granny gets tasered. when will people learn?

Status
Not open for further replies.
In fact, we may just find out that the Lt. had just come from witnessing the fresh cigarette burns on a 12 year old's body. Puts a pretty different complexion on it, yes?
Click to expand...

NO, it does not. The minimum amount of force necessary. NOT the minimum amount of force, depending on the allegation. The minimum amount of force necessary to effect the arrest. I watched the video, Granny SITTING IN THE POLICE STATION, officer reaches out, granny pulls her arm back. You tell me, Is this officer, big officer, afraid of an elderly granny, afraid that he thinks he is in physical danger to the degree that he must resort to a taser? If he was afraid of harm from that woman, he (the officer) needs to find a new line of work, maybe at a flower nursery.

Tasers are good in some circumstances, this was not one. Tasers used as a compliance tool to herd people like cattle is not a good thing. Once that becomes common practice, it will be verboten to speak ill about it, or you will be labled a cop basher.
 
Wildcard-
The Lt. is human. Certain human failings, such as outrage over the abuse of a child, I'm willing to turn a blind eye to. Other human failings, such as gratuitous abuse of power or simple incompetence, I'm not willing to excuse.

As Matt points out, we know not what happened here. But, as I've said before, it certainly raises one's antenna and bears watching.
Rich
 
I am 22. Not sure what that has to do about anything though... I have never been, am not currently, or will ever be a LEO. But I know enough that just becasue you have authority does not mean you have respect. Authority is given but without respect being earned, authority is nothing. I learned in government classes, politics and law, and talking to a few of the good LEOs that hang around at work that a cops duty is primarily to protect and serve. Plus they advertise it on their vehicles.
Click to expand...

[Personal attack deleted by Rich Lucibella]

Authority is what is going to put your posterior in jail if you break the law. Respect is what you learn when you realize they have that authority...given to them by society (read that as: The People).
 
Authority is what is going to put your posterior in jail if you break the law. Respect is what you learn when you realize they have that authority...given to them by society (read that as: The People).
Click to expand...
Nope, CraZkid's definitions are accurate. The People can grant only Authority. An individual, from the President to the local yard man, must earn Respect. (There's a difference between Deference and Respect.)

Being jailed has nothing to do with refusal to give Respect, except in a Police State; in a Free Society, being jailed has only to do with refusal to comply with Lawful Authority. Nearly every hero in this Nation's history recognized the difference between Authority and Morality, separated them when necessary and stood up against Non-Lawful Authority at the peril of joining those who were simply Criminals in their incarceration.

Words matter. Choose them wisely.

Rich
 
Respect is an individual thing.

Many people choose not to respect many things, including but not limited to:

-the law
-the police
-themself
-others
 
TBO-

Many people choose not to respect:
- The Constitution
- The Moral Imperative
- The Golden Rule
- Common Sense
- The Elderly
- The Weak
- "Civilians" (Whatever They mean by that)

And guess what? They can be found in every occupation imaginable. We generally look down on them. When they harm others, we sanction and/or jail them. But we never excuse them because of position.

What's your point?
Rich
 
Earn respect, don't expect it to be given. That was advice from a Iowa State Patrol officer when I became a supervisor at my current job. The people I supervised are my drinking buddies when we punch out. Did they take me seriously at first? No.

Just becasue you are given a badge(thus authortiy) does not mean you have the respect of the PEOPLE. In fact you may have the disdain of the people. That fault lies with bad cops (like this guy, the guy that handcuffed a 13 year old, the looting cops in NOLA) and the cops that stand by while bad cops abuse thier authority, taking away from your collective respect.

It only takes a few bad apples ruin it for everyone. If you wish to personaly attack me for my feelings, PM me. Making Rich delete it on a public board when I am being perfectly reasonable and respectful of LEO in general just make the rest of the LEO community look bad.
 
Earn respect, don't expect it to be given. That was advice from a Iowa State Patrol officer when I became a supervisor at my current job. The people I supervised are my drinking buddies when we punch out. Did they take me seriously at first? No.

Just becasue you are given a badge(thus authortiy) does not mean you have the respect of the PEOPLE. In fact you may have the disdain of the people. That fault lies with bad cops (like this guy, the guy that handcuffed a 13 year old, the looting cops in NOLA) and the cops that stand by while bad cops abuse thier authority, taking away from your collective respect.

It only takes a few bad apples ruin it for everyone. If you wish to personaly attack me for my feelings, PM me. Making Rich delete it on a public board when I am being perfectly reasonable and respectful of LEO in general just make the rest of the LEO community look bad.
Click to expand...
Looks like you're confused on a number of levels
 
Just becasue you are given a badge(thus authortiy) does not mean you have the respect of the PEOPLE. In fact you may have the disdain of the people. That fault lies with bad cops
Click to expand...
There are no Cop haters out there who dislike Cops for any other reason? :rolleyes:
 
I am sure some hate cops for other reasons. However, most of my generation grew up hearing about rodney king and a bunch of other crap like that. Abuses of authority are why most of my generation has a dislike for LEOs.

For the record i am not saying king was a saint.
 
However, most of my generation grew up hearing about rodney king and a bunch of other crap like that. Abuses of authority are why most of my generation has a dislike for LEOs.
Click to expand...
How many of the "Most of my Generation" do you know that you are personally speaking for.
confused.gif
 
Click on MTV or VH1. See the rappers rapping about killing cops?
Go into a video game store. See how copies of Grand Theft Auto fly off shelves?
Go to a college party. See how often a "cops suck" discussion gets started.

You have no idea about my generation because you don't care to learn. Understanding is beyond you, because what you must learn can not be taught in a cop car [personal attack deleted by Rich Lucibela].
 
OK-
That's pretty much enough.

The topic is about the Duty of the People to obey Police commands, most especially, the lawful command, "You are under arrest. I'm going to need to put these cuffs on you now." It's then about the appropriate actions when faced with non-compliance and what constitutes "non-compliance"; it's about threat level, place context, time, Force Continuum and the like.

Many have taken their personal swipes. Back on topic or the thread goes dark.
Thanks-
Rich
 
Turning the topic back to more worthy questions:


  • [1] Is anyone here saying that there is NO circumstance in which the appropriate method of effecting the arrest of a 68 year old woman would be to tase her?

    [2] Is anyone here saying that there is nothing that the woman in this instance could have said, done, or implied that would have merited being tased?

    [3] Would it matter if the victim had been violently assaulted by bare hands?

    [4] Would it matter if the victim had been assaulted by, or said that Ms. Kidwell had in her possession, a dangerous weapon?

    [5] Would it matter if the officer had good reason to believe that Ms. Kidwell was infected with a dangerous communicable disease and was clawing at him during his attempt to cuff her?

    [6] Would anyone here claim that there is no level of force appropriate to use in the arrest of a 68 year old woman, between empty hands and deadly force?

    [7] I may have gotten ahead of myself, here: Is there anyone here that would claim that deadly force can NEVER be authorized in effecting the arrest of a 68 year old woman?

:confused: I genuinely ask these questions for real discussion. Please feal free to refer to them by number. :)
 
After seeing wildcard's link I modifyed Long Path's questions to deal with what we know. i then asked two of my co-workers who are studying to become poloice officers as to what they knew.
1)In this situation, tasing was not neccesary. She had no evident weapon. In our PD you go through a metal detector before entering, that PD and ours may be different however.
2)Both of my CWs said that even if she threatened to kill them, an un-armed 68 year old is hardly a danger.
3)I belive the victim was a teenage girl. Both CWs agreed that there was a big difference in being able to hurt a young woman and a trained grown man. That and psycologicaly she would be less apt to violence in a foreign place(ie a police station) than her home, where for some everything must be their way.
4)Again, proper screening at the door should prevent this.
5)The simple act of clawing will rarely cause communication of disease(we know this thanks to a flight nurse ), spitting into that wound could become problematic.
6)Both felt that bare hands were more than enough.
7)If it were totaly differnt circumstances, ie the woman had the victim baracaded in her home with a gun, threatening violence upon the victim.

My CWs while not full-fledged cops are about a year away from their degrees. They felt that if the old woman were trying to leave, and you felt that you could not effect the arrest by yourself, that calling for back-up would be the best option. At 68, the woman is not going to get far. They also felt that the cop was way out of line.

This is with the facts that were presented in Wildcard's clip. I want to thank my CW's for participating and the mods for deciding to re-open this one.
 
This is just another incident in a long string that demonstrates lack of training. The taser was never intended to be an alternative for the lash, yet that's how it's used. "Do what I tell you or you get zapped".
They think they're supposed to inflict pain in order to punish noncompliance.
So we see stories in the paper like this one, or little girls *already handcuffed* in the back of cruisers, or men who are strapped to hospital beds.
A taser is supposed to be a preferable option to the handgun; used only in situations where somebody is a threat. I'm certain this jackass had a better option than his taser.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top