Poll: The Officer Who Tased a Handicapped Person?

[Jinx_Dragon]

Its been posted but to cap:

The shot is being taken from inside, so we can not hear what is being said outside, and through the glass is a guy with his hands up and a police officer with his taser drawn. The officer is saying something, likely telling the guy to turn around but he isn't moving at all. Then the officer pulls the trigger and tasers him, knocking him to the ground.

While he struggles under the volts the officer begins to kick the guy. By now the camera-man has moved outside and we can hear the officer giving orders for the man to stay still. The tasering stops and the man just lays there for a few moments while the police officer puts a foot on his back then places his hands on the cement beside him.

The officer informs the man not to get up while putting more pressure on his back, the man starts to speak and it is at this moment we can tell he is of diminished capacity as his speech is on par with down-syndrome. I won't rule this as handicapped myself, he could just be very drunk, but it is clear he is not all there mentally. The officer gives more orders and the man compiles, after a minute the officer feels comfortable enough to handcuff the guy while witnesses just stand around....

Mostly making the same arguments people are here.

In closing: The camera man is a dick!

 

[Vivi22]

I'm assuming you've never been tased or sprayed. I would take a taser any day, over the misery that is being maced/oc sprayed.

This really doesn't have anything to do with the argument Dags90 was making. The court stated that their needed to be immediate threat. This does not mean refusing to comply with an order given by a police officer. It means that someone, either the officer or another person, is at risk of immediate physical harm from this person. That was clearly not the case in the video as he wasn't even moving.

Also, you need to keep in mind that Taser's can kill people. How do you know the guy you're hitting with it doesn't have a heart condition or other medical problem which makes it far more likely they will die when the officer pulls the trigger. Mace isn't going to kill someone and will give an officer the edge needed to subdue them in all but the most extreme cases.

Also, even if the officer had had room to walk around, there's no guarantee the officer wouldn't get a struggle then either, after all, he's already shown he's willing to ignore police orders.

Again, the man was not presenting a threat. Use of force that can be potentially lethal is not justified unless the man is an immediate threat. He could have tried to walk around him. He could have called for backup. He could have done any number of things other than pulling the trigger and hoping the guy doesn't die. Police Officers are one of the few groups of people who are given government sanctioned control over who lives and who dies. They need to be held to the absolute highest standard imaginable if they're going to wield that power responsibly.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

Cut

Thank you, a lot of people here are missing a huge point: Even if it is an intermediate weapon, which I will argue it is not but lets say it is, then it is still force far out-balancing the risk! The nature of the weapon doesn't matter, by their own use of force continuum the officers response in this situation was not justified. The man was somewhere between compliance and non-resistance and that does not justify use of a weapon.

Also, we don't know what was being said before the camera man came out of the building. This man could easily been asking the police why he was being arrested and demanding an answer, one that has to be given, and was not being given one. In that case he doesn't even fall into the non-resisting part as he hasn't even given a verbal reason to think he would resist. Hell, if they want to accept the argument the cop was telling the guy to turn around then we have to accept the possibility the man was simply asking why he was being held at taser point.

For this reason we have to go what we see: And we see a man with his arms up, not violently resisting, being tasered.

 

[Navvan]

Well I can't really make a conclusion based on the video of whether the officer was in the right or wrong. What I can tell you is that the cameraman is an ass. He wanted the guy to be tased, not in the sense of enjoying the tasing itself, but so that he could post a sensational video condemning law enforcement. I find that disturbing in itself. If he actually knew the individual then he could have prevented the incident by helping him understand the commands rather than what he did. If he just "knew of him" cause its a small town then I wouldn't take him as very credible in a character assessment.

Taser guidelines are not as clear cut as some people think they are, and I think incidents like this point to more to needing a consistent structure with less flexibility rather than actual police power abuse. Even if you dislike police you have to acknowledge that their job is both dangerous and unpredictable. Them exercising extreme caution for their own safety isn't abuse, its self preservation. While incidents of abuse certainly do exist most of what people cite is not.If someone is not complying (as this man seemed to not be) that can be grounds for taser use. Especially if the the individual is larger than the officer or has a weapon.

Edit: I do not think the officer should have acted the way he did based upon my loose understanding of the situation. He should have remained where he was with the taser pointed, called for another officer and continue issuing the command until compliance. There are likely details I'm missing however.

 

[Kendell Cambridge]

It looks like a bit too much, but I don't feel like I can say for sure since we don't know what actually happened.
But that cameraman is really being a jerk. "I hope he gets tased. If he gets tased it's going on YouTube."

Seriously?

At his point I can't say for sure whether the guy or the officer is at fault here, but I can say you were too nice in your description. I hope the cameraguy gets tased in the balls for being that much of a dick. There is no excuse he could give for being such a twat

 

[I.N.producer]

The taser wasn't exactly necessary. You guys can say that he was resisting all you want, but passive resistance is not a threat. No threat or active resistance, i.e. running, no need for a taser. The officer could have circled around him with the taser drawn and cuffed him. If he did have a concealed weapon, it would have taken longer to draw it than for the officer to pull the trigger. Even if it is standard protocol, protocol doesn't mean it's right.

Also, what was going on with the cameraman constantly saying, "don't hit me," since he obviously wasn't being hit? I say obviously since there was no noticeable jarring of the camera. At most, he was probably tapped on the shoulder. Seems like he was trying to be the center of attention.

The cameraman was way worse than the officer, especially since he starts talking about arresting some lady because she spoke to him. He even yells at her from the beginning even though she's talking calmly. What a jackass. At least for the officer, there's a chance we aren't getting the whole story.

 

[Nouw]

Couldn't you supply a link or a backstory or ANYTHING?

I can't form an opinion until I know what happened.

I read that as 'onion' and realized that it may be fake.

 

[Zhukov]

I saw the video.

Fuck that cop. Fuck him where it hurts. That wasn't anywhere near justified.

Guy holding the camera was being a prick as well.

 

[Korolev]

Tasers or stun-devices are not inherently bad, but they are often abused by officers. In Queensland, our police have tasers - but they also have cameras attached to tasers. Arming the taser to fire also starts the camera - so anytime they use a taser, there is footage of how they used the taser and who they used it on. I think that system should be used in the US. I have nothing against giving police the tools they need to do their job - but we should also monitor how they use those tools and weapons to ensure they don't commit crimes of their own.

If a police officer is honest, they'd have no trouble with being monitored. Put cameras they can't turn off in their vehicles and weapons, and make sure the footage is handled and reviewed by people OUTSIDE the police departments. If the cops aren't bad, they shouldn't have a problem with being watched. If you are given additional power and authority, you have to accept additional responsibilities and surveillance.

 

[sky14kemea]

If you've seen this video and have heard of what happened.....how do you feel about this?

Please post more information when making threads like this. Maybe an article about it? Also remember to link to your sources.

 

[Brutal Peanut]

I only have enough information on this subject to say one thing - the cameraman was a complete asshole.

 

[Kombatkid123]

Sorry about not posting the link guys, I didn't know if I was allowed to do that on an Escapist thread :/ One of the forums I used to use deleted accounts that pasted links to other sites on it