<!--QuoteBegin-Transmission+Jun 16 2005, 07:22 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Transmission @ Jun 16 2005, 07:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If we assume that the first use of the taser was justified, why did he feel the need to use the taser again after she was on the ground. At that point, she was either in shock or pain, and most likely very scared. When they asked her to put her hands behind her back, and she yelled that she couldn't, it's most likely true that she was not able to.
I highly doubt that she was still attempting to resist, as she was probably scared out of her mind. The officier, however, decides that she is still a danger, and shocks her again.
What possible reasoning was behind the second shot? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I hate to quote myself, but while people have unlimited ammounts of support for the cop's first tasering, nobody mentions anything about the second shot. Only at the second shot do we see how trigger happy this officer was, and it seems all defense of actions stops there from those who think that the "piece of trashed" deserved it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I hate to quote myself, but while people have unlimited ammounts of support for the cop's first tasering, nobody mentions anything about the second shot. Only at the second shot do we see how trigger happy this officer was, and it seems all defense of actions stops there from those who think that the "piece of trashed" deserved it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
alright..
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If we assume that the first use of the taser was justified, why did he feel the need to use the taser again after she was on the ground. At that point, she was either in shock or pain, and most likely very scared. When they asked her to put her hands behind her back, and she yelled that she couldn't, it's most likely true that she was not able to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He explains why she was tased the second time "... is telling her to roll over and put her hands behind her back. She doesn't comply, and recieves another five second tase"
He will continue to tase as long as the suspect is resisting (be it passively or actively), and will give them a chance to comply between each burst.
If you've seen the instructional videos where tasers are used on officers, you'll notice that they regain full muscular control immediately after the tasing stops, as shown by many of the officers hopping right up. It is well within the relm of possibility to roll over and put your hands behind your back after a tasing.
It is possible that she was so physically out of shape that she could not have put her arms behind her back, (although she most likely could have rolled over), it's a judgement call. Far more likely, however, is that she was just bewildered about what just happened and she just <i>said</i> she couldn't do it.
What in the hell is wrong with you people? These police officers don't just do this **** once every couple of years you know, they're on the street all the goddamned time and they know that you can't trust anybody by their appearance. They also have lives, and FAMILIES FFS! Which one of you wants to be the one to tell that officer's wife and child that their father was killed by a raving lunatic SUV driving **** because he was "courageous" and tried to "pull her out of the car like a man" and got stabbed in the process.
Christ on a pogo stick... cops are just like most other people, they want to live to see retirement and that lousy pension that is their reward for PUTTING THEIR LIFE ON THE LINE TO PROTECT YOU every single day. Despite what you may think its not courageous to risk your life and you're family's wellbeing over some stupid crazy **** on a cell phone.
Put yourself in those shoes and tell me you wouldn't use the taser.
No kidding, man! You guys are arguing stuff that is EXPLAINED IN THE SERGEANTS DIALOG. Get all the information first before you start howling foul play.
CplDavisI hunt the arctic SnonosJoin Date: 2003-01-09Member: 12097Members
<!--QuoteBegin-BukakkeSake+Jun 16 2005, 04:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BukakkeSake @ Jun 16 2005, 04:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The trained police officer whoever it is, is biased. The trained officer would have to agree that there has been alot of uncertainty around the taser. Do a search on the internet and read the first 10 articles. hell type in Taser Deaths and see what you get. The trained officer cannot deny the amount of deaths associated with tasers, ...
I think the trained police officer is just trying to protect his own. He obviously is looking at this very one wayed.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> If you read my posts I either tried to explain policies in general or I stated that the actions taken in the video were justified under current US law.
As I stated before, if you want to be mad at someone, be mad at the US constitution and ths surpreme court.
If I dont like the way a Big Mac tastes, Im not going to blame the guy who did his job and made it according to the way the McDonalds managment dictates, Ill blame the idiot who made that burger recipe and had it implimented.
Im not trying to talk here out of bias but out of expirience.
If you want to talk about bias I could very easily say that you yourself are biased the other way around b.c of the expirience that you say your brother had with the police.
Do you know how many lives (including the bad guys) have been saved b/c the officer was able to use a TASER to subue a man with a knife etc were the cop would have had to use his real gun instead had he not had a TASER?
As I said before many of the reports about TASERS are biased in themselves. Many law enforcment agencies including the Federal law enforcment agencies are still buying and implimenting them. TASER also markets a civilian version out.
I cant tell you how much red tape and etc it takes to get stuff implimented into general useage in e law enforcment community. It took a lot to get the TASER implimented and classifed as a tool in the same group as peppersray and not a firearm.
Anyways speaking of this origional situation..
It just so happened that someone who was under arrest tonight refused to get into the back of the cruiser. Same deal as the video basically, just different in the fact that we couldnt get someone in rather than out. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Thinking immediatly of this thread lol I counted in my head as the officer told the man in a calm polite but firm voice, "Sir please get in the car.... no less than 10 times.
At the 8th repititon and the suspect still would not get in the officer pulled out his can of pepperspray and warned the individual that if he did not sit in the car he would be peppersprayed. He then repeated this comment 4 more times.
The guy still said "(bad word) off!" The officer shook his spray and aimed it in the guys face ready to spray him and the guy suddenly gave in.
One second longer and he WOULD have been sprayed. Our department doesnt have TASERS b/c they are expensive and we dont really have the cash for them right now. But plans are in the making to possibly get some more. Only our tactical team has them. But had we had TASERS instead of spray it definitly would have been the TASER out there instead.
(once again peppersray and TASERS fall under the same catagory for when you can use them)
And you know what, it would have been totally justified. The man was short but pretty beefy. Had we tried to physically put him in there it most likely would have ended up ending with someone haveing somesort of physical injury. Either him geting his head unintentionally smashed into the side or a leg stuck in the door or something.
EpidemicDark Force GorgeJoin Date: 2003-06-29Member: 17781Members
edited June 2005
<!--QuoteBegin-Burncycle+Jun 16 2005, 04:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Burncycle @ Jun 16 2005, 04:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> It is possible that she was so physically out of shape that she could not have put her arms behind her back, (although she most likely could have rolled over), it's a judgement call. Far more likely, however, is that she was just bewildered about what just happened and she just <i>said</i> she couldn't do it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> She could have been in a shock, the screams she made was probably not from the psychical pain, there's so many possibilities.
- Merkabe said it better <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Transmission+Jun 17 2005, 04:59 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Transmission @ Jun 17 2005, 04:59 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I hate to quote myself, but while people have unlimited ammounts of support for the cop's first tasering, nobody mentions anything about the second shot. Only at the second shot do we see how trigger happy this officer was, and it seems all defense of actions stops there from those who think that the "piece of trashed" deserved it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> The second tasering is actually irrelevant until we have reached consensus about the first one. If the first one was justified, the second might have been so as well. If the first one was not, there is no way the second one can have been. So it all hinges on the first tasering, which is why that's the one we're focusing on.
*Draws Taser* "Ma'm get out of the car. I will tase you."
*Continues to talk*
"Ma'm get out of the car. I will tase you."
*Continues to talk*
"Ma'm get out of the car. I will tase you."
*Continues to talk*
*Tase*
Theres no 'poor helpless woman' there. She had AMPLE TIME to get out. Even if she still was on the phone, the least she should have done was get out of the car. Failing those two, he drew, TOLD HER MANY TIMES that he was going to taser her, then did it. Bravo for him.
Yup. I think if the woman would have been tased once, then listened, and not howled like a total idiot about this absolutely massive pain that hardly exists, this disscussion wouldnt have happened. The officer did <i>nothing wrong,</i> but obviously people cant get that through their head.
When I was referring to the cops insensitivity, I'd like to withdraw that statement as I think I was more having a go at the general way the US policeforce operates rather than that particular person. Hardly surprising really as I live in a country where policemen aren't allowed to carry any sort of firearm, so scenes like that are rather scary to me.
Going back to my suggestion that this woman has the mentality of a little kid, think about how kids tend over overreact to any form of physical damage against them (like Peter Griffen falling down his water-slide stairs, banging his knee and then wailing for 5 minutes. "I'm not going to take you to the hospital because if I do you won't learn anything").
I live in France, I'm not used to seeing cops using violent actions, but then again the law's different here. We don't have live weaponry here, and people are smart enough to listen to orders. I don't live in a bad neighborhood so I can't say what's happening there. I'd say most of us here are in the same case.
Even if she thought the taser was a gun or something, why was she still talking on the phone saying "OGM HE'S GOING TO SHOOT ME" while the Cop is telling her to get out of the car or we'll tase you, 5 times.
She was overeacting when she was screaming. Kind of like those kids, the ones that likes attention, lets say bump into a wall slightly, then start crying loud and long, as if the kid was punched in the face by somebody who is twice their size.
Like everyone said, the cops were tased before, so they weren't like "OMG I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH PAIN IT DOES BUT LETS USE IT!"
Lets say you were the cop with the taser, and you've been in many situations like this, and heard sometimes some guy pulls out of a gun out of no where and start shooting, who seemed to be calmfully following police orders. Alright she is refusing to listen to you, she is talking on the phone, not getting out of the car, also was speeding and so, after you told her 5-6 times to get out or we will tase you. So do you want to risk getting shot and killed or your partner shot? Or do you want just to tase, little pain and paralyze? I'd guess you'd pick tase.
Ok there weren't many good options besides tasing, also it doesn't cause the victim to have long term damages. So point is, the cop did what was right for a situation like this. <b>Tasering her was one of the best options for the situation</b>.
The simple solution to this debate? Those arguing that excessive force was used have led sheltered lives, have absolutely NO concept of what people who aren't in their right mindset are capable of, and live in an idealistic utopian world with unicorns and gnomes. Except the reality is that mentally unstable people ready to snap at any moment are there, doing the unicorns while sucking off the gnomes with a gun in hand. There's no sense in arguing with people who say "This could have gone so much better if they would have just reasoned with this person!", as they have absolutely no real-life experience with people who have turned violent on a whim, nor do they have even the faintest concept of what police encounter over the course of their carreers in the way of human depravity. So just ignore them, and realize they live in a fantasy land that they're most likely very content with.
To everyone who says "Oh she obviously didn't have a weapon, he could see her hands"
I carry at knife at all times, unless I'm sleeping. It's useful for my profession. I have a knife (utility knife, but still a knife) on my keychain too. If I had been that woman, I would have been perfectly capable of stabbing that officer in the arm or chest if he chose to pull me out of the car, and he wouldn't have seen it coming.
Moreover, I guarantee if that had been a man that was tasered the vast majority of the arguments would never have happened.
<!--QuoteBegin-Haze+Jun 17 2005, 02:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Haze @ Jun 17 2005, 02:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Yup. I think if the woman would have been tased once, then listened, and not howled like a total idiot about this absolutely massive pain that hardly exists, this disscussion wouldnt have happened. The officer did <i>nothing wrong,</i> but obviously people cant get that through their head.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Have you ever been TASERed/electrocuted? IT HURTS A LOT.
Sake, you might have a point in your argument that tazers should not be used at all, but that isn't the cop's job. They are issued equipment and told when and how to use it, I really doubt that cop knew any statistics at all. The tazer was used properly and apropriately given the circumstance. It isn't the officer's job to do safety tests with his equimpent, it is his job to use it how and when he is told to.
<!--QuoteBegin-Dubbilex+Jun 18 2005, 04:33 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Dubbilex @ Jun 18 2005, 04:33 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Haze+Jun 17 2005, 02:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Haze @ Jun 17 2005, 02:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Yup. I think if the woman would have been tased once, then listened, and not howled like a total idiot about this absolutely massive pain that hardly exists, this disscussion wouldnt have happened. The officer did <i>nothing wrong,</i> but obviously people cant get that through their head.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Have you ever been TASERed/electrocuted? IT HURTS A LOT.
Trust me on this one. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I've been electrocuted a few times before (each lasting around 5-10 seconds), and it doesn't cause you to scream for 5 minutes. Also seriously, tasering her was the best option, read everyone's post to see why...
I've seen plenty of videos where the a person being pulled over speeds away/goes crazy/draws a weapon.
It doesn't matter how young the woman is, if she was rushing to her friend, if she got her liscence taken away because she had to speed to the circus to save eight kids from a 1 ton gorilla that knows martial arts, or if the person on her cell phone was in fact Jesus (which is the name of my friend's grandfather).
When the police ask you to do something, you do it. If you have some special circumstances, politely/calmly/non-obnoxiously plead and talk with them, and do what they tell you to for the time being. As a matter of fact, if she was rushing to the hospital, they would've been able to get her (and whoever she was rushing) into the police car, turn on the siren, and speed faster, safer, and completely legally to the destination.
If she had any sense, she'd realize police are there to protect and enforce, and that you should listen to them to avoid conflict. They're higher up in the social chain than you, and as an American citizen, you need to listen to the police.
Since she wasn't complying, she could've had multiple tricks up her sleeve, and been waiting for the right time/for the person on the phone to come to her aid. She could've flipped out, or done whatever. Don't say "WELL SHE DIDN'T", because she didn't have the opprotunity to.
If she didn't know not to listen to the police before, she knows now, and better then than in a potentially much more dangerous situation. She should've known it before, but whatever. We're not in some oppresive state, there's no KGB, and I can say Bush sucks all I want. Police take action against people that endanger other people.
The bottom line is LISTEN TO THE POLICE WHEN THEY TELL YOU TO DO SOMETHING. All she had to do was get out of the car, say "I'll call you back, been pulled over", hang up and get ticketed. She didn't, after multiple non-violent requests, so they used the taser. That's what happens. Not every civillian is peaceful.
Tasering = no damage resulte gun = ow baton = ow peper srap = ow but no damage and beating her = ow i would say asking her nicly wasnt enough what hapend to the days when you respsects the law?
Comments
I highly doubt that she was still attempting to resist, as she was probably scared out of her mind. The officier, however, decides that she is still a danger, and shocks her again.
What possible reasoning was behind the second shot? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hate to quote myself, but while people have unlimited ammounts of support for the cop's first tasering, nobody mentions anything about the second shot. Only at the second shot do we see how trigger happy this officer was, and it seems all defense of actions stops there from those who think that the "piece of trashed" deserved it.
alright..
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If we assume that the first use of the taser was justified, why did he feel the need to use the taser again after she was on the ground. At that point, she was either in shock or pain, and most likely very scared. When they asked her to put her hands behind her back, and she yelled that she couldn't, it's most likely true that she was not able to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He explains why she was tased the second time
"... is telling her to roll over and put her hands behind her back. She doesn't comply, and recieves another five second tase"
He will continue to tase as long as the suspect is resisting (be it passively or actively), and will give them a chance to comply between each burst.
If you've seen the instructional videos where tasers are used on officers, you'll notice that they regain full muscular control immediately after the tasing stops, as shown by many of the officers hopping right up. It is well within the relm of possibility to roll over and put your hands behind your back after a tasing.
It is possible that she was so physically out of shape that she could not have put her arms behind her back, (although she most likely could have rolled over), it's a judgement call. Far more likely, however, is that she was just bewildered about what just happened and she just <i>said</i> she couldn't do it.
Christ on a pogo stick... cops are just like most other people, they want to live to see retirement and that lousy pension that is their reward for PUTTING THEIR LIFE ON THE LINE TO PROTECT YOU every single day. Despite what you may think its not courageous to risk your life and you're family's wellbeing over some stupid crazy **** on a cell phone.
Put yourself in those shoes and tell me you wouldn't use the taser.
The trained police officer whoever it is, is biased. The trained officer would have to agree that there has been alot of uncertainty around the taser. Do a search on the internet and read the first 10 articles. hell type in Taser Deaths and see what you get. The trained officer cannot deny the amount of deaths associated with tasers, ...
I think the trained police officer is just trying to protect his own. He obviously is looking at this very one wayed.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you read my posts I either tried to explain policies in general or I stated that the actions taken in the video were justified under current US law.
As I stated before, if you want to be mad at someone, be mad at the US constitution and ths surpreme court.
If I dont like the way a Big Mac tastes, Im not going to blame the guy who did his job and made it according to the way the McDonalds managment dictates, Ill blame the idiot who made that burger recipe and had it implimented.
Im not trying to talk here out of bias but out of expirience.
If you want to talk about bias I could very easily say that you yourself are biased the other way around b.c of the expirience that you say your brother had with the police.
Do you know how many lives (including the bad guys) have been saved b/c the officer was able to use a TASER to subue a man with a knife etc were the cop would have had to use his real gun instead had he not had a TASER?
As I said before many of the reports about TASERS are biased in themselves. Many law enforcment agencies including the Federal law enforcment agencies are still buying and implimenting them. TASER also markets a civilian version out.
I cant tell you how much red tape and etc it takes to get stuff implimented into general useage in e law enforcment community. It took a lot to get the TASER implimented and classifed as a tool in the same group as peppersray and not a firearm.
Anyways speaking of this origional situation..
It just so happened that someone who was under arrest tonight refused to get into the back of the cruiser. Same deal as the video basically, just different in the fact that we couldnt get someone in rather than out.
<!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Thinking immediatly of this thread lol I counted in my head as the officer told the man in a calm polite but firm voice, "Sir please get in the car.... no less than 10 times.
At the 8th repititon and the suspect still would not get in the officer pulled out his can of pepperspray and warned the individual that if he did not sit in the car he would be peppersprayed. He then repeated this comment 4 more times.
The guy still said "(bad word) off!" The officer shook his spray and aimed it in the guys face ready to spray him and the guy suddenly gave in.
One second longer and he WOULD have been sprayed. Our department doesnt have TASERS b/c they are expensive and we dont really have the cash for them right now. But plans are in the making to possibly get some more. Only our tactical team has them. But had we had TASERS instead of spray it definitly would have been the TASER out there instead.
(once again peppersray and TASERS fall under the same catagory for when you can use them)
And you know what, it would have been totally justified. The man was short but pretty beefy. Had we tried to physically put him in there it most likely would have ended up ending with someone haveing somesort of physical injury. Either him geting his head unintentionally smashed into the side or a leg stuck in the door or something.
She could have been in a shock, the screams she made was probably not from the psychical pain, there's so many possibilities.
- Merkabe said it better <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
The second tasering is actually irrelevant until we have reached consensus about the first one. If the first one was justified, the second might have been so as well. If the first one was not, there is no way the second one can have been. So it all hinges on the first tasering, which is why that's the one we're focusing on.
"Ma'm step out of the car."
"No. I'm on the phone."
"Ma'm step out of the car."
*continues to talk*
"Ma'm step out of the car."
*continues to talk*
"Ma'm put the phone down NOW."
*continues to talk*
*Draws Taser* "Ma'm get out of the car. I will tase you."
*Continues to talk*
"Ma'm get out of the car. I will tase you."
*Continues to talk*
"Ma'm get out of the car. I will tase you."
*Continues to talk*
*Tase*
Theres no 'poor helpless woman' there. She had AMPLE TIME to get out. Even if she still was on the phone, the least she should have done was get out of the car. Failing those two, he drew, TOLD HER MANY TIMES that he was going to taser her, then did it. Bravo for him.
Going back to my suggestion that this woman has the mentality of a little kid, think about how kids tend over overreact to any form of physical damage against them (like Peter Griffen falling down his water-slide stairs, banging his knee and then wailing for 5 minutes. "I'm not going to take you to the hospital because if I do you won't learn anything").
I don't live in a bad neighborhood so I can't say what's happening there. I'd say most of us here are in the same case.
She was overeacting when she was screaming. Kind of like those kids, the ones that likes attention, lets say bump into a wall slightly, then start crying loud and long, as if the kid was punched in the face by somebody who is twice their size.
Like everyone said, the cops were tased before, so they weren't like "OMG I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH PAIN IT DOES BUT LETS USE IT!"
Lets say you were the cop with the taser, and you've been in many situations like this, and heard sometimes some guy pulls out of a gun out of no where and start shooting, who seemed to be calmfully following police orders. Alright she is refusing to listen to you, she is talking on the phone, not getting out of the car, also was speeding and so, after you told her 5-6 times to get out or we will tase you. So do you want to risk getting shot and killed or your partner shot? Or do you want just to tase, little pain and paralyze? I'd guess you'd pick tase.
Ok there weren't many good options besides tasing, also it doesn't cause the victim to have long term damages. So point is, the cop did what was right for a situation like this.
<b>Tasering her was one of the best options for the situation</b>.
Those arguing that excessive force was used have led sheltered lives, have absolutely NO concept of what people who aren't in their right mindset are capable of, and live in an idealistic utopian world with unicorns and gnomes. Except the reality is that mentally unstable people ready to snap at any moment are there, doing the unicorns while sucking off the gnomes with a gun in hand. There's no sense in arguing with people who say "This could have gone so much better if they would have just reasoned with this person!", as they have absolutely no real-life experience with people who have turned violent on a whim, nor do they have even the faintest concept of what police encounter over the course of their carreers in the way of human depravity. So just ignore them, and realize they live in a fantasy land that they're most likely very content with.
I carry at knife at all times, unless I'm sleeping. It's useful for my profession. I have a knife (utility knife, but still a knife) on my keychain too. If I had been that woman, I would have been perfectly capable of stabbing that officer in the arm or chest if he chose to pull me out of the car, and he wouldn't have seen it coming.
Moreover, I guarantee if that had been a man that was tasered the vast majority of the arguments would never have happened.
Have you ever been TASERed/electrocuted? IT HURTS A LOT.
Trust me on this one.
Have you ever been TASERed/electrocuted? IT HURTS A LOT.
Trust me on this one. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've been electrocuted a few times before (each lasting around 5-10 seconds), and it doesn't cause you to scream for 5 minutes. Also seriously, tasering her was the best option, read everyone's post to see why...
It doesn't matter how young the woman is, if she was rushing to her friend, if she got her liscence taken away because she had to speed to the circus to save eight kids from a 1 ton gorilla that knows martial arts, or if the person on her cell phone was in fact Jesus (which is the name of my friend's grandfather).
When the police ask you to do something, you do it. If you have some special circumstances, politely/calmly/non-obnoxiously plead and talk with them, and do what they tell you to for the time being. As a matter of fact, if she was rushing to the hospital, they would've been able to get her (and whoever she was rushing) into the police car, turn on the siren, and speed faster, safer, and completely legally to the destination.
If she had any sense, she'd realize police are there to protect and enforce, and that you should listen to them to avoid conflict. They're higher up in the social chain than you, and as an American citizen, you need to listen to the police.
Since she wasn't complying, she could've had multiple tricks up her sleeve, and been waiting for the right time/for the person on the phone to come to her aid. She could've flipped out, or done whatever. Don't say "WELL SHE DIDN'T", because she didn't have the opprotunity to.
If she didn't know not to listen to the police before, she knows now, and better then than in a potentially much more dangerous situation. She should've known it before, but whatever. We're not in some oppresive state, there's no KGB, and I can say Bush sucks all I want. Police take action against people that endanger other people.
The bottom line is LISTEN TO THE POLICE WHEN THEY TELL YOU TO DO SOMETHING. All she had to do was get out of the car, say "I'll call you back, been pulled over", hang up and get ticketed. She didn't, after multiple non-violent requests, so they used the taser. That's what happens. Not every civillian is peaceful.
I do not agree with the second.