• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Taser use correct? What do you think?

I can't view the link. Goes to an error page. Is this the one where the dude is tased by Utah Highway Patrol for refusing to sign a citation?
 
This is what im getting for some reason,

Page Cannot Be Found

You've requested a FOXNews.com page that cannot be found. The page you are looking for may have moved or it may no longer be available. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Please try the following:
If you typed the URL, make sure that it is spelled correctly.
Open the FOXNews.com home page and look for links to the information you want.
Use the navigation at the top to find the link you are looking for.
Click the Back button to try another link.
Enter a term in the search form above or below to look for information on FOXNews.com.
If the page has moved, reset your bookmark.
If you think this is a server error, please contact foxnewsonline@foxnews.com.
 
He was under arrest when he refused to sign his promise to appear. He passively resisted that arrest and a use of force was used to get him to comply.

Would it fly in my department? No. We have a no taser-use on passively resisting subjects. Could it be completely legitimate and reasonable in another situation? Absolutely.

Where I live, a deputy could be with the man alone for 20-30 minutes before backup arrives. I'm not sitting there arguing with someone who is obviously emotionally unstable, while I keep trying to touch him and use lesser means of physical force to get him to comply. What if it turns into an all out fight? Now what? Now I'm fighting until I gain control of him and have to use a Taser anyway, or if he gets ahold of one of my weapons, he dies. Then the world cries, "why didn't you tase him?!?"

It's simple. He was under arrest, by his own choice mind you. The officer was alone and multiple physical attempts as well as verbal attempts to make the subject comply failed. So the officer raised the bar.

What's the deal?
 
9M61 said:
He was under arrest when he refused to sign his promise to appear. He passively resisted that arrest and a use of force was used to get him to comply.

Would it fly in my department? No. We have a no taser-use on passively resisting subjects. Could it be completely legitimate and reasonable in another situation? Absolutely.

Where I live, a deputy could be with the man alone for 20-30 minutes before backup arrives. I'm not sitting there arguing with someone who is obviously emotionally unstable, while I keep trying to touch him and use lesser means of physical force to get him to comply. What if it turns into an all out fight? Now what? Now I'm fighting until I gain control of him and have to use a Taser anyway, or if he gets ahold of one of my weapons, he dies. Then the world cries, "why didn't you tase him?!?"

It's simple. He was under arrest, by his own choice mind you. The officer was alone and multiple physical attempts as well as verbal attempts to make the subject comply failed. So the officer raised the bar.

What's the deal?
Click to expand...

I agree with you for the most part, but he was handcuffed what type of fight could he perform that the office could not have just put him down again.
 
JVM650 said:
I agree with you for the most part, but he was handcuffed what type of fight could he perform that the office could not have just put him down again.
Click to expand...

I didn't see that he was handcuffed. Even still ,handcuffed people can pose a very real threat -- but that's starting to push limits of reasonableness and I see the issue.

In the end I think elevating use of force to affect an arrest is fine, especially if the subject is the one essentially forcing that elevation. In this specific case, I'll be willing to bet the use will be deemed reasonable because the guy was still resisting -- albeit, I agree, it's distasteful.

That said: I am one of the Taser instructors for my departments and this is exactly the type of scenario I train my personnel to avoid. In my opinion, and what I train, is that a Taser is a device used to help gain control in a potentially, or actively, violent scenario. This is specifically why we have a no-use on passive resistors policy.

Again... this is one of those scenarios that looking back -- from what I can see -- looks like it could have been handled differently. Also, remember, we're not there and we don't know the *entire* story, so I'm going off what we can see. Like, is that cop alone? How has the guys anger / emotion increased over time? How big is he? How long until cover arrives? Etc. All these things come into account.
 
9M61 said:
I didn't see that he was handcuffed. Even still ,handcuffed people can pose a very real threat -- but that's starting to push limits of reasonableness and I see the issue.

In the end I think elevating use of force to affect an arrest is fine, especially if the subject is the one essentially forcing that elevation. In this specific case, I'll be willing to bet the use will be deemed reasonable because the guy was still resisting -- albeit, I agree, it's distasteful.

That said: I am one of the Taser instructors for my departments and this is exactly the type of scenario I train my personnel to avoid. In my opinion, and what I train, is that a Taser is a device used to help gain control in a potentially, or actively, violent scenario. This is specifically why we have a no-use on passive resistors policy.

Again... this is one of those scenarios that looking back -- from what I can see -- looks like it could have been handled differently. Also, remember, we're not there and we don't know the *entire* story, so I'm going off what we can see. Like, is that cop alone? How has the guys anger / emotion increased over time? How big is he? How long until cover arrives? Etc. All these things come into account.
Click to expand...

As I am a paralegal and I have to look at things as I see them and not give a all conclusive opinion without all the facts therefore I would totally agree with you.

We don't know the facts that led up to this part of the video therefore we can not say the officer was or was not using excessive force..
 
9M61 said:
I didn't see that he was handcuffed. Even still ,handcuffed people can pose a very real threat -- but that's starting to push limits of reasonableness and I see the issue.

In the end I think elevating use of force to affect an arrest is fine, especially if the subject is the one essentially forcing that elevation. In this specific case, I'll be willing to bet the use will be deemed reasonable because the guy was still resisting -- albeit, I agree, it's distasteful.

That said: I am one of the Taser instructors for my departments and this is exactly the type of scenario I train my personnel to avoid. In my opinion, and what I train, is that a Taser is a device used to help gain control in a potentially, or actively, violent scenario. This is specifically why we have a no-use on passive resistors policy.

Again... this is one of those scenarios that looking back -- from what I can see -- looks like it could have been handled differently. Also, remember, we're not there and we don't know the *entire* story, so I'm going off what we can see. Like, is that cop alone? How has the guys anger / emotion increased over time? How big is he? How long until cover arrives? Etc. All these things come into account.
Click to expand...


You sound too reasonable. You'd never last in Florida. The video did state that he was alone and that the resistor was put in the squad car after another LEO got on scene.
The sad thing is the thought process of the original LEO was filled with 'FAIL'.:thumbdown
Surely he should have found it out of the norm for such a large man to be
sobbing uncontrollably. Most likely emotionally, and possibly mentally, unstable @ the time. Why would he think that tazing the man would help him get control of himself??? :thumbdown
 
Interesting. I wonder how a similar use of force on a so-called passive resistor would fly in something like a civil disobedience situation, such as a "die-in."

9M61 said:
I didn't see that he was handcuffed. Even still ,handcuffed people can pose a very real threat -- but that's starting to push limits of reasonableness and I see the issue.

In the end I think elevating use of force to affect an arrest is fine, especially if the subject is the one essentially forcing that elevation. In this specific case, I'll be willing to bet the use will be deemed reasonable because the guy was still resisting -- albeit, I agree, it's distasteful.

That said: I am one of the Taser instructors for my departments and this is exactly the type of scenario I train my personnel to avoid. In my opinion, and what I train, is that a Taser is a device used to help gain control in a potentially, or actively, violent scenario. This is specifically why we have a no-use on passive resistors policy.

Again... this is one of those scenarios that looking back -- from what I can see -- looks like it could have been handled differently. Also, remember, we're not there and we don't know the *entire* story, so I'm going off what we can see. Like, is that cop alone? How has the guys anger / emotion increased over time? How big is he? How long until cover arrives? Etc. All these things come into account.
Click to expand...
 
JVM650 said:
I agree with you for the most part, but he was handcuffed what type of fight could he perform that the office could not have just put him down again.
Click to expand...

There are many cases, too many, of officers being killed by handcuffed suspects. And trust me; I could kill someone when I was handcuffed if I had to. Handcuffs are not magic bracelets, or the magic lasso like Wonder Woman.
 
From what I saw in the video, if I had to make a determination on whether that was reasonable force or abuse under color of authority, I would say that the officer's actions fell on the reasonable side of the fence. But it would be right up to that fence.

I would say that the force was objectively reasonable for the following reasons:

The suspect was clearly resisting arrest. The officer was alone. There is no constitutional requirement for the officer to wait for backup. The suspect was seated and handcuffed on the ground, at night, beside a busy road and in a dangerous location between the patrol car and violator car. If the patrol car was hit from behind, the suspect was in a bad location and could be killed. The officer is now legally responsible for the safety of his prisoner. The officer looked small in stature, was unable to stand the suspect up as he was resisting and dropping his weight. The officer may not have been physically capable of moving the suspect to a safer location alone, due to his size. The officer verbally warned the suspect, who told him to go ahead and TASER him.

As a LEO, I would not have used that type of force as our policy also prohibits TASER use on a passively resisting suspect. I would have found another way. :2cents
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top