Excessive use of Tasers

Marsha,

Yes it seems that the tasering of people is on the rise.  I don't know all of the details in the case you outlined, but I think you're right.  This was excessive.  Ditto with the man who got tasered the other day at the John Kerry discussion.

I don't know if anybody has noticed, but I have been seeing a rise in what I would consider, "unruly," behavior, predominantly in the courts & at political functions, excessive force, tasering & an attack on our freedom of speech.

We have seen the scenes of fights breaking out in our courts, especially after a verdict has been read.  Baliffs have had to separate sometimes numerous pople, who attacked others.

The charges of excessive force seems to be in the headlines every other week or so.

At political functions we have seen a steady erosion of freedom of speech & now it is combined with a taser at the Kerry discussion, combined with what I would call excessive force.  Looking at the videos, there were at least 5 or 6 police surrounding the man & not one of them looked like the proverbial, "98 lb. weakling."  Any one of them could have cuffed the man even though it didn't appear that he was being unruly.

Facts to be considered, he had a history of playing pranks, but did not appear to be doing anything else but asking questions.  Maybe I didn't see all of the video.  A report from one of the officers said that as soon as they were away from the cameras, the man started acting normally, smiling & talking with people.  I still don't think the situation justified the use of a taser. I am not surprised at all that something like this happened in a state like Fl.  I am surprised however, that it happened at a Democratic event, as opposed to something like a Bush speech. 

I would not be surprised if the man who was tasered files a legal charge against the powers that be.  He could claim excessive force & First Amendment violation.  For more on that, scroll back a few pages to one of my blogs titled, "Good News-Bad News, I just Had To Share," 08.22.07.

The story reported a situation in which a couple wore anti Bush tee shirts, were thrown out of the speech area, arrested & the whole schmeer.  They decided to sue the powers that be & the Bush administration, in a very rare example of making a good decision, settled out of court for 80K of our money.  They knew they couldn't win & Bush had enough embarrassing moments & legal charges in his portfolio.  But it is frightening to see that these situations seem to be on the rise.

We keep hearing the police & their representatives saying that the situation will be studied & appropriate actions will be taken to avoid it in the future.  But it doesn't seem to be picked up by other forces because it keeps happening.  Unruly, disruptive behavior should not be tolerated.  But neither should excessive force or speech violations be tolerated.  JATFUR.

Doubt is the first step towards knowledge.  Acquiring knowledge is the next step to a higher intellect

RichK

This blog kind of ties in with the other one regarding stupid people.

In "most" cases of "excessive force", some idiot has decided that for whatever reason they don't have to play by the rules put in place to keep any forum respectable.  They then get forcibly taken away, and claim excessive force.  No kidding it was force, it is meant to be. 

These are the same people whose parents likely called complaining to the Principal that the teacher was not letting little Johnny express himself, i.e. talking out of turn and being disrespectful.

I watched the entire video - the guy was politely asked to step down but kept on going and in fact became violent in his actions and words.  I waited for him to cry for his mommy. 

Lets just say for discussion sake they let him go at it, and lets just say he had a weapon and started using it - the same folks complaining about excessive force would now be complaining the authorities did little to control the situation. 

Now, are all cases of taser use justified?  Of course not, just like all speeding tickets and all cases of arrest are not justified - but the system works well until somebody who has no idea of what is like to wear a badge or a uniform gets TOO involved.  Involvement by the public and public criticism is good and is what sets our country apart from others, but everybody is bit an expert on everything. 

And Rich, I just knew you would find a way to weave W into this one.  You've just overdone that whole Bush t-shirt thing, look up the facts behind Clinton's staff telling General officers not to wear their uniform in the West Wing (which is public property by the way) if you want to use an example of "excessive force, a.k.a. ego." or suppression of free speech.

CCC,

As I stated, I might not have seen the whole video.  I will rely on your description.  Chronological point.  Since I saw, & as was reported, the man was asking questions, the point of the session, why was he asked to step down for asking a question in the first place?  Is asking a question such a threat?  If he became "violent," & / unruly, then yes, the security people had every right & responsibility to remove him.  But from that point, I stand by my statements in my reply.  There was no need to taser him with 5 or 6 very large people there to escort him out. 

Once again, as I stated, this guy has a history.  Perhaps you missed that.  Once again, as I stated, his character changed abruptly, according to the report, as soon as he was out of cameral range.  Perhaps you missed THAT!  Not my point.  My point is that there has been a rise in suppressing opposing points of view during what was supposed to be basically a free exchange, Q & A scenario.  It seems, at least according to most news reprts in the past few years, that this is mostly a Republican form of upholding the First Amendment.  As I stated, the only thing that surprised me was that it was at a Democratic event.

And why, for goodness sakes, wouldn't I bring up Bush?  What better example could I give of a president who has no respect for his oath of office, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the laws of this country, international law, common decency or the people who put him in office?  He and his administration have made Nixon, in comparisson,  to look like Pee Wee Herman, a rank amateur. Heck, even the Times Union has printed the stories & reports of his wrongdoings.  (Sorry, Lamar, sorry, Jonathan.) So I don't know how you can possibly defend him. 

This man & his administration have been and still are, not only the worst, but the most dangerous, when it comes to threatening the free speech & basic liberties of all of us.  They obviously considered a tee shirt with an opposing view a threat to national security.  Tell you the truth, I'm surprised bush didn't have the couple sent to GTMO, since that seems to be their modus operendi for anyone who they might THINK is dangerous.

I'm sure we won't hear the last of this subject. The public seems to have taken to it like a dog to a juicy bone.  Me?  I look forward to the views, especially yours.  JATFUR.

Doubt is the first step towards knowledge.  Acquiring knowledge is the next step to a higher intellect.

RichK

I saw what was provided by the news stations, more then one station and it was all pretty much the same.  If the young man was creating a "stage" it is not apparent in the video, I cannot speak to what I did not see with my own eyes.  If he was then he got what he deserved.

I think the incidents that have been compared to Emily Delafields are not truly comparable. Civil rights versus the right to life itself.  The only commonality is the taser itself.  But since the dialogue was added I will engage.

It's obvious the young man ignored repeated requests to vacate the mic, but it would ALL have been avoided if John Kerry had just answered at least one of the mans questions. The last one being "why won't you answer the question"?  John Kerry has alot of responsibility in this situation.  He could have calmed it all down, he could have stepped up to the plate and either gotten the Officers to back down, the man to stop resisting with the assurance of an answer or both of them in combination but he did nothing.  This should not have been a big deal for a man who has been to war.

I agree whole heartedly if this guy would have had a gun or something else to hurt someone those Officers would be criticized for not doing enough. 

I agree that out of control behavior is on the rise, but to say freedom for the sake of freedom with no rules and no order will lead to anarchy and that is where we are heading.

There were clear limits and procedures to the event.   If someone is not prepared to accept the protocol then they should expect resistance, or exercise their freedom by choosing not to participate.  I don't think this young mans behavior is the same as people being removed for wearing a tshirt stating their political opinion.  One caused an actual disturbance, the other was a perceived disturbance and the initial subject in this blog was a very heavy, old, and wheel chair bound woman that was a limited threat and she is dead after being tasered at least ten times. 

I would think at the very least that these Officers would lose their right to carry a taser considering their judgement on when and how much to use is in question.

They are designed to give a five second jolt then recycle.  One of those tasers was faulty if it gave a twenty five second jolt.  The taser has a data port that can be plugged in to that will give a report on date, time, and duration of tase.

By now, you guys have probably seen more video, and that Mr. FreeSpeech had a colleague there with a video camera to ensure his act was recorded.  Maybe the pair was up to noble purposes, but, given the partial details so far, I'm siding with the UF Police.  Tasering was a bit excessive, but control must be maintained, and the student, the oh so indignant student (and incredibly rude and obnoxious) is the REAL responsible party.  Not John Kerry (ugh), not the police, but the moronic student who created the scene.  Don't the rest of us have a right to a reasonable expectation that people making public presentations will comply with legal, and very common, time limits, and general decorum?  Continuing to talk after your time has expired does not warrant tasing, but jumping around like some sort of lunatic, yelling and screaming, and refusing to comply with many requests to calm down and act rational, especially given the venue and recent history (Virginia Tech), does warrant some action by legal authorities.

In short, the guy was being an ass, and got what he deserved.  Free speech is one thing.  Acting violent on a college campus is another.

Marsha, you are so right.  The two incidents are not even remotely related.  I agree with you also, someone seems to have completely over reacted in the Delafield case.  But, I will defer any harsher judgement to people who really know the facts of that case.  I have only briefly read reports, and don't know the circumstances beyond what you've described.  Sort of like questioning the actions of those in combat.  I'll leave those judgements to others.

I find it funny how we love to Monday morning quarterback the actions of our police officers, the same people who put their lives on the line every day, for people they don’t even know.  We are quick to criticize officers and try to sue them every chance we get, yet just as quick to call them as soon as we hear a bump in the night or even find a snake in the house. For all of you who criticize our officers, I think you should be made to serve just one night on the beat.  We should be ashamed of our selves

Thanks Magnumforce for pointing out that the tasers are only supposed to have a five second jolt, the news report left that out.  They actually showed it briefly on the tv, and they left that little factoid out.  If what you say is true the more then one was malfunctioning, or whoever was using it didn't realize or didn't care because the woman received several jolts that were in excess of five seconds. I mentioned the 25 seconds because that was the longest one.

Why would the tv station not mention malfunctioning tasers? If that were the case why did the story come back up minus that information?

Your all encompassing defense of law enforcement, your rude attitude and your name all suggest you are a cop yourself,wanted to be, an offspring or perhaps married to one. 

Like any other business or profession there are some BAD APPLES and Law Enforcement is not immune to that reality. 

My comments did not condemn them in whole or in part.  I gave MY OPINION on a particular situation.  The blog was civil until you jumped into it.  I guess if you had YOUR WAY anyone with any criticism of Law Enforcement would get locked up.

"Monday Morning Quarterbacking" is called that because it is done THE DAY AFTER THE GAME.  This is hardly a rush to judgement, it's not the day after, it's MONTHS after so if you're going to be rude and nasty get your terms in order!  Put enough electrical current through the human body, either with one jolt or ten and someone is going to die, that is why we teach small children to leave outlets alone and then plug them.

Eleven years ago when my first husband died I was treated like a crimminal for ten days until Cause of Death was determined.  While I was at the Funeral Home making arrangements they showed up at my house and cornered my kids in a bedroom and 2 of them were under six years of age and did everything they could to get them to say something against their Mother.  There were no "suspicious circumstances" around my husbands death, it was just unexpected. My kids were frightened beyond words, and when my Daughter In Law requested to be in the room with them because they were so small she was told basically to get out or be arrested.   My kids were already grieving, lost and hurt and after that afraid.  Their cries could be heard outside of that bedroom that day.  

CAN YOU DEFEND THAT AS WELL, IS IT OK TO INTIMIDATE AND SCARE CHILDREN NOT EVEN OLD ENOUGH TO BE IN SCHOOL??????????

I did not trash the GCS Police Dept, I did not trash CCSO, I mentioned no names. I referred to "whoever was in charge" on the scene that day.  If you want to rail on someone why don't you send an email to First Coast News, they're the ones that ran the story about the data that came from the tasers. 

I don't make a habit of finding fault with Law Enforcement, in fact even with the hideous treatment that I PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED I still tend to side with them because of the tough job they have and the lack of appreciation that is blanketed upon them.  

So "Monday Morning Quarterback" my comments as much as you want, why don't you try to exercise some civility while you do it.  At least I don't hide behind a childish and fictitious name in an adult forum.  At least I have the guts to be who I am.

Why would a tv station not mention malfunctioning tasers?  You are much smarter than that - tv stations and newspapers mention what sells.  The selling point of the story initially was an elderly lady getting tasered.   The elderly lady was an unfortunate incident - yes - but she was armed, dangerous, and uncooperative.  Shooting her with a tranquilizer dart?  You have been watching Discovery channel too much, throwing a fish net over her - too many action movies. 

Bottom line - it is fun to sit back and say what "I would have done" or "they should have done" but these decisions are made in an instant to PROTECT THE PUBLIC FIRST, the perpretator second. 

And as far as Q&A sessions, they have guidelines for time.  When you go past that time, you are done - period.  No different than our local government or civic meetings.  If you fail to respect those guidelines, you are removed.  Happens all the time.  I don't think in this case trying to tell the young man he was going to "time out" would have worked.  My guess is he will also think twice, as will his friends, before they cross the boundaries of another organized Q&A session.  If so, the UF police did their job - protecting the public and ensuring order, while the organizing agency of the Q&A session ensures the freedom of speech of participants. 

Evin,

Uncivil attitudes aside, I think that you might be missing a very important point.  In these blogs is an attitude of giving an opinion @ what was seen.  That is our right.  But I'm sure that no one here will be unwilling to change their opinion if further information comes out that would show that the police involved were justified in their actions.  I also doubt that there are all that many people who would give a blanket condemnation to all law enforcement people.  Are there bad cops?  Sure.  They are, after all, humans with human faults & frailties.  But the majority of them are doing a great job under extremely difficult circumstances.

Perhaps cutting some of us a bit of slack would be in order along with eliminating blanket accusations.

RichK

You make a valid point about the press but seeing as that is how all of us hear about what is going on in the world then I guess none of us have the "real story" on anything. 

I rarely watch the Discovery Channel or action movies, and yes the suggestions I made were a little out there I will give you that it's just very hard to imagine that there was no other way.

I don't consider it "fun" to say what I would have done, or what "they should have done", I see nothing "fun" in someone dying. I know I would not want to subject my own body to the repeated jolts that woman received that day for fear it would kill me, would you?

I agree that Law Enforcement has to make decisions in seconds to not only protect the public but their own lives, and hindsight is always 20/20.  But anyone who thinks that there are no individuals within Law Enforcement Agencies be they local, state or federal who carry that Rambo frame is just as unrealistic as you have accused me of being.  Was Rambo present that day?  I don't know, I was not there, I just STILL BELIEVE the woman was a limited threat, and obviously out numbered and I am just not so callous that a loss of life is so easily dismissed. 

Law enforcement officers are (outside the occasional bad apples found in any line of work) among the people I most admire.  Just imagine ...

Walking up to a vehicle you've stopped because of a broken tail light, not knowing if the driver is just unaware of the equipment malfunction or an armed psychopath having a bad day.  Perhaps entering an apartment and wrestling a man away from the woman he's beating, only to have that woman attack you from behind because you're now fighting with her man.  Or having any number of split-second decisions that potentially are life-threatening to yourself or others.

The men and women wearing badges and pledging to put their lives on the line so I can live safely are true public servants.

And if they perform their dangerous duties perfectly 99 percent of the time, I still reserve the right to criticize them about the 1 percent they did something wrong.  That doesn't mean I don't, on balance, appreciate them tremendously.  My criticism would not be to impugn them, but to be a stimulus for change.

A fatal tasering incident, for example, deserves scrutiny.  Criticism may not be directed at the individual law enforcement officers, but at the rules of engagement allowing taser usage.  And in discussions like that, resorting to saying someone should be ashamed of themselves is, well, shameful.

My, my. This has become a very contentious subject very quickly. I don't understand why. Both sides of this tasering issue are open to criticism but I don't understand why we are attacking one another. For my part, I completely understand Marsha's view regarding the police. Here's what happened in my family. Sixteen years ago, my nephew died of SIDS. When the police showed up they were very suspicious of her and made her life very uncomfortable. Prior to this incident, she had never had any trouble in her life. She already had a three year old son. She was an investigator for a law firm and an auxilliary highway patrol officer. But all the police officers focused on was a suddenly dead 5 month old child. Fortunately, my sister is not weeping willow. She suffered the abuse the law heaped upon her then went out and made a difference. She solicited a newly elected state senator who drafted a bill which sends police investigators to training in how to deal with SIDS cases. This law was signed by Lawton Chiles. I forget the date but the upshot is that police can no longer just barge about intimidating parents without doing a thorough and somewhat sensitive investigation before making charges.

 My feeling is that police officers should serve no more than five years in their jobs. I have noted first hand that they become extremely jaded and uncaring about the public they claim to protect very quickly.  I think this is very understandable as for the most part, the people they do come in contact with are low life degnerates. This blinds them to otherwise honest citizens who make a stupid mistake, such as speeding. I am not defending this position but I do understand it. Heck, even Harold Rutledge will admit that as a police officer he came to loathe the public, seeing everyone as a potential lawbreaker, not a citizen in dire need of help. I heard him say it at the Travelling Road Show in August.

So, yes, we do need to support the thin blue line but the long arm of the law needs to recapture its sense of humanity. Actually, I would venture to say that just about anyone in the public service vocations should get out after 5 years. This goes for the president (and really, aren't we all pretty darn sick of the president, whoever he may be, after 5 years?) down to the clerk answering public questions in any part of the bureaucracy. I suppose I may have to expound on these thoughts at a later date but I did want to partake in the conversation as soon as I caught up here

 Lily's Lore "I don't ever want to be rescued And I don't ever want to be saved I got a feelin' that I'm gonna be alive forever Dancin' on the edge of a grave..." Jim Steinman

Mike, I agree with you 100% and this is morphing into something that it was not intended to be.  From what I understand the Officers involved have been cleared of any wrong doing which I can accept as they have more information then what this Jane Q Public has, but with what information I have gathered I just believe there were alternatives.  The womans call to 911 was a woman who was in fear for herself, and somewhere it went terribly wrong.

I too retain tremendous respect for what these people do even though I've had personal experience that could have poisioned me otherwise. 

To me a wrongful death is just that, saying that it should not have happened is not pronouncing guilt on anyone.  I referred only to the person in charge on the scene, if the mission is to protect the public and there was a needless death then it falls on the person in charge.  That isn't personal, just an observation.  Suggesting that the people who tasered the woman should perhaps be relieved from using them when their judgement "appears" to be in question is a tame and  non condemning suggestion, not a guilty verdict and judgement.

The object of my blog was Emily Delafield, and the latest news that had come out on the matter, and my own personal views.

The blog was not a rant about Law Enforcement, I tried to choose my words carefully so the message would not be misconstrued.  I don't know if that is the readers fault or mine, probably both but it has still morphed into something it was not meant to be, personal slams either outright or hidden in sarcasm, tired cliches, and cynicism yet once again and we're supposed to be adults.

Lily,

I am  not a regular but I sporadically check in to MCS blogs and always find them interesting. Your comment about 5 years and out is REALLY interesting,   I think it has merit for SO many jobs. However, I don't think too many "career" bureaucrats/politicians will embrace the idea.

Great food for thought.

I'd love to comment on the taser issue, but, I don't think anyone is going to achieve a concensus in this debate, it is a very polarizing issue.  Politics will eventually make this choice.   

Regarding the 5 yr and out plan.  How would any department have someone with enough experience to competently investigate a complex allegation?  I'm sure, as in many careers, thoroughness comes with experience.  Not to mention, how would they get to know the people they deal with on the street, and the former inmates back on the street?

Plus, having been a involved in job training, the cost of a five year turnover would be astronomical.  Where would a governmental body get the funding?  Would we have to go private sector like that Robot Cop movie?

Speaking of movies, remember Escape From New York?  Take all the really bad people, stick them on an island.  You go in, you don't come out.  Fend for yourself!  Save on taxes, too!!!!

Oops, soapbox collapsing, bye.

I was using 5 years more as a benchmark than a hard and fast rule although I still maintain that experience aside, those in authoritarian positions become too jaded to remain neutral in what they do. Some should be removed earlier, some later. Everyone is different but it is extremely necessary today regarding politicians. Does anyone remember how the Clintons in 1992 writhed in glory over their poverty and how they never owned a home of their own? Now when she-witch Hillary declares her holdings it's in the neighborhood of 50 million dollars? How did that happen? And remember, Bill never received a plurality of the vote. He was never overwhelmingly loved in office though he wanted to be. But 6 years into his presidency, like Bush, reagan Nixon, etc... the country was weary of them all. I don't recall how they felt about Eisenhower. I was too young. (Yes, once upon a time, I was young.) So, yes, when it comes to holding office, term limits (and I think 5 years is more than enough but that is my own personal opinion) are necessary. Too many voters just don't care enough to objectively rate the incumbents. They usually will vote whoever's name they recall. Not why they recall it, just that they do. I also think requirement s for voting should be toughened. Again, that's just me. You don't have to agree but you also don't have to attack either.

Lily's Lore "I don't ever want to be rescued And I don't ever want to be saved I got a feelin' that I'm gonna be alive forever Dancin' on the edge of a grave..." Jim Steinman

Deployment Health Risk

 http://www.taser.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/Controlled%20Documents/Warnings/LG-INST-LEWARN-001%20REV%20L%20Law%20Enforcement%20Warnings.pdf

  I hope that if MCS decides to report on this incident that they report all the facts unlike First Coast News. Here is some information from Taser Internationals web site.  Part of the training each operator receives is before beginning your tour of duty you are suppose to test the taser.  If it is not operating correctly it should not be used and reported to your agency training officer. The big question is did the officers test their taser that day before beginning their shift and was the taser working properly?  I am sure the report down loaded for the taser will answer that question. 

Digital Pulse Control (DPC)  Digital Pulse Control (DPC)  Published: 3/12/2007 
An internal circuit including the microprocessor of the X26 and various support hardware. When the X26 is fired, the DPC measures the time between each shaped pulse discharged from the device. The DPC then regulates the power throughput of the pulse generator to maintain a constant pulse rate.   In previous generation pulse energy weapons such as the M26, the pulse rate of the weapon would vary greatly depending on battery conditions. Particularly, in colder weather, the pulse rate could slow dramatically as battery performance decreased. The DPC in the X26 adjusts power consumption to compensate for changes in environmental conditions in order to maintain a constant pulse rate, and therefore consistent incapacitation performance, across a broad temperature range from - 4 degrees F (- 20 degrees C) to 122 degrees F (50 degrees C). The DPC automatically delivers a 5-second burst for each pull of the trigger. The DPC uses a constant pulse rate for optimal performance.

http://www.taser.com/research/technology/Pages/DigitalPulseControl.aspx

I went to FCN.com yesteday to the latest story that was broadcast.  They have a place where you can comment on stories and they actually require you to "Be Polite"

I was, went in and commented on the discussion that was going on here and then I asked a couple of questions.  One about the number of tasers that were used that day, and the other was a question regarding the proper functioning of the tasers, did they know, if so why was it not reported. If they did not know could they please look into that so the reporting would not appear to be biased.

Those comment sites have their own little codes you have to enter to comment, I wish I had kept track of what my numbers were because when I went there this morning to see, hoping they may have responded. 

Much to my surprise my comments have dissapeared.  I have now written an email to the Reporter who did the last story and asked the questions again.  In the 16yrs that I have lived in Clay County I have contacted FCN perhaps half a dozen times over different things.  Not once, not ever, have they responded.  I am not optomistic about a response this time either.

It does make a person wonder. 

Quote: Again, that's just me. You don't have to agree but you also don't have to attack either.

I thought I was speaking my piece. If, by chance, you took this as an attack on you, that was not the intent.  Merely counting the cost of performance.

As to term limits, I am all for them.

As to Tasers, hmmmm, seems with a gun or a billy club, you know they are going to hurt and have an extended effect.  The Taser, the effects seem to be short term or permanent.  How do you weigh that option, and moreover, is there a way for a cop to know what the effect will be?  Just food for thought.

Semi, no I didn't mean to imply you're post was an attack. I agree with most of your points. I apologize because I have noticed I am not nearly as clear anymore, in my writings as I think I am. I supose I was only trying to fend off a potential attack in reply to what i wrote. I am getting more  and more muddled as time goes by.

On a seondary point, yes, it might seem to be cost effective to keep authoritarian figures in positions of power longer than 5 years but I truly don't think that is what's best for them or the citizenry. There is way too much potential for another Rodney King exploit the longer they are allowed to stay in their jobs specifically because they become so inured to lousy people that everyone automatically becomes a thug in their eyes and not an onnocent victim. Again, ask any police officer what he thinks of the public after 5 years of service.

Lily's Lore "I don't ever want to be rescued And I don't ever want to be saved I got a feelin' that I'm gonna be alive forever Dancin' on the edge of a grave..." Jim Steinman