Taser Time

by **Adam Gamradt** on Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:44 am

Sorry to reply to my own post.

But any behavior your mother wouldn't approve of, isn't something I condone. The guy acted like a jerk, and was clearly seeking attention and attempting to make his point by antagonizing the speaker. It's a pretty common tactic on this very message board.

I simply not convinced his actions rose to the level where the police should have put their hands on him.

I know where debating on the internet, so I don't expect to find any epistemological easter eggs, but isn't it possible for both the police, and the kid, to have made mistakes?

**Sponsor**

by **Danny Hogan** on Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:04 am

the people in charge of the event cut the mic and wanted the guy out of there, the guy wouldn't leave, the police are there for that sort of thing.

the police did not make the judgement that the mic needed to be cut and the guy had to go, they were essentially following orders as a security precense.

how are the police supposed to get him out of there without touching him?

he made his own bed with the tazering (tazed tazing) when he started flailing around.

by **Gvlax** on Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:22 pm

jessexy wrote:
Gvlax wrote:stun guns were implemented in police agencies as a form of non deadly force to a violent offender. when 6-8 police officers are surrounding one guy there is no reason to us a tazer. if there was one or two police officers then there would be more of a threat to the officer. I believe police officers should have tazers but watching so many videos of police overstepping their duty with stun guns has been the reason that strict rules need to be put in place of when and when not to use them.

you've obviously never seen 6-8 police officers trying to subdue a beligerant drunk or person high on crack or ice or something like that. when someone doesnt wanna be taken down, they can be pretty strong.

Actually i have. I work head security at a arena in GR and we had a guy on meth try to stab a guy from the band tool. it took 7 of us to take him down. cops were there and they didnt reach for their stun guns. we used our muscles and took him down and he had a weapon. not just a protestor.

by **Adam Gamradt** on Fri Sep 21, 2007 4:16 pm

Looks like another example of how to use a taser inappropriately here:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/21/ohio.taser/index.html

by **semilaxed** on Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:34 pm

I have seen a 5'4 140lbs guy take down a 6'4 350lbs lineman by one arm. 5 cops shouldn't need a taser to take down that guy. Half the time they need it because there are too many cops and they are getting in each others way.

by **Kevin OBrien** on Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:36 pm

It appears to me the guy was already laying on the ground when they tasered him. I wouldn't exactly call that "resisting" especially when surrounded by numerous police officers.

by **WaterBoy** on Sat Sep 22, 2007 8:01 pm

I think it's important to remember- the job of the police officers in that scenario is not to "win the fight." Clearly multiple officers could take down a person and get them into submission- if they were in a bar fight.

Here, the duty of the officers is to get the young man into submission AND to avoid injury to themselves. Being injured on the job by a suspect is a hazard of being a member of law enforcement- but it is not THE job.

Resisting arrest does not mean you have to be toe to toe with an officer with your dukes up- refusing to put your hands behind your back when an officer tells you to is sufficient. It's been said already and can't be said enough- the way to avoid all of this issue is to simply follow the instructions of the officers when they give them to you.

Complaints about this being a police state to me hold little water- the fact of the matter is, if there is police misconduct, we provide ample forums to protest the matter- both publically and financially (called a lawsuit). The time to question the decisions of an officer is not at the point in time at which they are doing their job.

Make no mistake, I make no contentions that law enforcement is perfect of that all individuals involved therein are saints- but those who are deserving of scorn for the ill-performance of their duties are very, very few and far between. They are the exception and not the rule.

That kid got what he deserved- not because of his political beliefs, or even for asking the question, but because he refused to follow the directions of the officers, physically resisted arrest, and ignored multiple (audible on video) warnings that he was going to be tased if he refused to desist.

It is not the duty of the officers to "take one for the team" and attempt to physically wrestle the perp when an alternative such a tasing exists.

by **Gvlax** on Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:13 am

Go on a ride along, which i have many times, and you will see that people dont follow every word that the police officer says. So if that gives the police the right to tase them because they didnt follow orders then the amount of people being tasered will be going up.

He was in submission when he was taken to the ground. The police would be right to use it to get him to the ground. He was already down, no need to be tasered at all.

by **Gvlax** on Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:15 am

waterboy have you even been tasered?

by **Zeuslax** on Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:32 pm

Went to a gathering this weekend with some college friends (almost all are cops in major cities) and a few family members (my cousin is number two in the Maryland State Police). At one table were 6 cops. Consensus = police wrong in the case, period.

He was in submission when he was taken to the ground. The police would be right to use it to get him to the ground. He was already down, no need to be tasered at all.

GvLax pretty much hit the nail on the head.

by **Danny Hogan** on Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:56 am

well if you ask any "real" cop they would say that a decent officer should be trained/prepared to control any situation sans taser.

by **Tim Whitehead** on Sat Sep 29, 2007 4:38 am

God help me, I'm agreeing with Sonny and Stryker on this one. The second this idiot kid started fighting back against the cops trying to remove him, he deserved to get tased. This wasn't a guy just going limp and letting cops drag him out like that guy at (I think) UCLA. This was a guy fighting back, trying to make a scene. He got exactly what he was looking for.

by **LaxRef** on Sat Sep 29, 2007 8:25 am

Tim Whitehead wrote:God help me, I'm agreeing with Sonny and Stryker on this one. The second this idiot kid started fighting back against the cops trying to remove him, he deserved to get tased. This wasn't a guy just going limp and letting cops drag him out like that guy at (I think) UCLA. This was a guy fighting back, trying to make a scene. He got exactly what he was looking for.

So, the police are now in the business of judging when people should be given corporal punishment? Can they also decide to punish people by public flogging?

The police have the job of arresting the man without putting themselves or the public at significant physical risk. If they had him on the ground, they could probably have done so without using a taser.

The guy probably (I haven't watched the video) did deserve punishment, but one within the law and administered by a judge.

by **Danny Hogan** on Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:49 pm

the video may change your mind.

by **Zeuslax** on Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:50 pm

The video that was taken to his immediate right is the best view point yet. When he dragged out and up the aisle the person filming follows the scene. Knees on him, plenty of muscle......he was definitely subdued (is this a word).

Taser Time

Who is online