Police taser 10 year old.

[StBishop]

You really think a grown man, trained to 'serve and protect' and to keep order, should resort to using a tazer when assaulted by a freaking 10-year old girl?

While tazers are generally considered non-lethal weapons, there have been a number of cases where people have died or have suffered serious physical injury as a result of a tazer hit. What kind of idiot uses one of those to take down a little girl? I bet the cop felt like a real man after that...

I'm not saying the cop is to take the full blame. Obviously the mother is chiefly responsible for the whole situation. But as I said, there's no reason to resort to a weapon like that against a tantruming little girl.

What's next? Using pepperspray on noisy babies?

I'm sorry but I think this is wholy uncalled for.

First: I think that the cop has done nothing wrong.

Second: If the appropriate authorities in the area have deemed a taser as appropriate equipment for a police officer then he's well within his rights to use it to subdue anyone, within reason.

Third: Where are you given the impression that the cop in some way enjoyed this experience. Personally I wouldn't have enjoyed being kicked in the groin. Furthermore; if I had a taser and got kicked in the groin I'd tase who ever did it regardless, I'm also not a cop.

Fourth: I don't think we're all right to jump to blaming the parent, sure this could possibly been avoided if the child was raised differently but who's to say the mother hasn't done the best she could have with what she was given. Sure, she probably didn't but how many of you that blame her are parents yourselves? How many of you know what it's like raising a child?

Fifth: She broke the law (Assault of a police officer), she deserves to be arrested. She was unable to be arrested. She was subdued in a State-Approved manner. Case closed. On top of it all the mother (although this was probably bad judgment) gave the officer permission to use his taser.

Sixth: Babies are too young to make concious decisions, 10 year olds are not. In the state of
Queensland (Australia) a 10 year old has pretty much the final say in things such as which parent they live unless one of them is deemed by a court to be unable to care for the child. (ie. The child would be removed from their care regardless of any other circumstance due to lack of safety etc.) This law may apply to other States and Territories in Australia too but I'm not confident enough in that to rely upon it in an argument.

I'm sure there're other problems I have with things you and others said, but hey, you have to stop nit picking some time.

Don't take it personally.

 

[traceur_]

That's pretty funny. I've totally lost count of how many times I wished I could have done that to those little shits throwing a tantrum in a shopping centre.

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

[rant]

I'd agree with what you said if she wasn't 10 years old. I don't care if they have the right to choose where they live (which isn't even comparable), you just don't use such weapons against a little girl. That's excessive use of force no matter what way you twist the story.

And because apparently you missed it, the "I bet the cop felt like a real man after that." was sarcastic.

 

[Kranay]

What's wrong with a bit of shock therapy?

 

[teisjm]

First of all: what kind of retarded parents calls the police when their unruly child won't showe rand go to bed?

second of all: what kind of retarded police stations answers such a call.

and last but not least, how's an officer gonna be able to handle criminals if he/she cannot handle a 10 year old girl without tasing her.

This is indeed a victory for stupidity.

The Officer did not wish to accidently break her hands or arms when attempting to subdue her, which would be quite easy considering she is a 10 year old girls, electricity in a short burst is probably slightly safer. lol

you can easily hold persons of that size without breaking anything, as long as you just hold them, the only way they're gonan break is if they've got enough streangth and stubborn-ness to break their own arms.

Isn't it illegal for the police to use force, and especially weapons, against someone who has done nothing illegal in the first place?
I don't know about (whereever this story is from, i've forgotten) But in Denmark where i live, theres no law stating that 10 year olds must go to bed when their parents tell them to do so.
If i had been the police officer i would've told that retard of a mom to STFU and learn how to raise her child. Cause it certainly ain't the polices job to tug 10 year olds in.

 

[SmartIdiot]

So glad I saw this post before some of the more... dickheaded responses. It just about sums it up. Only thing I have to add is if this persons child was out of control and they couldn't handle it they've failed royally as a parent. You don't let your kids call the shots. Second, any policeman who can't handle a 10 year old girl without using a taser is absolutely fucking pathetic and shouldn't be a cop in the first place. How the fuck are they expected to tackle real criminals?!

Okay people, heres the deal. There is absolutely no good way to fight a 10 year old girl. Besides the whole ridiculous amounts of manic energy, they're just old enough to know how to fight dirty, and young and cute enough to make it where any decent man would have severe trouble punching her in the face. The cop had only 2 other choices: nightstick, which would have lost him his badge by morning, or handcuffs, which are most definitely NOT designed with little girls in mind. This whole thing was just messed up from the beginning.

So... what are you saying exactly?

 

[Maze1125]

Second: If the appropriate authorities in the area have deemed a taser as appropriate equipment for a police officer then he's well within his rights to use it to subdue anyone, within reason.

Yes.
And it is not the slightest bit reasonable to taser a ten year old.

Fourth: I don't think we're all right to jump to blaming the parent, sure this could possibly been avoided if the child was raised differently but who's to say the mother hasn't done the best she could have with what she was given. Sure, she probably didn't but how many of you that blame her are parents yourselves? How many of you know what it's like raising a child?

I do.
And I say that woman is an abusive and neglectful ***** who should be locked up and there is absolutely no way she did the best she could have.

 

[SnipErlite]

Crap parenting, but I see why he used the taser - under assault from someone. Depends just how violent and whatnot she was whether the age factor should some onto it.

=]

Its a 10 year old. What kind of damage can she possibly do to a fully trained cop?

Who knows? Depends on the 10 year old

But really, that parenting is POOR

=]

 

[funguy2121]

All of you who think that sparing the rod is spoiling the child seem to be not applying any logic at all to this simple fact: if indeed the laws return to the 50's, pre-child's bill of rights, and a good ol' fashioned parent can once more smacketh the crap out of their unruly little urchin (which will never ever happen in a developed country), what's to stop all the mommies and daddies who break bones?

Violence is for the weak of mind. You train your children to be weak of mind when you train them by keeping them in line with any violence. Besides, there are much more effective means of punishment.

Given that violent crime, frequency of youth gangs and the frequency of crimes committed by a youth have risen substantially since the 50's are you really sure our 'More Effective' methods are actually working?

Three words: ARE THEY FUCK!

Take your pick...

Australia [http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/violent-youth-crime-on-the-rise/story-e6frg8y6-1111116956513]

United Kingdom [http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/may/16/ukcrime.gender]

Canada [http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/story.html?id=f5d98397-fd07-4b97-94e6-cbd6fb1ee1cd]

United States Of America [http://social.jrank.org/pages/1252/Violent-Crime-Murder-Youth-Growing-Up.html]


Please could you give examples of these 'More effective means of punishment' and show us how all how children are all so much better behaved now. Demonstrate this by finding statistics of how youth-related crime as dropped since the abolishment of the practise of giving a good 'ol clip round the ear...

Please show us some of this Logic you speak of...

No, I won't follow your guidelines to prove my point. People are poor and desperate, and they respond with crime, violent or otherwise. This happens everywhere. It happens more when daddy rapes his daughter or beats the fuck outta his wife and son. If you doubt that then you certainly aren't a fan of statistics. Children raised in a home with both the carrot and the (preverbial) stick, without the threat of violence, grow up to be well-adjusted adults. Kids raised with the threat of fear and violence grow up to project that violence onto others.

 

[Pyro Paul]

you can easily hold persons of that size without breaking anything, as long as you just hold them, the only way they're gonan break is if they've got enough streangth and stubborn-ness to break their own arms.

acctually a combative individual of that age, you're more likely to cause grevious bodily harm through forceful detainment. 65-100 lbs of dead weight caused by twisting, jerking, or intentionally imbalancing onesself put on a lot of stress on the still developing bone and can easily snap it.

it really isn't that the guy is too strong, it is that the childs body is physically weaker.

and before you go saying that is bull, Dislocated arms is one of the more prevalient less-than-10 year old injuries in the US. commonly this is caused when a parent, naturally much stronger, pulls the child one way while the child jerks themselves the other way.

 

[Maze1125]

and before you go saying that is bull, Dislocated arms is one of the more prevalient less-than-10 year old injuries in the US. commonly this is caused when a parent, naturally much stronger, pulls the child one way while the child jerks themselves the other way.

A dislocated arm is a very minor injury that, although may be painful, is unlikely to cause permanent brain damage, and is very rarely caused by restraining a child and more often caused by playing games. It is also quite different to breaking a bone.

So, yes, the overall claim you are making is still utter poppycock.

 

[fuzzball]

So to counter this her own mother called the police.

The mother should have her parenting license taken away.
Next.

When the police arrived, the girl's mother give one of the men permission to use his taser on the girl if he really needed to.

The mother should be arrested for being a stupid *****.
Next.

the police man couldn't restrain her. She even went as far as kicking him in the groin.

The police officer should be fired for being an incompetent fuck.
The girl should be arrested for assaulting an officer of the law (incompetent fuck though he is.)
Next.

It was at this point, the officer delivered a quick stun to her back by using his taser.

The police officer should be arrested for his complete fucking incompetence.
Then fired.

Done.

The cop will not be fired, when you call the police how they act in restraining a criminal is the cop's discretion, plus the cop was incompetent, if the girl got ahold of a knife then the child would be a huge danger to everyone, and he also did not want to break her arm or hands with restraining her.

Actually, "how they act in restraining a criminal" is *not* at their discretion. There are certain chokeholds and techniques that cops are FORBIDDEN to use to arrest a suspect, and, more importantly, if how the cop subdues a suspect is really at his/her discretion, there wouldn't be such a thing as police brutality, genius.

Well of course you can't strangle the suspect, but its at the disgression how they want to correctly restrain a suspect, the decision to use a taser, or restrain them with a proper hold is to the polices disgression when you call them

 

[fuzzball]

First of all: what kind of retarded parents calls the police when their unruly child won't showe rand go to bed?

second of all: what kind of retarded police stations answers such a call.

and last but not least, how's an officer gonna be able to handle criminals if he/she cannot handle a 10 year old girl without tasing her.

This is indeed a victory for stupidity.

The Officer did not wish to accidently break her hands or arms when attempting to subdue her, which would be quite easy considering she is a 10 year old girls, electricity in a short burst is probably slightly safer. lol

you can easily hold persons of that size without breaking anything, as long as you just hold them, the only way they're gonan break is if they've got enough streangth and stubborn-ness to break their own arms.



Isn't it illegal for the police to use force, and especially weapons, against someone who has done nothing illegal in the first place?
I don't know about (whereever this story is from, i've forgotten) But in Denmark where i live, theres no law stating that 10 year olds must go to bed when their parents tell them to do so.
If i had been the police officer i would've told that retard of a mom to STFU and learn how to raise her child. Cause it certainly ain't the polices job to tug 10 year olds in.

She did do something illegal, assaulting a police office, and there were probably other domestic laws she was breaking or maybe was close to breaking. And of course it is easy to restrain someone of that size, but if you are restraining someone you do have to apply a large amount of force on certain points of their body and it is quite easy for them to hurt themselves, and that 10 year old girl is probably fragile and crazy enough to hurt herself, if on purpose or accidental by struggling

 

[fuzzball]

The cop will not be fired, when you call the police how they act in restraining a criminal is the cop's disgression, plus the cop was incompetent, if the girl got ahold of a knife then the child would be a huge danger to everyone, and he also did not want to break her arm or hands with restraining her.

Of course he won't be fired, but he should be.
He is, to rehash, fucking incompetent.

He couldn't restrain a little girl?
Are you fucking kidding me?
He shouldn't be allowed to mop floors for a living.

He could have restrained her, but the girl was so restless that he probably would have restrained her and she would have injured herself trying to escape.

 

[thevillageidiot13]

let me re-iterate. anything considered "unnecessary force" can be considered police brutality.

 

[funguy2121]

All of you who think that sparing the rod is spoiling the child seem to be not applying any logic at all to this simple fact: if indeed the laws return to the 50's, pre-child's bill of rights, and a good ol' fashioned parent can once more smacketh the crap out of their unruly little urchin (which will never ever happen in a developed country), what's to stop all the mommies and daddies who break bones?

Violence is for the weak of mind. You train your children to be weak of mind when you train them by keeping them in line with any violence. Besides, there are much more effective means of punishment.

Given that violent crime, frequency of youth gangs and the frequency of crimes committed by a youth have risen substantially since the 50's are you really sure our 'More Effective' methods are actually working?

Three words: ARE THEY FUCK!

Take your pick...

Australia [http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/violent-youth-crime-on-the-rise/story-e6frg8y6-1111116956513]

United Kingdom [http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/may/16/ukcrime.gender]

Canada [http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/story.html?id=f5d98397-fd07-4b97-94e6-cbd6fb1ee1cd]

United States Of America [http://social.jrank.org/pages/1252/Violent-Crime-Murder-Youth-Growing-Up.html]


Please could you give examples of these 'More effective means of punishment' and show us how all how children are all so much better behaved now. Demonstrate this by finding statistics of how youth-related crime as dropped since the abolishment of the practise of giving a good 'ol clip round the ear...

Please show us some of this Logic you speak of...

There is a greater frequency of reported crimes, because the "good ol' boy" theory has been largely rejected. Overpopulation and white flight and the misguided drug war (read: CIA drug trade) have flooded the inner cities with desperate, impoverished, drug-addicted people. Laws that are completely imbalanced will send someone with enough weed to prison for longer than a child-molester, where that person will learn to play the race war game or lose his anal virginity, then be released to the streets, once more desperate and broke.

The rise of an intellectual approach to child-rearing in lieu of smacking them around has done literally nothing to promote violent crime. However, the rise of sperm and egg donation combined with near-total abandonment has contributed possibly more than anything else.

A child raised with love, and shown both carrot and (preverbial) stick from a very early age, will grow into a much better adjusted adult than one who has the shit beat out of him/her. I remember I always feared my Mom locking up the video games far more than spanking me.

Besides, my argument was about abuse, and you strayed off into crime territory. What about parental abuse?

 

[fuzzball]

He could have restrained her, but the girl was so restless that he probably would have restrained her and she would have injured herself trying to escape.

I...I can't even get over how ridiculous this entire situation is.

I'm not saying you shouldn't electrocute small children; god no.
But seriously: I have restrained people before.
I have restrained people who were actively trying to cause me harm.
I am not a police officer.

There is no reason I can hold down a murderous person my size and he can't hold down a small child without hurting it.

lol maybe he barely passed his restraining small children exam