would the police be justified in tazing him/her - disabling the pacemaker, causing a heart attack.....all because he/she refused to sign an incriminating instrument of the court by driving 32 miles an hour
Now - ask yourself if someone galloping on a horse would have been stopped...........probably not - but why ?
SHE chose to have the situtation raised to a higher level. She was pregnant, she should have put her baby first. Since she referred to her baby as an unborn fetus, I understand why she didn't put the baby first.
The police officer is supposed to be the "voice of reason" in unreasonable situations. He did not use his discretion wisely, as I'm sure he had more than a few options available to handle the situation. If he felt his person was in danger the taser would have made sense. But to use it after he realized the lady was pregnant was excessive force.
"one more thought before I abandon the thread - what if the driver was elderly, had an implanted pacemaker, and physcially could not exit the vehicle or communicate that refusal effectively?"
Then maybe the old geezer was in no physical condition to be driving the vehicle, and should have been taken into custody posthaste.
If a driver has trouble physically exiting a vehicle when asked to do so by a police officer, they could simply relay that information to the police officer. There are many drivers who are handicapped in some way.
would the police be justified in tazing him/her - disabling the pacemaker, causing a heart attack.....all because he/she refused to sign an incriminating instrument of the court by driving 32 miles an hour
A traffic ticket isn't an "incriminating instrument of the court". By signing a traffic ticket, you are simply agreeing to show up in court at the time and date specified. Many traffic tickets are dismissed by the court after the judge hears the motorist's side of the story.