Replies

The incident stems from A The kid not observing the two speed limit signs in a construction zone (The second was obscured by the patrolman’s car for some 15 second which is 1/4 mile roughly. The Officer setting the kid up by omission..(Those who are in the game know good an well how he did it). (The kid was idiot the Officer tired)

However,

I don’t think this case is the best by any stretch to demonstrate the problem with Tazers.

I think it may in fact be one of those cases where it was a logical act to conclude the incident which was provoked by the Officer to begin with (not out of malice but tiredness).

That being said.

I would not have let the kid get back into his car and or maybe gain access to a weapon in the vehicle or on his person.

I also would not have wrestled with the kid on the freeway side of the vehicle (Thats too easy a way to get run over)

Still

I want Tazer employment greatly restricted as they are a not a “Non lethal weapon”.. They are a “Less Lethal” weapon big difference.

Taze a certain number of people in the population at random and a certain percentage of people will die.

That means the Tazer should not be used in situation where the officer is not in reasonable fear for his or someone else’s life. Not as a means to gain compliance to orders.

As such it’s application should be extremely limited.. Not even carried by all officers which is what the Manufacturer so desperately wants in order to make sales.

A night stick will not kill anyone when employed properly..

Hurt yes. however avoid the head, neck, spine and trunk and you would be hard pressed to kill anyone. Officers are trained to do that and they do it pretty well.

The Tazer’s ease of use encourages escalation in the the use of force too quickly in my opinion.

When an Officer knows he has to get his uniform dirty and work up a sweat unless he talks things out he will generally try to talk things out (or at least eventually choose that route with experience). Because the truth is even the more bullying types of officer (let’s not pretend they do not exist) never know with certainty they will walk away from a physical encounter unhurt (The guy who wrote the book may be the one eyed fat man in front of them) Mature Officers do not want to find out and want only to do their job in decent fashion not prove anything.

Courteous, respectful and reasonable treatment of citizens is responsible for more Police Officers going home safe and sound than all the guns, tazers, body armor, laws and clubs around.

Human nature easily leads a certain number of people to becoming Police Officers that are IMO less than optimally suited.. Being in a position to “always win an argument and when you don’t win with words have State sanction to use violence to gain compliance does not bring out the best in human nature..among even the best and most mature people let alone young people.

The fact that there may be a price one pays for taking things to the extreme without cause helps reduce the desire to take things that far.. To deliberately incite conflict.

Young men and women under 30 are not emotionally qualified to be in the position of trust that PDs place people in..

They are there, truth be told, because they are cheap to pay and they are cheap to pay because like teachers they get other intangible benefits. Emotional satisfaction.. Only problem is.... That is wholly inappropriate for police department personell as a significant driver.

When all one has to do is give a set of commands, then Taze away, well, that is easy and there are no uniform cleaning bills.

That is a recipe for increased use and eventual abuse which is what we are seeing.