Replies

Me: Are we in agreement that tazing in those circumstances did indeed put the driver's life at increased risk? (regardless of who was responsible)

UCANSEE2: No more at risk than the life of the officer. (who had to stand just as close to traffic as the driver, in order to handcuff him)

Why did you add the part in parenthesis? Obviously, when the driver was down and and being handcuffed, both were at equal risk. I was referring to the possibility of falling into a busy traffic lane, and being helpless to protect himself.

Let me ask it this way: Is it your contention that a person standing along a highway in full control of his faculties, is no more at risk than someone being tazered in the same setting?

If the officer had not used the taser, and had to physically subdue the driver, it could have been the officer hit by a car.

Agreed. Trying to wrestle with the guy would have been just as reckless, and risked the life of both.

The driver's wife could have been like her husband, gotten back out of the vehicle to argue with the officer, and gotten hit by a car, killing both her and her unborn child.

Correct. I don't think the officer is being faulted for telling her to stay in the car.

I suppose that would have also been the fault of the officer. As it was, he told her to stay in the vehicle. For his safety, but especially for hers. Do you not recognize this as a fact?

Of course. I haven't said otherwise.

It is possible that had the officer NOT tasered him, that further struggling physically could have gotten the driver killed by the passing traffic.

We agree that a struggle alongside a busy highway is unwise.

So, maybe the officer actually saved his life. You just never know.

Is it your contention that the only options available to the officer were tazering or a physical struggle?

If not, what other options could the trooper have chosen in this situation?