[rwfromkansas]

Why didn’t he reach for his gun instead of basically putting a live electrical current to his heart for almost a minute?

He should have shot the guy in the arm, and it would have been over.

[Jagdgewehr]

He should have shot the guy in the arm, and it would have been over.

The use of the officer's sidearm would be considered lethal force. In other words, the officer would only use his sidearm if lethal force was justified. The taser, when used properly, is considered less-lethal or less-than-lethal. Obviously the taser had lethal consequences in this situation...therefore, the subsequent debate.

[Rammer]

He didn’t think the taser was working, as the suspect continued as though nothing had happened.

[fr_freak]

Why didn’t he reach for his gun instead of basically putting a live electrical current to his heart for almost a minute?

He should have shot the guy in the arm, and it would have been over.

One of the rules of firearms is that you don't pull a gun on anything you don't intend to shoot, and you don't shoot anything you don't intend to kill. Once the officer's gun came out, death would be a very imminent possibility for someone. Also, shots to the arm can kill, probably with a higher probability than tazer blasts, although 37 seconds might serve to even those odds a bit.

[PapaBear3625]

He should have shot the guy in the arm, and it would have been over.

Getting shot in the arm is not like on TV. You don't wind up at the end of the episode with your arm in a sling and completely healed by the following week. Hit a major artery, and the guy will bleed to death before the paramedics can arrive. Hit the bone and the doctors will likely have to amputate. Then you have a crippled kid suing the dept for $100M

The guy kept going after being zapped. He did not go down immediately. He was likely on drugs, and would have kept coming after a wounding shot, which would have required a follow-up in the head