Police Tasings Might Finally Be Ruled Brutality

Originally posted by autowrench
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.

Tasers have no effect on the heart.

As far as incidents go its a double edged sword. When looking at national stats you get a generalization (number of incidents). What you dont get is a breakdown of how they were used. The other isde of the blade are the states. Contrary to popular belief the States are individual and make their own laws. The laws in Michigan regarding the use of tasers is different than that of California is different than in Texas.

Once the baseline of the state is established individal departments develop their policies for its use.

While it may sound like a deflection / excuse its not. Say for example there were 1000 reports of tasers being used in an innapropriate manner nation wide. It sounds like an epidemic, and the media portrayts it as such. However when stats are broken down you see some states are very high, while other states are low. When you drop down to the county / city level is further diludes the number of incidents.

Its difficult to argue the bad about tasers when agencies only have a few incidents a year. Any person looking at that stat would say the same.

I am not a fan of law enforcement tools being regulated by the Federal Government, especially since their standards for Federal Law Enforcement are not the same as local law enforcement. I am in favor of better regulation and oversight of taser use though.

The new Tasers have audio and video recording built in for added liability. Just so no one is confused I dont agree with using a taser on a person for refusing to sign a ticket. People sign citations all the time and show up to court as well as ditch the court date. In the end its the resonsibility of the person cited to go to court and its the responsibility of the court to deal with a failure to appear.

reply to post by Xcathdra

The problem is for non-lethal weapons, they can be and have been lethal to one too many people. They are being abused, and the abuse is getting more widespread and insane. The cops are not using common sense in the situations where they are using the tasers.

These things need to be taken away from the cops. If it is problem with only rogue cops, then they need to be taken away until all the rogue cops are rooted out of the system. Which will probably be never.

From what I have seen and know about their use, the cops are using them as torture devices. They taze the person, and expect them to get up in three seconds. When the person can't, because their body is still convulsing on the floor while their mind is still in a tail spin from the shock. They taze them again, and expect them to get up in three seconds again. The process continues until they are tazed who knows how many times, and have to be lifted up off the floor anyhow.

They took the use of electroshock therapy away from the doctors in insane asylums for good reason. Why should police be able to use it with tasers on the streets?

Yes, tasers can and have affected pacemakers, so in essence they can affect the heart. The taser does not have to affect the heart directly. In some people the shock to the system would be enough to set off a heart attack. The taser doesn't affect the head either, but it did cause death to one lady who was hit by a taser, which caused her to hit her head on concrete causing her death.

They can be lethal, are dangerous, and should only be used in extreme circumstances, but they are not. They are being used unnecessarily, and should be taken away.

reply to post by pianopraze


I hope justice prevails, though I wont hold my breath.

I have seen too many of the videos, too many so that I know
beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is something very wrong
going on. Its almost as if there is some kind of a Psy Ops going
on in this country....a war being waged on innocent people
whom better fear for thier life if they happen to fall into a situation
even innocently.


Like these poor people did. They were returning home, only to find
that a traffice stop and arrest was occuring at their driveway.

What happens after that is horror - how can this happen?
www.stonecountypolicebrutality.com...

reply to post by EvilSadamClone


You punish them ALL in this case.

I don't care. I can't stand cops.

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by EvilSadamClone

 

You punish them ALL in this case.

I don't care. I can't stand cops.

Although, your personal feelings on cops should not determine how police services is managed or regulated. Your prejudice is really nothing different than a bunch of bad cops who believe anyone and everyone should see the end of a taser.

An equally wrong mentality with faulty logic.

While I believe in the use of the taser it does get out of hand in certain instances but you can't blame everyone though for the actions of some bad cops and after all It's better than using a gun. They need to punish officers wandhave them wrongly and not just slap them on the hand. They also need to tighten the controls on who gets one besides "hey, we tase you and you can have one". They also need to realize and make sure their officers know trained that while not "lethal" they need to be handled as of it were a gun. People do get hurt all the time from misuse even if the cop has good intentions. If the proves to fail then I'd say get rid of them as a weapon for law enforcement.

I personally prefer mace though.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Tasers have no effect on the heart.

Tasers have killed many people. They DO effect some peoples hearts. They want the numbers hushed up as it's an exported product of our country putting money into peoples pockets.

Go get a taser and zap your 80 year old grandmother and see how her heart holds up. If she dies you will NOT go to jail, you will get off scott free since they want the taser deaths hushed up. "Natural Causes"...lol!

reply to post by Xcathdra

Tasers have no effect on the heart.

I'm sorry, but can you please explain to me how it is that people have died from electrocution?

The heart uses electrical signals (visible via an electrocardiogram) to control operation. Electrical impulses introduced into the human body can interfere with the normal electrical operation of the heart muscle. Thus, the statement you make above is absolutely false. Even if, as expected, the current level that actually passes through the heart muscle or controlling neural system does no permanent harm in 99% of the people, it still has the potential to disrupt the electrical regulation mechanisms.

From TASER International:

The TASER ECD pulses mimic the electrical signals used within the human body to communicate between the brain and the muscles. The TASER ECD simulates the pulsed communications used within the nerves, and interferes with communication – like static on the telephone lines within the body.

The human heart is a muscle.

Or, this article from the National Institute of health:

Controversy exists concerning the lethality of Tasers. These are conducted electrical weapons which incapacitate subjects by delivering an electrical charge that causes diffuse muscle contraction. In North America, over 440 deaths have been reported immediately following Taser use. Taser International has recently suggested that Tasers should not be aimed at the chest, although there is no conclusive proof that a discharge over the heart would cause an arrhythmia. The case history is presented of a young man who was shot in the chest by a Taser and presented to the emergency department in ventricular fibrillation.

440 deaths from Tasers.

The problem is not in the use of Tasers; they are obviously far less lethal than a firearm. The problem lies in statements such as yours, which leads to the belief that Tasing someone is harmless. As long as Tasers are considered 'harmless', they will continue to be abused by police departments and IMO should be outlawed. Only if they are relabeled as an alternative to deadly force and not, not, NOT as something to be fired every time a law enforcement officer has a bad day, then perhaps they can be used for the advantages they actually offer.

I do not totally blame law enforcement over this; a great deal of the blame goes to Taser International for deliberately distorting and omitting information in order to increase their sales. But I am not worried about the blame as much as I am the needless deaths and pain (and yes, Tasers can easily be seen as torture devices) inflicted without due consideration.

TheRedneck

reply to post by TheRedneck


Tasers are not used every time an officer has a bad day. X did a good job of explaining how the statistics really break dow. There are some officers and departments that need to be addressed. However, taking Tasers away is not the answer.

That would leave officers with only three things besides their hands. Mace, which can be highly ineffective and even hinder the officer's ability to react effectively. Batons easily break bones and can cause internal injuries that go unnoticed/untreated. Guns aren't magical death rays, but they cause a wide range of injuries and have a high probability of permenant injury or death. Going hands on can cause numerous injuries and death for all parties involved. It also puts an officer at contact range and makes it easier for the person being detained to use a bladed or pointed weapon.

Tasers have to be used with common sense. You don't tase a pregnant woman. Don't light up the eighty year old woman in a wheel chair that may have a pace maker. If an officer does something like that he deserves professional sanctions or more, in most cases.

Punish bad cops, but don't put the lives and health of everyone else (including the criminals)at risk.

reply to post by MikeNice81

X did a good job of explaining how the statistics really break dow.

He did however state that a Taser has no effect on the heart, which is an absolute lie. That lie is admittedly perpetuated by Taser International, and I believe most officers actually believe it is as harmless as spraying someone with a squirt gun. That is a major problem that must be addressed.

Electricity has been used to execute convicts, torture prisoners of war, control dangerous animals, etc. Now suddenly we are to believe that 5000VAC at 19 Hz is safe while we know that 110VAC at 50/60 Hz is deadly. True, the current is regulated in a Taser, but the total available charge is more than sufficient to stop a healthy heart should it receive the full amount. True, it is difficult for the full charge to flow through the heart muscle alone. But it is also true that the current required to create fibrillation varies greatly from individual to individual, just as it is true that once the charge is released, there is no way to force it to move through a particular path in the body.

However, taking Tasers away is not the answer.

Neither is allowing them to be used on the young, the infirm, the pregnant, or the elderly an acceptable answer.

I think the Taser is an excellent addition to an officer's arsenal; I simply state facts. Tasers can be dangerous, even lethal, in certain cases, and by labeling them as 'non-lethal' and 'harmless' they have become abused. I did not above state that Tasers should be taken away; I stated this:

Originally posted by TheRedneck
As long as Tasers are considered 'harmless', they will continue to be abused by police departments and IMO should be outlawed. Only if they are relabeled as an alternative to deadly force and not, not, NOT as something to be fired every time a law enforcement officer has a bad day, then perhaps they can be used for the advantages they actually offer.

While the mention of having a bad day is an exaggeration, I thought that was fairly obvious. Since it is not, allow me to rephrase: every time an officer is met with any amount of perceived opposition, no matter how minor or by whom.

Tasers have to be used with common sense.

That is the key. But we are seeing far too many instances of a lack of common sense being used. A Taser was originally billed as a non-lethal alternative to lethal force; it is not used that way. Far too often, it is used as an alternative to having to get one's hands dirty. If a grandmother is confused about what she is expected to do, tase her. If a kid talks back to his teacher, tase him. If a woman gets upset because you gave her a speeding ticket, tase her. If the guy you just tased can't stand because of the tasing, tase him again!

The simple solution, if you want police to carry tasers, is to treat each tasing as though a firearm were discharged, and to hold officers legally accountable for damages resulting from unwarranted tasings. But of course, that will never happen; the only recourse left is to remove them from service and go back to police work like it was before they existed.

With increased authority comes increased responsibility. Abuse the responsibility and the authority must be removed.

TheRedneck

reply to post by TheRedneck

Now suddenly we are to believe that 5000VAC at 19 Hz is safe while we know that 110VAC at 50/60 Hz is deadly.

It is in most cases. Volts don't kill the amps do. You can get hit with lighting and live. With direct current it takes more amperage than with the ac outlet in your house. The taser is not perfectly safe. However, under the right circumstances even a 9 volt battery can kill a person.

Electricity has been used to execute convicts, torture prisoners of war, control dangerous animals, etc.

I love the appeal to emotion. Electricity is used far more often to save lives, provide sanitation, and make modern life possible.

True, the current is regulated in a Taser, but the total available charge is more than sufficient to stop a healthy heart should it receive the full amount.

No it is not. A healthy heart can easily withstand a full blast from the Taser. There are variances that reduce the resistance (ohms load) of a person's body. However, an average person in average health should be able to withstand a taser blast with no heart issues. The most comon issue is minor burning of the skin from heating and injury from falling. Heart problems are minimal compared to the total number of times tasers are used.

Neither is allowing them to be used on the young, the infirm, the pregnant, or the elderly an acceptable answer.

In my department it is forbidden unless are other methods have been exhausted. You will be facing demotion or unpaid leave at a minimum. Depending on circumstances termination is a possibility.

by labeling them as 'non-lethal' and 'harmless'

They are actually labeled as "less lethal." As this very story states Taser International states that there are circumstances when they shouldn't be used.

every time an officer is met with any amount of perceived opposition, no matter how minor or by whom.

That is still an extreme exaggeration. Less than 1.4% of all face to face interactions with police officers involve the threat or use of force. The vast majority of the time it is a shove, push, or grab. Out of the times that force is used 71% of the people admit that they instigated the use of force.

This idea that cops are meeting every bit of resistance with undue force (or force at all) is largely built on sensationalistic reporting. Study after study from the DOJ and others have repeatedly shown that police use force in a nearly infinitesmally small number of face to face contacts.

The simple solution, if you want police to carry tasers, is to treat each tasing as though a firearm were discharged, and to hold officers legally accountable for damages resulting from unwarranted tasings.

Police officers can and are held criminally acountable for excessive force. They can also be sued if they are found to have criminally used force.

But of course, that will never happen; the only recourse left is to remove them from service and go back to police work like it was before they existed.

You mean like when they carried "black jacks" that left people crippled, maimed, and brain dead? Most people don't understand that police abuse is actually less of a problem now than it was in the 1930s, 1950s, 1970s, or even 1990s. Increased regulation, training, and oversight has actually served to change the way police use force, and the type of force used.

reply to post by MikeNice81

Volts don't kill the amps do.

E=IR.

There is no real way to separate voltage, current, and resistance; the three are physically interrelated. Current is a function of voltage and resistance encountered. In a Taser, which is really little more than a modified shock stick like is used to control animals, the voltage is delivered at about 5000V in order to ionize the body fluids, then continues at something like 1200 volts for the remainder of the charge. If 110 volts is so lethal, why are those higher voltages needed? In order to create enough current through the body's resistance to ensure that affected muscle tissue is immobilized. This current is regulated through a capacitive discharge circuit, which builds and then releases a certain amount of electrical energy. The actual amount of current which is released is based on how fast that capacitive energy discharges, and that depends on the resistance/inductance of the ionized pathway through the body.

It's a bit more involved than the simple statement you make.

Electricity is used far more often to save lives, provide sanitation, and make modern life possible.

Yes, it is. Just as a crowbar is used typically as a construction (destruction?) tool. Does that mean it is OK to use it as a weapon? No.

Neither is it OK to kill and/or torture people with electricity. Surely you do not deny that electricity can be lethal?

A healthy heart can easily withstand a full blast from the Taser. There are variances that reduce the resistance (ohms load) of a person's body. However, an average person in average health should be able to withstand a taser blast with no heart issues.

No, sir, it cannot. You are obviously not getting my point. If the full discharge energy of a Taser passed directly through the human heart, the heart would stop beating.

I am also deeply troubled by the use of the words "average" and "should". I would probably be less affected by a Taser than the vast majority; I have a naturally high electrical resistance. 110VAC is more of a surprise to me than a painful shock (220V I cannot say, as I am not dumb enough to tempt fate that way). I would not be surprised if a Taser blast did nothing more than make me yell out in sudden pain. But if we are talking about averages, my high resistance means there is someone out there with low resistance who would receive much more current from a Taser blast than the "average".

In my department it is forbidden unless are other methods have been exhausted. You will be facing demotion or unpaid leave at a minimum. Depending on circumstances termination is a possibility.

And that is proper use of a Taser. It seems, however, based on news reports, that your office may well be in the minority. How many stories have we heard here about misuse of a Taser? I have seen reports of elderly being tased, children being tased, people being tased with their arms high above their head in surrender simply asking what the problem was, and people being tased repeatedly for not standing back up after being tased... do police officers understand that when one has their muscles immobilized, they cannot stand up immediately?

That's like beating someone for not tying their shoes while handcuffed behind their back. I sincerely hope that type of situation is a rarity, but it is getting harder and harder to believe that.

This idea that cops are meeting every bit of resistance with undue force (or force at all) is largely built on sensationalistic reporting.

I will readily admit that is responsible for a large amount of the stories we hear; I have seen several where I could not fault the officer. But what is the acceptable level of abuse? One person killed unjustly per year? Ten? One hundred?

440 deaths from Taser use. Is that an acceptable number to you?

You mean like when they carried "black jacks" that left people crippled, maimed, and brain dead?

I will grant you this point... overall, a Taser is less likely to result in serious injury than a blackjack or firearm. I have already stated this. Yet, just because it is less likely to result in serious injury, it does not follow that it should be used every opportunity. If I point my gun in a random direction and just start pulling the trigger, it is very unlikely I will injure someone. Yet, if I do, I am arrested for causing the injury. Why? It was very unlikely that I would injure someone.

My bottom line: Tasers are effective, but can be misused. Tasers are being misused in some cases. Misuse has already led to unjust deaths, and use of the Taser seems to be increasing despite this. Ergo, Law Enforcement needs to police itself or be policed by an outside force. No one is above the law, and that includes police officers. Sorry.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Tasers have no effect on the heart.

Wrong.
Wrong.