Police Taser 16 year old with broken back

[Cowboysrock55]

I have had to apply it more than once and no one died but they did comply.

Have you ever had to apply it 19 times? I have a seriously difficult time imagining any situation where applying it that many times would be necessary.

 

[NoDak]

They're treating soccer moms and old men in wheel chairs as the same threat level as some gang banger with an AK.

Ever notice how no matter how well a point might be made, it loses credibility when stuff like this is injected?

 

[Cotton]

Clay, I don't envy you your job at all and it isn't one I'd want to do. I sincerely feel and pray for you guys every day. One of the big differences is though, that you guys know the people you deal with generally will hurt you. You are constantly on guard against that with no relief from it. (Another reason I don't envy you your job. More stressful and less pay). We on the street however have to determine first of someone is a threat and for some, that is the tough part. I have heard cases where little old ladies were packing and one story in particular where the lady was later found to have a gun and said the only reason she decided not to shoot the officer was because he was nice to her. She had planned on it but changed her mind.
And then when some officers are hyper vigilant they are criticized for rudeness or treating people badly by just putting them in the back of their car after a pat down. Stay safe Brother.

Always stay safe. I interact with cops on a daily basis, and hear all of their stories. It's probably a lot of the reason I generally defend them. I have heard firsthand what they have to deal with and face mentally every day.

 

[Clay_Allison]

How the hell do you know about all of those police departments? How do you know they are good? I need examples.

I have a criminal justice degree and I'm still good friends with the department head from my college. He gets a lot of info from his former students who go on to various departments.

 

[Smitty]

You don't think running away is a cause for suspicion? Really?

I think as a matter of law it can't be. It doesn't necessarily imply anything other than a strong desire to not talk to police.

There are strong implications as to WHY one might not want to talk to police, but as a matter of protecting our rights from a police force that may, someday, be considerably less benevolent than it is now, we have to protect that right to get away from police.

So yeah, I think police should not be able to infer suspicion simply by someone running away from them. If a policeman sees someone drop a can of spray paint then start running, that's different.

 

[Cotton]

I have a criminal justice degree and I'm still good friends with the department head from my college. He gets a lot of info from his former students who go on to various departments.

There are thousands of officers in each of those departments. How can you possibly know if the department as a whole is solid?

 

[fortsbest]

Of course not, but Smitty is being obtuse. If you stopped anyone for whatever reason and they ran, would you not chase?

Maybe I didn't explain properly. If I stop someone for a reason (traffic stop, noticed they were doing something I suspected was illegal, etc) then I have legally detained them and they are not free to go until I have completed my "investigation". If they run, then I WILL chase them. If I am walking down the street and just say hello to someone because I'm officer Friendly and they run, then no, I'm not chasing them.

 

[Cotton]

I think as a matter of law it can't be. It doesn't necessarily imply anything other than a strong desire to not talk to police.

There are strong implications as to WHY one might not want to talk to police, but as a matter of protecting our rights from a police force that may, someday, be considerably less benevolent than it is now, we have to protect that right to get away from police.

So yeah, I think police should not be able to infer suspicion simply by someone running away from them. If a policeman sees someone drop a can of spray paint then start running, that's different.

There is no talking to you. I already stated that suspicion on the stop has to happen. Running after that initial stop is an absolute reason for suspicion. I don't give a damn what your "law" says. Your lawyer stuff doesn't apply when the feet are on the ground. All they can do is make sure they don't kill or hurt someone needlessly.

 

[Smitty]

Maybe I didn't explain properly. If I stop someone for a reason (traffic stop, noticed they were doing something I suspected was illegal, etc) then I have legally detained them and they are not free to go until I have completed my "investigation". If they run, then I WILL chase them. If I am walking down the street and just say hello to someone because I'm officer Friendly and they run, then no, I'm not chasing them.

And you can't, I'm pretty sure.

 

[Cotton]

Maybe I didn't explain properly. If I stop someone for a reason (traffic stop, noticed they were doing something I suspected was illegal, etc) then I have legally detained them and they are not free to go until I have completed my "investigation". If they run, then I WILL chase them. If I am walking down the street and just say hello to someone because I'm officer Friendly and they run, then no, I'm not chasing them.

Exactly.

 

[Smitty]

There is no talking to you.

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I suspect you get easily confused by the subject matter and thus frustrated without reason.

I already stated that suspicion on the stop has to happen.

So you're saying that when a policeman has reasonable suspicion he can stop someone? Yes, I agree.

Running after that initial stop is an absolute reason for suspicion.

It depends on WHY there was an initial stop. If the policeman had reasonable suspicion to initiate a stop, then the person is detained already. Them running after that stop, is just a violation of the detaining which the officer could legally do. In that case, the person running isn't what is creating the suspicion, the suspicion is already in place.

If the policeman doesn't have reason to detain, then the person can run all they want and the policeman can't do anything about it. And that's the way it should be. So approaching someone, having no other reason, and then the person runs, that is not enough.

I don't give a damn what your "law" says.

Well you should.

 

[Cotton]

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I suspect you get easily confused by the subject matter and thus frustrated without reason.



So you're saying that when a policeman has reasonable suspicion he can stop someone? Yes, I agree.



It depends on WHY there was an initial stop. If the policeman had reasonable suspicion to initiate a stop, then the person is detained already. Them running after that stop, is just a violation of the detaining which the officer could legally do. In that case, the person running isn't what is creating the suspicion, the suspicion is already in place.

If the policeman doesn't have reason to detain, then the person can run all they want and the policeman can't do anything about it. And that's the way it should be. So approaching someone, having no other reason, and then the person runs, that is not enough.

So, you agree with just about everything I just said. Cool.

 

[Smitty]

So, you agree with just about everything I just said. Cool.

Good thing you do care about the law.

 

[Cotton]

Good thing you do care about the law.

I care about keeping our cops safe above all else.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

So, you agree with just about everything I just said. Cool.

I think the point is from a legal perspective the running has no impact on the officers "suspicion" that gives rise to their right for detainment.

 

[Clay_Allison]

There are thousands of officers in each of those departments. How can you possibly know if the department as a whole is solid?

I only know about their reputation and an impression of what kind of training is offered.

I didn't say I did a Doctor's Thesis on comparative departmental quality in Texas, FFS.

 

[Clay_Allison]

I care about keeping our cops safe above all else.

In that case, take away the Tasers and give them total license to shoot people entirely at their own discretion. But no handguns. They should carry assault rifles at all times. They will be very safe, even if no one else will be.

 

[Cotton]

I think the point is from a legal perspective the running has no impact on the officers "suspicion" that gives rise to their right for detainment.

I never once said that running alone was cause for suspicion.

 

[fortsbest]

Have you ever had to apply it 19 times? I have a seriously difficult time imagining any situation where applying it that many times would be necessary.

No I have not. ANd I'm not saying this wasn't excessive, but as always in any legal entanglement posted I prefer to reserve judgment until all the details are known or I just try to remain neutral and post what I consider relevant for you guys to read. Twice is the most I've ever tased, but I have had officers give someone 5 rides and all were justified. Also, maybe some explanation of how a taser works is needed. To my knowledge, 2 models of Taser are currently in use by LE. The X26 and the newer one the X2.


The X26 has a single cartridge that shoots 2 probe, or it can be used with the cartridge removed by direct contact of 2 electrodes on the front of the device. Once the probes are shot, if they stick you can pull the trigger as many times as needed to gain compliance. typically if you pull the trigger it runs as long as you hold the trigger. You can have a 1 second burst or a minute long burst. Each trigger pull is recorded as a separate instance. Our department trained to give a 5 second ride, reassess and use again if needed. So in this case, 19 bursts may have been 19 one second shots if these are the tasers they used.
The X2 is different in that there are 2 sets of probes.

Safety controls are much better in this one and it's much more programmable.

Ever notice how no matter how well a point might be made, it loses credibility when stuff like this in injected?

Absolutely. Hard to reason with anyone once things get like this. Just like the Dems!!!

Always stay safe. I interact with cops on a daily basis, and hear all of their stories. It's probably a lot of the reason I generally defend them. I have heard firsthand what they have to deal with and face mentally every day.

Thanks IMTDG for those you have helped and maybe even those you've helped remove!

 

[Cotton]

In that case, take away the Tasers and give them total license to shoot people entirely at their own discretion. But no handguns. They should carry assault rifles at all times. They will be very safe, even if no one else will be.