Police Taser 16 year old with broken back

[Cotton]

Well, maybe for something like vandalism, letting them get away has to be protocol if you can't catch them.

Would the police risk a high speed chase down a highway, endangering the lives of others, to catch a graffiti artist, even if he's trying to evade them in a vehicle? Of course not, it's just not reasonable.

I guess you have never watched Cops.

They chase people for simply running, without even having a violation of the law to urge them on, except suspicion.

As well they should.

 

[Smitty]

I guess you have never watched Cops.

They chase people for simply running, without even having a violation of the law to urge them on, except suspicion.

As well they should.

Well, that is what I'm arguing, running from cops should not give rise to whatever level of suspicion triggers their ability to use such force.

And I doubt it does, legally. Probably they have to articulate something else that kicked off reasonable suspicion to instigate a stop.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

What is the 1st resort to subduing a perceived dangerous person?

Kicking their ass with batons? Sometimes you can't reach them.

Two problems with your logic.

The first is how do you determine who is a dangerous person? Clearly cops are not always doing a good job of determining who is or isn't dangerous. Someone threatening with a gun is clearly a dangerous person. Someone laying on the ground with a broken back not so much. Police should proceed with caution, but they shouldn't just jump to the conclusion that every person is dangerous.

The second problem with your logic is that you think cops must kick the shit out of/taze the shit out of/ inflict some physical damage in order to subdue someone. This just isn't true.

 

[Cotton]

Well, that is what I'm arguing, running from cops should not give rise to whatever level of suspicion triggers their ability to use such force.

And I doubt it does, legally. Probably they have to articulate something else that kicked off reasonable suspicion to instigate a stop.

I don't understand what you mean. Anything can instigate a stop or detainment. The issue is what happens after the initial stop. In the videos I posted, all of them were from random traffic stops that ended up in a cop getting killed because they either didn't execute enough caution or they didn't use the tools available to them to keep themselves safe.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Then argue that they should change the tools that the cops are given, not how they are used.

Why? Guns kill people but I wouldn't argue that cops shouldn't have them. They just shouldn't use them unless it is a last resort. The trigger for use of a taser shouldn't just be "He isn't listening and doing everything I say." Sadly that seems to be the level that triggers the use of a taser waaaaay too often.

 

[Jiggyfly]

What is the 1st resort to subduing a perceived dangerous person?

Kicking their ass with batons? Sometimes you can't reach them.

Way to move the goal post, the kid that was running was dangerous how or the kid with the broken back?

 

[Jiggyfly]

I don't understand what you mean. Anything can instigate a stop or detainment. The issue is what happens after the initial stop. In the videos I posted, all of them were from random traffic stops that ended up in a cop getting killed because they either didn't execute enough caution or they didn't use the tools available to them to keep themselves safe.

And like I said those videos have nothing to do with this discussion.

 

[Cotton]

Two problems with your logic.

The first is how do you determine who is a dangerous person? Clearly cops are not always doing a good job of determining who is or isn't dangerous. Someone threatening with a gun is clearly a dangerous person. Someone laying on the ground with a broken back not so much. Police should proceed with caution, but they shouldn't just jump to the conclusion that every person is dangerous.

The second problem with your logic is that you think cops must kick the shit out of/taze the shit out of/ inflict some physical damage in order to subdue someone. This just isn't true.

You ever been in a position where your life was threatened. I have. I had a gun put under my chin once. It brings about a perspective most people don't have. You did make a good point, though. It's impossible to tell if a person is dangerous just by looking at them. So, you have a choice. You either put everyone you stop into handcuffs or you are very cautious and if something arises from the stop that raises your hackles you take further action.

I can't even imagine what it's like being a cop and hearing the stories from those deaths of their fellow cops when everything on the surface seemed copacetic. It would be in your mind every time you stopped someone.

 

[Cotton]

Why? Guns kill people but I wouldn't argue that cops shouldn't have them. They just shouldn't use them unless it is a last resort. The trigger for use of a taser shouldn't just be "He isn't listening and doing everything I say." Sadly that seems to be the level that triggers the use of a taser waaaaay too often.

Then argue that they should change the tools that the cops are given, not how they are used.

 

[Cotton]

Way to move the goal post, the kid that was running was dangerous how or the kid with the broken back?

This is a general discussion, not specific to either of the two stories.

The idea was brought up that tazers are used too often. Or, did you not read the whole thread?

 

[Cotton]

And like I said those videos have nothing to do with this discussion.

It has everything to do with it. You just refuse to acknowledge it.

 

[Clay_Allison]

You ever been in a position where your life was threatened. I have. I had a gun put under my chin once. It brings about a perspective most people don't have. You did make a good point, though. It's impossible to tell if a person is dangerous just by looking at them. So, you have a choice. You either put everyone you stop into handcuffs or you are very cautious and if something arises from the stop that raises your hackles you take further action.

I can't even imagine what it's like being a cop and hearing the stories from those deaths of their fellow cops when everything on the surface seemed copacetic. It would be in your mind every time you stopped someone.

I work in a prison full of convicted murderers, rapists, and other violent criminals. I don't work mostly with innocent members of the public like cops. Somehow I can do my job without whipping out my pepper spray (we don't have tazers) and going to town every time an inmate argues with me. And I have seen plenty of videos of simple verbal confrontations suddenly escalate into an officer being stabbed. Knowing that, I still do my job like a sane person. If you're too terrified to be a professional and do your job without excessive force, you don't need to be doing that job.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Then argue that they should change the tools that the cops are given, not how they are used.

I'm saying exactly the opposite. I think the taser is a tool that should be at their disposal but that 90% of the time it is being miss used. They should be used differently not removed entirely.

 

[Cotton]

Listen, I know this is a slippery slope. There are some really shitty cops out there, but it is really tough to judge the job they do when you look at all of what they have to deal with. I couldn't do it. I would probably taze every fucker that talked back to me. So, it's easy to sit on the sidelines and nitpick every single thing every cop is reported to have done. I would guess some would have a much different opinion if you were out there every fay.

 

[Cotton]

I work in a prison full of convicted murderers, rapists, and other violent criminals. I don't work mostly with innocent members of the public like cops. Somehow I can do my job without whipping out my pepper spray (we don't have tazers) and going to town every time an inmate argues with me. And I have seen plenty of videos of simple verbal confrontations suddenly escalate into an officer being stabbed. Knowing that, I still do my job like a sane person. If you're too terrified to be a professional and do your job without excessive force, you don't need to be doing that job.

How many inmates you run across could possibly have a gun?

 

[Smitty]

I don't understand what you mean. Anything can instigate a stop or detainment.

Incorrect. Police can always approach and ask questions, but the subject can walk, or run, away.

In order to detain a police officer must have reasonable suspicion or probable cause, and it's pretty set that declining to talk to an officer doesn't amount to either of those standards.

I wouldn't think that the manner in which you decline to talk to an officer matters, either running away or walking away. There has to be something more than the decline.

I'm saying running away from an approaching officer should not trigger their ability to stop you. Maybe the policeman say something else before approaching that triggered it, but the running by itself should not be enough.

The issue is what happens after the initial stop. In the videos I posted, all of them were from random traffic stops that ended up in a cop getting killed because they either didn't execute enough caution or they didn't use the tools available to them to keep themselves safe.

Well in all those stops I'm sure the police had cause to pull the person over, like, they were clocked violating the speed limit and thus the police had probable cause that they violated the speed limit law.

 

[Clay_Allison]

How many inmates you run across could possibly have a gun?

Who cares? I don't have a gun either. Last week we shook down a pod and found a ten inch shank. You think that can't kill you? Especially when you're running a unit with 1300 inmates and 20-25 officers (depending on who calls in sick etc.).

 

[Cotton]

I'm saying exactly the opposite. I think the taser is a tool that should be at their disposal but that 90% of the time it is being miss used. They should be used differently not removed entirely.

I can agree with that to a degree. But, it's impossible to tell which cases are warranted and which are not because none of us are there. All we have is the info the media provides to us. It's hard to say what moves were made, hands reaching into pockets, belligerent threats, etc. at the scene where it happened.

It's stupid to judge a cops actions by what you read.

 

[Cotton]

Incorrect. Police can always approach and ask questions, but the subject can walk, or run, away.

In order to detain a police officer must have reasonable suspicion or probable cause, and it's pretty set that declining to talk to an officer doesn't amount to either of those standards.

I wouldn't think that the manner in which you decline to talk to an officer matters, either running away or walking away. There has to be something more than the decline.

I'm saying running away from an approaching officer should not trigger their ability to stop you. Maybe the policeman say something else before approaching that triggered it, but the running by itself should not be enough.



Well in all those stops I'm sure the police had cause to pull the person over, like, they were clocked violating the speed limit and thus the police had probable cause that they violated the speed limit law.

I meant anything causing suspicion can give cause to stopping or detainment. Running away is damn sure one of those things that can cause that suspicion.

 

[Cotton]

Who cares? I don't have a gun either. Last week we shook down a pod and found a ten inch shank. You think that can't kill you? Especially when you're running a unit with 1300 inmates and 20-25 officers (depending on who calls in sick etc.).

Well, thank goodness you have been lucky enough not to get shanked, but a gun is a million times more deadly if only for distance alone.