Tasers should be banned?

C

CarbineCaleb

New member
There seems to be a lot of controversy over Tasers in general these days. Many people think they should be banned. I don't quite get it. Yes I believe it hurts. Yes I think their should be formal guidelines in place for when they should be used. Tasing jaywalkers for sport would be bad, for example. :rolleyes:

But they are noninjurious. And they stop the fight immediately, saving both the officer as well as the civilian from further injury that would be caused by real combat. So what is the big problem? I see these as a safety measure, not a hazard, for both the police and the civilians they are struggling with.

If you want the police to just wrestle with every guy they try to arrest, some of these folks are going to pull a knife, gun, or grab the officer's gun - those situations end up with one participant or the other dead, rather than the perp in pain for 10 seconds. I am not an LEO, but I think grappling with someone while you're wearing a gun around your waist could be a very bad idea - even if they don't have a weapon, you do, and it's right where they can get it.

An old fashioned tool for persuading an unruly criminal was the billy club. Now, would you rather be whacked on the head a few times, or tased? I would rather be tased, thank you!

My understanding of the taser's mechanism is that all that it does is induce powerful, chaotic contractions in the muscles of the body - probably doesn't feel real good. Is that all that people object to? What force method does feel good? You want them to give perps massages? If you offer an ice cream cone to someone in order to get them to get into your squad car, you probably won't get very far.

Puzzled... Caleb :confused:
 
There's developed a standard over the year regarding use of deadly force, but is there a standard (say, from the NIJ) on the use of tasers? From some reports of use, it seems like LE is still feeling out when to use them. It would be good if we can come up with answers to questions like:

1) When can LE use tasers,
2) When can LE not use tasers,
3) When can LE use tasers, but really shouldn't

I believe the taser can, and has, saved lives and prevented injuries. The loudest catcalls on the taser seem to come from people opposed to ANY amount of police force. The recent video from Florida exemplified this attitude, with a woman who seemingly believed that if she repeatedly asserted how the po-po had no authority over her, the officer would just shrug and walk away.
 
Tasers are under fire at the moment because of deaths from it's use. There has also been enough time for statistics to have been compiled showing that minorities are much more frequently the target of tasers.

I disagree with the "logic" of most of these arguments, but that is why they are appearing. The taser is the latest boogey bear in the media's need for a story. Remember cellphones cause brain cancer?
 
Other "less lethal" force - bad situation

The taser really seems like a win to me at this point (as to whether it should be banned). Some of the so-called "less lethal" options, need to be sorted out real quickly for sure...

We had a young woman, Victoria Snelgrove, killed here last fall by Boston City Police, who were confronting an unruly mob after the Red Sox victory over the Yankees (it wasn't that bad, nothing like the LA-King riots)... well at this one location, apparently the police kind of panicked, and rushed into the crowd firing these pepper pellet guns indiscriminantly, without really even aiming them. A student, Victoria Snelgrove was struck in the eye and died instantly... another student was also struck in the forehead and the pellet embedded in his skull between his brows, so he narrowly escaped being killed by them also.

This has given the entire department a real black eye. They have been hammered by investigative panels that were set up, and the city will pay out a 5 million dollar settlement in a civil suit brought in the case.

I don't understand why in this case criminal charges may not be brought against these officers? Is that not possible? The findings of a recent commision have all been bad - here's a sample:
Victoria Snelgrove died because of a series of failures by the Boston Police Department, including poor planning at headquarters, a breakdown of command outside Fenway Park, and ''serious errors in judgment" by individual officers at the scene of her shooting, an independent panel has concluded.

...facing discipline on department charges, including inappropriate use of force, poor planning, and bad judgment. The officers could be fired...

...The panel's 50-page report is harshly critical of officers on Lansdowne Street that night, saying they fired FN303 pepper-pellet guns ''indiscriminately."
Click to expand...

Now, I am usually on the side of the men in blue. But not this time. And what I don't get is, if these guys were firing indiscriminantly and killed one person and nearly killed another - why is the worst thing that could happen to them is termination of employment? Legal folks here please?
 
Its not tazer mania, per se. It's just thinly veiled LEO bashing and the the tazer is merely an excuse. Rest assured that if you subdued a suspect with a wet noodle, some clown somewhere would find a way to turn it into an LEO bashing incident......
 
I posted an article recently concerning one very large federal agency (or was it two) that concluded that tasers were a big liability and wouldn't use them. So there is more than reasonable doubt about the safety of such devices. And personally I think that in the long run they are going to prove to be a general liability to the peace officers that carry them as well.
 
Large federal agencies don't normally have the need for less lethal devices. They simply aren't in physical confrontations at the rate of most local LEO's. Most federal agents don't routinely carry straight batons or OC spray either. I've made my opinion on this pretty clear on other threads. As for liability, you get way fewer complaints on their use than any other means of force. They have gotten me out of hairy situations and one in particular that could have easily been deadly. It's a long story and if you really want to know, PM me and I'll give you a link to it.
 
I would rather be tazered than shot or beaten with a baton. So I think a tazer has a place out on the street. It gives the police officer another option besides deadly force or a physical confrontation in which someone could get hurt.
 
I have no problems with cops using tasers on people who are presenting a threat, but on the other hand, I don't feel that cops should use them whenever they're impatient or annoyed with someone who isn't instantly jumping through hoops at their every command. All too often cops are resorting to tasing people who they'd never think of using a baton on.

Tact and diplomacy should be a cop's first choice of weapon in most cases.
 
As a peace officer, I wholeheartedly agree that tact and diplomacy are the most effective tools I possess to accomplish my duties. Youd be amazed exactly how many folks that will fight a cocky officer, but that I can talk into a set of handcuffs.

However, there are certain people who will push you to the edge, just because they think they can, or because the last officer they dealt with was a raging vagina, or they just dont like the police. Thes people are the minority, but the minority seems to be growing daily.

As to your remark about using the taser on people I wouldnt use the baton on, you are 100% correct. The taser is lower on the force continuum than the baton, OC or even hands on. The taser leaves no lasting effect, wheras the others can and will. The taser lessens the chance I get hurt because the person who is going to jail is an idiot. The taser lessens the chance you get hurt because you are an idiot. Due to the immense televison coverage of the taser, the effect of even producing a taser is very impressive.

I believe it was once said "be polite to eveyone you meet, but have a plan to kill them"....the same can be modified to police work. You may be a nice guy, and I may even like you, but I am planning on how I can effectively and safely take you into custody if need be the minute I turn the blinky lights on.
 
IMHO, tasers are the .50 BMG of the police world. The latest thing out, the best technology, no one really knows the facts about them, so it is easy to drum up public support against them.
 
Reason minorities are the number one target for tasers?

Most criminal activities are commited by minorities. Its sad, and rather unfortunate that it is true. This is why more minorities are in jail.

The fault lies mostly with the mostly white liberal democrats who preach that the minority is a victim and can't do anything on his own.
 
The fault lies mostly with the mostly white liberal democrats who preach that the minority is a victim and can't do anything on his own.
Click to expand...
That, and the fact that "professional victims", such as Jessie Jackson, have a vested interest in keeping the people they "represent" in the victim class lest they loose their power base.
 
and don't forget, minorities are most likely to complain about police brutality. well, if i were an leo, the taser would be very close to me at all times. small times of pain to render them slightly impaired in fighting me. much better than oc. i have gone through oc 1 and 2 in the MEU(SOC) training. first time, sprayed for 10 seconds, wait five mins (with eyes open to get in there good) and run obstacle course 2 times. 2d time, sponge soaked in oc wiped over eyebrows and down one closed eye (to allow to get into pores) and run obstacle course. now this is absolutely painful. even washing your face off burns like a son of a gun. now if the gen. pub. would want this vice a sharp, concentrated electrical pain for a few seconds, then by all means be my guest. but there also needs to be some development where the leo can lessen the volts while he is tasing a person. some switch where he can adjust it with his thumb perhaps? just an idea so that you can avoid putting too much voltage on a person. a big man needs more volts than a 100 pound lady does.
 
I don't think they should be banned. That would be just as dumb as banning guns, batons, switchblades, or any other weapon.

I think it's irresponsible to market them to civilians who plan to use them as an alternative to a gun for personal defense. Oh, it's meant to supplement firearms? How many civilians would carry around both? Fewer than would carry two or more guns, which isn't many.

I think that because tasers hurt so much, cops shouldn't be so eager to use them -- regardless of the claimed lack of permanent injury.
 
My Department policy is that if the probes puncture the skin and they are still in, the person will be taken to the E.R. to have them removed. One of the first times I used the tazer was on a sword weilding maniac.(My partner had lethal cover for me). Anyways, when we took Mr. Mope to the hospital the Dr. on duty was just shocked(no pun intended :) ) at the "brutality" of the tazer. I asked him if he would have prefered the brutality of a load of 12ga 00buck because that was the alternative. The tazer absolutely saved this guys life and us a bunch of crap.

I wish I could make people understand that if someone does not want to be taken into custody it is near impossible to get them cuffed without someone getting hurt. Most of the time it is minor, sometimes not. Every call a copper goes to is a gun call with at least one weapon involved...his. Any tool that can keep me out of a wrestling match where my weapon is always at risk of being lost and keep someone (most importantly me) from getting hurt is a good thing. The Tazer is not fun and it is painfull, psychologically disconcerting and most of all very effective. Is it "brutal"? Absolutely not, but many of the alternatives are.

Steve
 
Steve154

That sounds like an exact echo of what we had here. We also have to take them to the hospital, and got the same response. I've talked with dozens of officers from different depts., and they are astounded that we have to take them to the hosp. They just pull the probes out with a pair of pliers. Saves time & money, & makes sense to me ;) . Hospital staff also wolfed... until a nut case went whacko in the ER and assaulted a doctor and 2 nurses. We tased him. Haven't heard a word out of 'em about how "brutal" the Taser is since. :D
 
About a month or so ago, I heard a report on the news about a national conference in Omaha in which tazer use was discussed. Can't remember the details, but there was at least one department that reported that in the year or two after they adopted the tazer for use, their "use of force" incidents went up over 300%. I don't know what that says to you, but to me it seems they are a little tazer happy. Either that or they actually caught 300% more criminals, yeah right :barf:
bergie
 
The LE explanation for the 300% increase would be that each and every one of those incidents represents potential danger to the officer, and that officer safety outweighs the harm of a little bit of hurt applied to a non-compliant suspect.

I think those statistics usually show up paired with statistics suggesting a drop in officer injuries after they start using tasers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top