Use of Tazers by the Police

[ks_emt]

no there is a thing called a level of force continuum. i used to be with a polic department and i noticed that a lot of officers do not ever follow that. these are the one im talking about. they would rather taze someone than follow their protocols. but i do agree that in some situatons that they are useful for restraining a violent person.

[Dustdevil]

no there is a thing called a level of force continuum.

Yep. And it was created by legal "experts," not survival experts. The COF is getting police officers killed all in the name of saving cities a few bucks in legal fees. It costs the city a lot less to bury a dead officer than to pay off an injured criminal.

i used to be with a polic department

Me too. Over ten years of my life.

...and i noticed that a lot of officers do not ever follow that.

And they are the ones who never get their arses whipped too. Coincidence? I think not.

they would rather taze someone than follow their protocols.

Rather? That's a pretty nebulous statement. Why would they "rather" taze somebody? Because they get a kick out of watching them fall to the ground? Wouldn't they get a bigger thrill out of drop-kicking them to the ground? Sure. So then, why would they "rather" taze somebody? It's simple. Because it is safer for both the officer and the criminal. So what problem do you have with that? Enlighten us with the vast insight you aquired as a police officer.

[kevkei]

read the whole thing. i said not all officers should have them. officer discretion is really poor.

So should their supervisors be the only ones to carry guns too? Sure, there are instances of improper use, but there are also cases of improper use of our instruments too (14g IV in the hand, NPA or OPA placement, inappropriate painful stimuli, etc.....) You only hear about the bad cases, not the ones where it prevented to suspect from being shot and potentially killed or it prevented further harm to the public.

On the topic of deaths in relation to Tazer use, the vast majority of these can be attributed to a condition called excited delerium. There are plenty of documented cases of excited delerium killing people without Tazer use or interaction with the police at all. Generally, these people are so loaded with CNS stimulants that they get to the edge of the cliff and fall off, regardless of Tazer use or anything else. Yes, it may be argued that the Tazer causes additional sympathetic system response, but so too will shooting them or having 10 police officers jump the guy. The moral of the story is you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. These people will die regardless of the circumstances if they don't receive benzo's to depress their heightened CNS stimulation.

To be honest, I don't know of any direct link to in custody deaths attributed to Tazer use, this is more of an assumption made by the media and the public, nor has there been an official 'cause of death' implicating the Tazer. Sure it sounds like a bunch of electrical energy but you need to understand volts compared to amps and it's not the voltage that kills you, it's the amperage. People can get struck by lightning carrying 1,000,000 volts and survive, so what about a Tazer?

The problem is we have people (LEO's) out there in bad situations trying to make the best decision they can while the rest of society stands back to play armchair quarterback.

[NREMT-Basic]

For me its not so much a matter of not approving of the use of less lethal weapons, as it is the training required before and officer can deploy them. My father had his butt saved on a number of occassions by less lethals when he was still wearing the badge. However, I also know that his training consisted of "see that little red dot, dont point that at the head" and once the volts are applied shout "stop resisting or your gonna get it again" as many times as you can for any news cameras that may be lingering in the shadows. I have used these less lethals and have also "taken the ride" during training. Yes, it hurts like an SOB, and does cause momentary confusion after the voltage stops flowing, which is what it is intended to do. In the IL Police Academy, new officer trainees are only required to take one 5 second ride at the end of the wires. There is a greater factor for disorientation and regaining the ability for coordinated "compliance" when you have been tazed say, 6 or 7 times. And I agree with some of the other posters that I would rather get tazed than hit with an asp baton. And would rather experience both at the same time then wind up with some surgical intern trying to fish a 9mm chunck of lead out of my spleen. If you really want the tazer experience, you can sign up for tactical classes, learn the ins and outs of the weapon, get popped with it once or twice and then get to pop others. Or, if you like, I am sure you could go down to your local PD Post and have them shoot you with a tazer and then a 9mm and play the game of better or worse. The fact remains that in a large majority of the cases, the tazer brings immediate compliance and no more lasting harm than two little sizzle burns at the point of impact.

[BushyFromOz]

Good post

[ks_emt]

ok i have been tazed and i have been sprayed and i have also been hit with an asp. they all hurt. but the thing i was saying was that i se a really good point in having them but some officers are way too quick to jump to use it. i mean put yourself in a situation where an officer has an attitude and he decides to use the tazer on you. he feels like he as done the right thing but in your eyes you feel the officer blew the situation out of porporton. i mean take the video of the kid at UCLA that was tazed many times. was he being a threat? did he directly threaten the officers? i dont know the whole story behind that but im sure there could have been a better way to handle that than taze him all the way to the car. i mean come on. but oh well thats just my opinion.

[BushyFromOz]

but some officers are way too quick to jump to use it

Rules for fools is not a good way to govern peoples actions. Why should the norm be changed in order to compensate for the actions of a few?

[Dustdevil]

i mean take the video of the kid at UCLA that was tazed many times. was he being a threat? did he directly threaten the officers?

Yes. He made clear his intention to resist the officers. Their choice was to fight him or taze him. Choice A means somebody is getting hurt, and the chances of it escalating dangerously are profound. Choice B means nobody gets hurt and the situation ends.

We WANT people to be worried about the cops escalating. That's what keeps people from resisting.

It's a no brainer.

[*** CDN BACON ***]

What seems to be missed/understood with the Tazer is where it falls into the Use of Force wheel (as it is referred to in Ontario)....In Ontario the Tazer can be deployed far before buddy makes a fist to start swinging...when a subject is actively resistant - uses muscle strength to attempt to defeat my lawful duties...ie hold something when directed to leave.....zap zap...the use of force wheel would also at this point alow me to deliver a series of distraction strikes which can vary from a punch, kick, elbow or knee strike pepper spray...what little disorientation that may remain after a Tazer hit is far less than the disorientation / pain that will remain from and a fist or elbow to the nose....the loss of bowel or urination is something that happens in policing when people are scared...foot chases...fights with police....warrants...etc

As I understand it......In the UCLA video (which made my blood boil) the agent of the property (security) found the subject in non compliance and asked him to leave....the subject failed to leave when directed ........the agent of the property called the Police ......the Police are then requested(impowered) to intervene on behalf of the agent...."let's go buddy time to leave"....subject refuses lawful order by Police...now arrestable for "fail to leave when directed, Trespass to Property Act"...the subject refuses to walk ...the Police then have the power to drag his stupid ass out.....grabbing walls, holding tables or chairs, locking arms under body when directed to put them behind your back are actively resistant....the officers must have told him to walk...how many times....20 plus....the situation then goes into a resist arrest situation possibly...those never go well(for the subject)

.....all the little street lawyers that gathered about made me wanna puke..."i want your badge number" "you can't do that" thats an abuse of your power""i've taken a law course and my daddy is a lawyer so I know"..... they all came very close to obstruct Police arrest...the old "back up or you will go too" fits really easily....

because you know someone who is a police officer and you have taken some security course doesn't make you a police officer and until you go out and do the job and know all the various powers and authorities available to you .........people will have a hard time understanding all that police do...

... during my career you could have seen me drag a screaming woman to a cruiser cuffed ....and forcibly ram her into the back seat...pretty .....hell know if thats all you saw.....you may have missed the part where we "wrestled" with here for a large knife that she would have gladly stuck through me....and told me so....I was completely justified...and if I had carried a Tazer back then she would have ridden the lightening like Homer on the bomb....

The Tazer is a great piece of kit that will reduce officer and subject injury....period

[AnthonyM83]

UCLA incident was legal, but in my opinion an extremely poor PR decision.

If student is passively resisting by just going limp, you can try to taser him a couple times, but if it's not working switch tools. Simply drag him out or use a wrist lock with pain compliance. Continuing to taser that many times makes me think it was a battle of how many times he could be tasered before he complied. If a crowd's gathering, just get out of their with your suspect. Also, knocking him down with a taser shot is not conducive to getting him to stand up.