Should Police Tone Down Taser Tactics?

Tasers are definitely better than the alternative (shooting). It's more a question of the proper training and use of tasers by the police. A police officer can come on the scene of a crime and not be able to tell the good guys from the bad. This is unfortunate and the officer must use his best judgement in such a situation. The judgement is dependent on the officers education. It is clear to see, police officers must have the best training available. FBI agents must have college degrees and undertake vigorous training. maybe the same should be mandatory for police officers.

You've heard the phrase "wrong place, wrong time". I personally have never been in that situation. There is another phrase; "look for trouble and you will find it". Again I haven't been there. People have been known to go toward a place where gunshots were heard out of curiosity. "Curiosity killed the cat". In that situation, any intelligent person would run the other way.

I don't agree that it is used as an alternative to lethal force. It is used as a submission device instead of a billy-club or a competent level of skill in grappling or martial arts. Cops seem very ready to put someone into submission if they only have to pull a trigger. This is a dangerous precedent.

I have heard from friend of mine that is a psychiatrist. That the intelligence level of a police officer is lower than the norm.

I was looking for some information to back that up but could not find it.

I have known some police officers and I see it as a split.

I do know when I was going to college, I had some communications classes that had some students from criminal science majors....frankly a good number of them were arrogant, while some had social issues. The more reserve ones in criminal sciences were looked down upon from these two groups.

My personal opinion....some were looking to get back at the people that gave them a hard time in high school.

p911

It is fairly rare for a Taser to kill a person. Not unheard of, but usually there are other factors - like near-lethal doses of meth or coke or PCP.

On the other hand, a bullet hole will usually do the job effectively all by itself.

Just ask yourself one question....if the cop makes a mistake and shoots you with something (deserved or not), which would you rather have?

Take a look at this video of a man getting tasered at the Vancouver airport. He died. Seems that a lot of people believe that the taser is non lethal. This guy can't agree.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPe_hf7aBXM

Vic

the first thing comes to mind is

why where there no body langauge used

the man was up set but ganging up is not cool either

what was the woman doing and who was she

what was her effect on him

why was he not informed in russia

I assume he is from

about what to do in a foreinig country

and not to do

he is mad about something

but the police approch was slowly

and abservent from what I can tell

I am confused about the decision of taser

on a person who cannot speak to what is wrong

but at what point does the russian take credit

for being a violent aggression

it is always great to decide to wax the saddle after the horse's leave the gate

here is the thing I see

1) english or no english

your mother must of told you about right and wrong

this is not a child

2) if you lack control what do you expect

all social novelities are null in void

3) and if you die in that process

who started it anyway

when do we take on the responseabilitys

of our actions

he knew he could not speak

why did he not try to explain himself

if your maner is to throw a computer monitior

well the police thru back a taser

I am sorry I see nothing wrong with this video in that light

but not to say I have a bigger reservation of what or why was the cop banging with the stick

was he making a bang to get the person's attention. ok humm

or was he knocking the guy in the head

taser you put that on me I am coming back and doubleing the stakes

sorry thats my attude

but if I am on crack I kind would perfer to be shot in the head

for that life is a road I will never take alive

look you can say what you want about it all in all kinds of light

it will never be right. NEVER

humans are problems, always was and always will be

and this is the results of that problem

there is no answer

It piss me off that there are 2,500 women and children

being brutilzed each and ever day with the most unbeliveable torture that humans can inflict on another

lets not mention the millions of starved children that die in the thousand's as you are reading this

the man was wrong first

and un educated

and now educated the public on how not to behave in public

I am not sorry for saying this

if it was my brother I would feel the same

wrong is wrong

this man was a treat

your not going to change things

but if you notice

the gap between rich and poor grows

the gap between truth and lies grows

and the gap between cops and civilians grows

the guns get bigger and bader

where does this stop

where is all that perfound wisdom

I keep hearing about

that comes with life and age

when do the borders comes down an we are people

who can respect each other

THAT IS THE REAL TRUTH HERE

I do not know who yuo are reading this

but I do know if your hunger I will feed you half of what I got

if your cold I will give you half of what I cloth

and if your pist off and hit me

I will knock you out

no gods no belives of karma or any of that

in my world you exist

and so do I

how ever I am smarter

what ever I know I will share with you

I want you to grow

reguardless of money personnel gains what ever

just see you happy

and what you do with that knowledge I learn and have gained the wisdom I have now

and later for spelling and english language

I am 60 who do I have to impress

certainly not me

I am followed by a fat ugly guy who stares back at me

but what do we realy do to oursleves

for get the taser

that is not the problem

its all of us

who invented the taser and for what purpose

and pray tell

what have we learned from our design

what have we learned from it all

you correct my spelling

I am going back in to my cave now

I do not like you all

you all spend to much time in problems

I have had a good timeI know what it is like

and it ain't this

I am off learning better machines

how to build cnc robotis

no egos to deal with

1) last word

does anyone ever think about the cop that has to go and fill all this paper work for all you people

and then go home to face his wife and kids

knowing he did his job but in the interm

it killed someone he vowed to protect

and now he has to deal with it with in himself

there is no winners here ever

Ok Johnny, A little hard to follow but I will give you a Good Answer on at least the last part.

Dragon

I would add that the availability of the taser as an alternative adds to the chances that the subject (suspect? victim? target?) dies. The officer can still employ other methods, sure, but they don't, because tasers work, and work well. There appears to be little to deter an officer from going straight to the taser as a means to control the situation.

The problem is that without tasers, the police are at a disadvantage a small percentage of the time, and the public is at a disadvantage the rest of the time. That ratio is directly proportional to the competence level of the the officer, whether through experience, education, or both.

"However, it is not the police officer's job to intimidate or to control. Rather, it is the police officer's job to protect society from the actions of criminals and generally maintain peace."

OK. How do you define 'maintaining peace?' I'd speculate that a majority of peace officers would include 'controlling the situation' in a short list of methods to accomplishing that. There are many ways that officers intimidate and control, and in general, that is helpful and arguably necessary for their job. They likely see the taser as just one more tool to help control the public.

Just to be extra difficult, consider how many people were killed by police batons & fists before tasers were so cheap and readily available.

Very well written opinion - I've got nothing to add to that.

Police are using tasers in greater numbers to incapacitate an unruly person. Whatever happened to using physical tactics to restrain a subject? I Believe that the majority of these law enforcement officers are just plain lazy. I mean, look at them - they are overweight and out of shape. It is these fat, lazy cops who are resorting to using tasers. Thank you.

Well said, police have to deal with more and more belligerent drugged up people and drunks it is only fair that they have a method of dealing with these elements and minimise the danger to themselves. Sure they will tend to use Tazers rather more than pulling out a gun and shooting with the possibility of killing someone or an Innocent bystander, it is good they can take care of business without worrying about that problem.

There will always be the odd unfortunate result it is something we have to adjust to for the greater good.

Most of the complaints come from thick brained clods who have allowed there children to grow up to be on the receiving end of such instruments would they prefer to have the police to return back to more lifethreatening methods of restraint?

When an officer discharges a firearm the intent is lethal force. They are not trained to use a gun as a submission tool, it is used to kill. On the other hand, a taser is a submission device used to force the compliance of an individual. This is fine if used in the rare case where compliance is required for public or officer safety.

Unfortunately the tasers are being used more and more as a way to force compliance when there is no threat from the individual, only non-compliance. In the the USA the police force is a public service and meant to keep the peace, not subdue the populace.

The danger of the taser is its use willy-nilly to get people to do what an officer says. In our Republic (USA) we have God-given rights which supersede the governments rights. The use of this 'big stick' threatens the publics willingness to exert their rights. And, to keep our public officials in-line, it requires the public to continually exert their rights or the government will surely usurp those rights.

Tasers are a better option than Glocks.

Unfortunately I think our police forces have gotten so overly ingrained with "Safety First!" that they have forgotten that their's is a dangerous job. They are not willing or trained to physically engage a troublesome suspect and the only recourse they have, according to their training an policies, is to resort to the Taser. I think that if police forces were trained in the use of weaponless self defense forms, like Aikido or Jujitsu, and attended frequent close combat/hand to hand training sessions, officers would feel more confident in dealing with aggravated individuals and would feel less of a need to suppress an individual who may just need a couple minutes to calm down.

I agree that our police deserve and need to be protected, but they must remember that they took the job to 'protect and serve'; that means they are supposed to put their lives on the line for us, not to endanger our lives to protect themselves (Tasers can and do kill people). Fire fighters run into burning buildings every day at risk to their own lives to protect us, and they do it with an air of service and responsibility. This is a result of better training and clearer philosophy. Our police forces are rapidly being converted into municipal funding machines and as their job has become more politicized they have been forced to turn more and more away from the philosophy of community involvement and more into the philosophy of an occupying army in hostile territory. This increases tension on both sides of the 'law' and creates an environment where excessive use of force is made more likely. Police generally deal with the lowest sectors of our community, as a result they must assume that the worst will happen, over time they begin to forget that most people are decent hardworking law abiding citizens and the stage is set for tragedy.

I think that if police forces were trained in the use of weaponless self defense forms, like Aikido or Jujitsu, and attended frequent close combat/hand to hand training sessions,

Personal observation is what I have seen is some people that take self defense courses is not for self defense or self control but as a outlet for their aggression.

The last half of your sentence;

officers would feel more confident in dealing with aggravated individuals and would feel less of a need to suppress an individual who may just need a couple minutes to calm down.

I was driving home about 2 weeks ago about 9:00 pm. And I saw what looked like a DUI (Driving Under the Influence) stop..

The suspect was pulled over and 4 other squad cars behind him. And they kept their distance with the suspect.

They do have a tendency to call back up on allot of the questionable stops. Common sense being a show of force and numbers would deter trouble......most times.

Sometimes this can have an overwhelming negative effect to the suspect.

you are absolutely correct that some people do take self defense courses as a means of honing their ability to be a public nuisance, and what's worse, some people become police officers so that they can have power and authority over people. However, no self defense course is complete without a comprehensive personal growth aspect. I suppose I should say that not only should they receive combat training, but they should also be indoctrinated with self control and humility.

Having confidence in dealing with threatening scenarios allows the individual to focus their attention completely on the problem at hand without doubts and fears clouding the issue. Self control and humility makes it easier for the public to accept the authority of that individual...

If the police had the same philosophy of service that fire fighters follow I think the problems of abuses of power would diminish, and if the police felt secure in their environment the likelihood of excessive force being used would also become diminished...

Fire Fighter Trainees must demonstrate that they have certain necessary skills to do the job... They go through rigourous testing and training to ensure they have the physical and mental skills to go into one of the most terrifying environments you can expect to find in a modern urban district... The police should be no different, and we should remember that one of their necessary skills is to deal with people in a fair and constructive manner...

I keep refering to the comparison between the philosophies of fire fighters and police, this is because I have heard police trainers speak at length in these terms, and because as far as I can see it is a valid point. There must be a philosphical change in the minds of the average cop before the situation can improve.

Sorry, I'm feeling a lttle verbose today, I just can't seem to say something short and simple.

It comes back to my earlier post #2 of the psychology profile of the officer. It is a tough occupation, it is not only a job, but it is a profession, and should be treated as such.

you're darn tootin'!!!

But don't forget the social aspect... There is a prevalent culture to most professions. The current trend in police work is reduction of departmental liability, either due to injury to police officers or inappropriate actions of police officers. This is largely being imposed by policies created by people who generally don't have any experience doing police work (politicians and union lawyers) and as such these policies are usually poorly conceived. The poor cop on the street has to follow policy or risk disciplinary action and he has to do this in an environment that is best compared to a high school football locker room in a war zone... lots of testosterone and machismo with the threat of imminent death thrown in for 'fun'... even in the ladies' locker room... Talk about an environment ripe for culture... you could feed about a billion petri dishes on that blend...

Damn, I'm still a big blabber mouth...

JUST FOR ALL WHO WANT TO KNOW, MY DEGREE IS IN CRIMINAL SCIENCE AND WE WERE TOUGHT THAT ONE OF THE MAIN PROBLEMS WITH OFFICERS IS THAT THEY ARE HIRED AT THE HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL.

WHICH MEANS THEY ARE AT THEIR PHISCAL BEST,

THERE TESTOSTERONE IS AT ITS PEAK.

THEY FEEL YOUNG AND STRONG WITH AN ATHORATIVE DISPOSITION.

DEATH IS NOT IN THEIR MIND MUCH.

THE GEAR THAT IS WORN GIVES A SENSE OF MILATARY STRENGTH,

AND WHEN THEY ARE IN GROUPS ITS HUMAN NATURE TO SHOW ONE ANOTHER UP.

that would explain from post #2 what I experienced from classes with students from criminal science in college.

Physical best.... some were buff, but if some were at their physical best the endurance test should eliminate them

Thank you, I am sure we have been reassured as to the quality of a criminal science degree.

"self proclaimed innocent victims", Have you ever seen a criminal that was not a "self proclaimed innocent victims"? I didn't think so.

A late remark: One thing that has been overlooked in this discussion is that the statistics show a high risk of fatality when taser is used on people who are "agitated" or have a cluster of symptoms described as "agitated delirium". That includes people who are high on drugs and also people who for poorly-understood medical reasons (psychiatric or neurological) are in a state of agitation.

No one in this condition should be tasered, unless there are additional circumstances that clearly justify lethal force. These people need medical attention, not extra stress on their nervous system - taser is over the top.

Alternatives for police: what ever happened to tranquilizer darts? When wild animals (which haven't actually attacked anyone) wander into our space and have to be removed for public safety, do they taser them? Certainly not. Why don't police have a tranquillizer gun at hand, as veterinarians and park officials do.

Another alternative that's ready to hand in an emergency: cold water. Not for nothing agitated people are referred to as "overheated". Look for the signs: flushed face, cracked lips, red ears. No matter if drugs or medical conditions are the cause. The troublesome person should be offered water to drink and wet cloths to apply to the face, back of the neck and head area. If the person is too agitated to accept the offer of help, a hosing down would get the ball rolling. I'm willing to bet that many conflicts or disturbances of this kind could be quickly brought into control simply by cooling the person down with water.

Third, where drugs are a suspected or known cause, the problem can be resolved if you speed up the clearance of drugs from the person's system. There are many innocuous foods and/or natural products that are helpful for this: the most common "drug interaction" involving foods and otherwise harmless products is that they stimulate a little function referred to as "cytochrome P450" which is involved in ridding the body of toxins - drugs are cleared out as well. Fruit juices (apple, orange, grapefruit) are reported to have this effect, so the drugged or "toxic" individual who has cooled down enough to accept help, could be given juice for starters (or better yet, for police who have to deal with these situations, some product designed especially for these situations, known to stimulate cytP450 max).

I also agree that the right kind of martial arts training would be helpful and maybe it should be required. If the officer is confident about neutralizing an attack without the necessity of weapons, there is less pressure (or temptation) to use them.

I've heard tales that include: a young man at a public meeting, tasered as he approached the microphone to have his say; a young woman tasered while in custody to stop her drunk disorderly behavior. These situations do not warrant the use of a taser. The limits on taser use should be clearly defined.

In the case of the Vancouver traveller (Polish, not Russian), there was an autopsy of course, and he was not on drugs as suggested by some who watched the video. He had been in the airport for many many hours without food or water and unable to make himself understood. Yes, he was agitated. The psychological reasons are self-evident, and hunger/dehydration/fatigue may have played a physical role in the condition as well. Whatever the cause, he didn't deserve to die under these circumstances. I wonder how it would have played out, if the officers had a protocol in place to start off by offering the man some water to drink.....

Alternatives for police: what ever happened to tranquilizer darts?

Too many variables... how do you set dosage on a dart? For that 7' tall 18 year old male bodybuilder having 'roid rage or for the 4' tall elderly woman having a bad reaction to her medication? What about drug allergies and interactions with other medication? The risk of causing excessive damage is higher with any kind of drug than with a tazer. These are the same problems that prevent police from using 'knock-out' gas.

Otherwise a nicely thought out post I'd say.

Good point. I must admit I don't know anything about tranquilizer darts or how dosages are calculated when used on animals: I'm not sure what the drug alternatives are either, or whether there is an option which could be considered relatively safe for everybody or in general, safer than taser.

I did read some medical reports on various ways that people with "agitated delirium" were treated, and those who were given minor tranquillizers (benzodiazepenes) survived and did well - but of course, bearing in mind, these people were in medical care from the moment they were given the drug. In those circumstances, any emergencies due to allergies and interactions can be addressed by the paramedics. Also, the basics of medical care, such as ensuring the patient is hydrated, would have been seen to immediately as well.

Found this VERY late but I noticed not one person brought up the reason the police switched to tasers.

Ever watch 'COPs'? Physically restraining someone can harm them physically. That person or their family sues.

Tasers were introduced because other than the rare death, they cause no physical bodily harm. No broken bones, no physical assault of any kind. No one can claim the taser touched them inappropriately.

Until such cases are considered non viable by the court system cops will have to use tasers to avoid litigation.

Period.

Sadly, some cops DO enjoy using them, they think it's funny. They even make up excuses for using them and pepper spray as well. They do this because they believe being the law means you don't have to follow the laws yourself. Sort of like how your manager is never on time for work but he expects you to be.

Like any other facet of society, 10% of them ruins it for everyone else that is following the rules.