current that does the job.

Stun guns/Tazers need high voltage to enable a significant surrent to pass through a human body which has a high resistance (when i measured my body's resistance once, it was about 10 million Ohms I think). Using Ohms law, you can work out that you need a high voltage to get a decent enough current to do the job.

To put it into context, you could have 100,000 Volts and only 1mA of current, which may not do any harm (using numbers for arguments sake), but you could have 12V and 1A and that could kill you.

Besides, the closer the two points, the less resistance to the current, and therefore possibly more damage. Although the current used is fairly low and would probably result only in light burns.

[edit on 12/11/04 by stumason]

I would say that if the police decide that the taser was the way to go the situation must have been critical. Had they not done what they did the child, having already wounded himself, could have inflicted a wound severe enough that he might not have survived, even if medical professionals were on site. A six-year-old doesn't have that much blood and a severed artery could be fatal in just a few minutes.

"I would say that if the police decide that the taser was the way to go the situation must have been critical." Wow, think for yourself man!

I also agree it was probably the right thing to do. Only because that's what I would have done in that situation IF talk had failed.

Why is this story achieving national play? It is because inch by inch powers who want to enslave you, and do so by fear want to normalize inexcusable conduct and reliance upon gadgets rather than sense. You handle these things like you did before your department handed out these weapons. They are a last resort such as a gun is a last resort in direct self defense only. Also the story is wrong because the kid had a water glass, not a broken glass. He is only six years old for crying out loud!

The police in your story are not only wrong, they are criminals and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of civil rights and other laws covering such assault and battery. You have to ask police officers across this country, do you want your child treated this way?

Does anyone have any idea how much agony these tasers inflict? They have already been fatal in many cases, while putting these devices, which are not entirely different from cattle prods, on a child is the worst. Shame! Shame! Shame!

[edit on 13-11-2004 by SkipShipman]

Originally posted by Jamuhn
"I would say that if the police decide that the taser was the way to go the situation must have been critical." Wow, think for yourself man!

I am thinking for myself. Consider that the situation had already escalated to the point that the school staff could not handle it and the child had already wounded himself.

Police have to be very careful about the use of force of any kind and they do not do so without some forethought as to the consequences. In this instance, I would naturally defer to the judgement of the police, because I am not a paranoid schizophrenic and I do not believe that the police are trying to take over the country one six-year-old at a time. If a subsequent investigation reveals otherwise, then my opinion of the matter will change.

Until that time, there is no one here who knows any more about the event than I do.

[edit on 04/11/12 by GradyPhilpott]

When situations arise the only knowledge we have is what is provided by the sources. From this we are able to deduce what WE believe to be the appropriate measures in such an instance. As we see, suitable action is fairly relative and can only be taken on a person to person basis as what suitable entails. There are a large amount of police whose judgement cannot be trusted (coming from New Orleans, I'd expect you to know this Grady). So, police measures must be taken with a sense of both trust and mistrust (especially if you don't even know the guy). As I stated before, I agree with police assessment of the situation, but that is not say I agree with it BECAUSE he is a police officer as you do. Placing blind faith in a stranger will get you burned.

As for your insinuation that I am a paranoid schizophrenic, well, you just go to prove my dislike for the BUSINESS of physchiatry (you are involved in this BUSINESS aren't you Grady?). Ironic how my past psychiatrist's name was Dr. Looney, eh?

Maybe now I can grow wings and fly away? I'm crazy don't you know?

They did the right thing and had NO OTHER OPTION...mace...no...gun...no...baton...no...words...no...hands...no...taser was their only choice left...i promise you these officers werent happy about doing it...but what other choice did they have?