Have you ever wondered if your bulletproof vest could defeat a TASER? Since our agency began issuing the TASER X-26, we have conducted many voluntary exposures. Recently, we had an officer take a hit while wearing his full uniform which included his concealable body armor from Point Blank. Everyone was interested to see if the TASER would penetrate the vest.
In this test, the volunteer was shot in the back and both probes impacted him in the rear panel of his vest. Both probes penetrated the body armor and the officer received what he described as full incapacitation. The instructor observed the officer’s legs moving, as if he were trying to run, so the instructor administered a drive stun on the officer’s leg. After the exposure, the officer advised that he did not feel the drive stun because he was already locked up. Both probes had to be removed from the body armor with a pair of pliers. The officer advised that he could feel the sharp points from both probes sticking into his skin, indicating that the probes went all the way through the layers of bullet resistant material.
In late 2007, Gregory Schultz (with G2 Consulting in Tucson, Arizona) received a U. S. Patent for his invention “ThorShield”. ThorShield is a 3-layer fabric that consists of outer layers of non-conductive material, with a conductive layer in the middle. Basically, the inner layer of conductive material completes the connection between the two probes and dissipates the electricity so the wearer is not incapacitated. This works because electricity follows the path of least resistance, and the conductive material passes the current much easier than the human body.
ThorShield is flexible and lightweight, so it can be used to make any type of clothing, but recently G2 entered into an exclusive agreement with Point Blank. Point Blank is sewing ThorShield material against the inner lining of their vest carriers, giving your vest the ability to defeat a Taser. Of course, Point Blank is offering this protection as an upgrade. PACA Body Armor products are also available with ThorShield under this agreement.
While ThorShield is currently only available to law enforcement and military, I have already seen websites sharing the “secrets” of this technology to criminals. Everything from putting aluminum duct tape on the inside of a jacket, to sewing metal screening on the inside of a jump suit, to the wearing of chain mail under clothing. This seems like a lot of trouble for a criminal to go to, just to protect against the chance of an officer using a TASER on them. Maybe all of this extra weight will keep the criminals from jumping so many dang fences during a foot chase!
TASERs offer a good option for officers, but remember that even without a suspect equipped with ThorShield, your TASER may fail. Whether it is due to the suspect wearing thick clothing that keeps the probes far enough from their body to keep the electricity from arcing or just one of your probes not connecting, at some point your TASER will fail. Be prepared by training for failure and being ready to transition to another force option.
For more information about TASERs, check out our previous posts on this subject:
Riding the Lightning
The TASER Generation: Issues for New Police Officers
Before the Storm: My decision making process for taking a TASER hit
The TASER Generation: Solutions for New Police Officers
Defeating the Taser in Combat
Related posts:
- Spartan Cops Interviews ThorShield Inventor, Greg Schultz During my research on “Defeating the Taser in Combat”, I...
- Three Months It has been three months since we started Spartan Cops....
- 10 things police officers should always do Last week I listed 10 things police officers should never...
- Ever buy a SWAT rock?: Functional police gear vs the CDI factor At a K9 seminar a handler was going through...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 18 comments… read them below or add one }
In the words of Billy Ed Hatfield, criminals is stupid. They haven’t put much thought into this “defeating the taser” thing. I guess it’s not their fault they don’t understand the force continuum and realize that when one level fails, you go up.
Just to keep it in perspective, if you have on a vest with Thorshhield and one probe hits the vest and the other an arm or leg the Throshield has been defeated. I have not expermiented with this concept as I do not have any Thorshield to test, but TASER works off of two contact points. If both probes are in the material, path of least resistance will be the copper mesh inside the Thorshield. But with one on and one off, the current is still finding a path between the two probes and that most likely will include the person wearing the material.
I am in the process of securing an interview with the inventor(s) of ThorShield. I hope the interview answers many questions and educates us all on the capabilities and limitations of this product.
Be sure to subscribe to SpartanCops.com so you are among the first officers to get an inside look at the first Taser-proof material on the market.
I think it is interesting that your article suggests that anyone who isn’t a cop, yet wants taser-proof clothing, is a criminal. I myself and not a cop or a criminal, but I desire this clothing to protect myself. You see, to many honest citizens of this country it has become clear that police don’t work for us anymore. We know your main purpose is “collecting” money for the state. We know that although the taser was issued to cops as an alternative to the gun it is now used to torture people into compliance, as the first option. When a device gives such powers of control to such power hungry people as yourselves than my first thought is to protect myself from it.
Shawnotron,
I don’t know of any agency that allows officers to use the Taser as a first level of force. Practically every agency does a use of force review any time that an intermediate weapon is used, which helps keep officers in line with department policy.
I have personally volunteered to take a “hit” from the Taser X-26, and while it was not pleasant, it was certainly not torture. I found it much more tolerable than being pepper sprayed, which causes pain and suffering for 30-45 minutes. I don’t recall a large public outcry about pepper spray, so I am not sure why you have such negative feelings about the Taser.
The Taser is just another tool in our arsenal for overcoming resistance. The Taser can fail without a criminal wearing ThorShield, so we have to be prepared to transition to more politically acceptable less-lethal weapons (like a baton or pepper spray).
I have been in law enforcement for over 15 years, so I am guessing that the change in the who the police now work for occurred during my watch. I must have been on RDO’s when the memo came out about us collecting money for the state, so I can’t help you with that.
Thanks for reading our blog!
Matt
@Matt
I understand that there are no agencies that “allow” the taser as the first level of force, and I know all about the force continuum and how you are supposed to act. A quick search on YouTube (or any video site) shows a different story though. Even watching ‘Cops’ a show made by, for, and to represent cops shows the reality of the situation. Police do very little arguing these days before resorting to the taser. Time after time when a person yells ‘I’m not resisting’ they will get tased again and again until they comply to the demands of the officer without the officer having to break a sweat. I just don’t think it should be so easy to force others to submit to your will.
I understand you probably got tased in training, and maybe you think it wasn’t so bad, but don’t tell me you don’t think it would be different to be getting tased in in an uncontrolled environment by a stranger relentlessly. What did you get, 5 maybe 10 seconds ‘riding the lightning’ as you folks like to say? Try 20 or 30 seconds over and over again from an authority figure and tell me how preferable it is to the spray or that baton then.
15 years on the force is a long time, and I have no idea what RDO’s might be, but I imagine you would have a hard time denying that you spend most of everyday collecting fines. Put your sarcasm aside a moment and tell me that you really believe the majority of the public is OK with everything you do. That the public is happy to be taxed additionally by men with guns. Tell me it’s normal for honest, average citizens to shake with fear when they get pulled over.
Shawnotron,
Sorry about the sarcasm, but when you come onto a predominantly police related blog and make some inflamatory statements attacking the ethical character of the men and women who put their lives on the line every day, prepare yourself for some type of retort. However, I do value your opinion and I am glad to give you my perspective on this subject.
Since you know all about the force continuum but aren’t familiar with the term “RDO’s” (regular days off in police jargon), I will assume you are not and have never been a police officer. This is important to note, because there is a vast difference between theoretical and practical knowledge of use of force and force continuums. This is not meant to insult you, but I teach use of force to our police recruits who have no practical knowledge of use of force at that point in the careers. They all have an above average interest in law enforcement, so they have seen virtually all of the videos and TV shows that you have mentioned. We teach them as much about use of force and force continuums as we possibly can in the classroom, and their theoretical knowledge at that point is well established. We then put these well versed use of force experts through a series of very simple scenarios based on events that they are likely to come across while working patrol. The results consistently show that even under the small amount of stress created in a training environment, humans have a difficult time applying this “book knowledge” to a real world scenario. It just takes time and experience to condition the recruit to operate and make appropriate decisions.
As a side note, the TV show “Cops” is not made by police officers for police officers. When you work full-time as an officer, that show loses some of its appeal.
As for someone yelling “I’m not resisting”, actions speak louder than words. When actions and words don’t match, we must give more weight to the actions. I have experienced numerous arrest situations where a suspect is yelling about how they are not resisting, but they are fighting the entire time. Video is two dimensional and does not accurately show everything that is happening. A simple example is a TV show or movie. In an intimate scene between two people apparently alone on screen, there is actually a large number of people present with a ton of lighting and sound equipment in the same room. Video can’t capture the feel of a suspect tensing up or the view that an officer has from his perspective.
As for the Taser making it much too easy to control a person against their will, I myself am still adjusting to this. I am still partial to the old physical version of overcoming a resisting subject. However, it is highly probable that either I or the subject will get injured during this fight. The longer a physical altercation between an officer and suspect goes on, the higher the possibility that the situation will escalate to higher levels of force. This raises the chances of me being severely injured or killed. The Taser allows me to potentially avoid being injured or killed. The suspect can go to jail injury free as well, if he just chooses to peacefully surrender. The suspect controls his own destiny and the officer merely responds to the suspect’s chosen course of action.
When I was hit with the Taser in training, it was for one cycle (5 seconds). It is so effective, that I did not want to continue resisting after that first cycle. I know from personal experience that a person who chooses to continue struggling (no matter what they may be yelling), after one full cycle on the Taser, has a high level of committment to fighting the police. If I were to go “hands on” with this person, there is a very high likelihood that the situation will escalate to a much higher level of force. Some people say that it is my job to get hurt fighting with suspects, which is not true any more than saying it is the bank teller’s job to get robbed. I still have a life outside of work and my kid’s would have a hard time understanding why daddy couldn’t play with them or coach their team because he got needlessly injured at work.
When we review uses of the Taser by officers, we especially scrutinize any time that the Taser is deployed for multiple cycles. We want to make sure that our officers are acting appropriately. No matter what “police bashers” write or say, the law enforcement profession is based on ethics and responsible decision making.
As for collecting fines from the citizens, I assume you are talking about writing citations. Issuing citations is not something new, so I find it hard to believe this is the new trend that you have referred to. Typically, the vast majority of officers in an agency are assigned to the patrol division. The patrol officers’ job is to respond to emergency calls for service. They have very little time or interest in writing traffic citations. Most departments do have Traffic units, whose main job is responding to accidents and enforcing the traffic laws to reduce the number of accidents. They typically target areas where there has been a large number of accidents or where citizens have complained of unsafe driving.
I will admit that people are not overjoyed when they get pulled over by a police officer. I even get a little nervous when I get pulled over, but it is not because I fear that the officer is going to hurt me. It is just like getting sent to the principal’s office as a kid or getting called to your boss’ office at work. We all have some type of authority to answer to and it can be emotionally unpleasant.
I do believe that the public supports law enforcement in the United States. This thought is reaffirmed every day through my contacts with citizens. If it ever gets to the point that the citizens don’t support us, I will look for a new line of work. No offense, but I do not think that you are an accurate representation of the general public.
Thanks for the interesting conversation,
Matt
As much as I don’t seem like an accurate representation of the general public, I don’t think you are an accurate representation of the general police officer. I say this because you actually take the time you respond, thoughtfully, to my statements rather than just delivering the ‘F-you’ and censoring my post, which is the normal response I receive. I really do appreciate this, and have added your blog to my feed reader. I agree with your assessment that I am not the average citizen, but I don’t think I have to be in order to be right.
I know that many people probably yell ‘I’m not resisting..’ when they are, but it is believable to me that they are not resisting when they never resisted in the first place. I routinely watch dashcam videos on the net and the show cops and read/watch the news, and I know that these videos can never give a full representation of the events. I often ask myself how I would act, as the officer, and the citizen, and on many occasions I agree that the officer has made the right choice. I am, however, quite disturbed far too often by the choices made.
As far as citations go. It may be different where you are, but here in NH when the state is hard up for funds it gets more dangerous to drive. These days, as an example, people are regularly getting stopped and fined for as little as 5 over. That is crazy in itself, but there is also the issue that speed limits have been the same for 40 years despite the increase in vehicle performance and safety which make it far safer to drive at higher speeds than it was to drive at the speed limit so many years ago. At the risk of sounding ‘tinhat’ I will admit that I think this lack of change is due to the fact that people are more likely to speed unknowingly when limits are intentionally kept lower than what is safe and comfortable; and that this generates more revenue.
I understand that the men and women of law enforcement do put their lives on the line daily and, to the extent that you do that in an effort to protect us, I am very grateful for it. Yet, if you value your life so highly than I must wonder why you and so many others put it on the line to enforce laws against victimless crimes. Surely you can’t think it’s worth risking your life to stop a person from doing something that doesn’t hurt anyone.
Shawnotron,
This has turned out to be a very interesting conversation and I thank you for engaging in a dialogue about these subjects. Here at Spartan Cops, we have discussed whether or not to censor some of the comments in an attempt to shield our readers from the usual rants that seem to occur on blogs that are open to the public. Your posts have been rational and articulate, just from a different perspective. I am glad that we decided not to censor your comment and you have added a unique point of view to our discussion.
When watching police videos, I appreciate the fact that you place yourself in the officer’s position and wonder how you would handle a situation. As a police supervisor, I have to do the same thing. There is an inherent problem with this though, and that is that we have the benefit of knowing the outcome and all of the details about the incident by the time we watch the video. Many times that puts the situation in a very different perspective from what the officer experienced on the street. We have to be conscious that the officer, at the time that he made his choices, was acting without knowing all of the info. The courts have acknowledged that officer’s are required to make split second decisions in situations that are rapidly changing and under extreme stress. We are supposed to review their decisions based on what the officer knew or believed to be true at the instant he made the decision, without the benefit of hindsight. Using this technique helps us understand why an officer reacted the way he did.
As for speed limits, I concede your point that cars have much better handling and performance capabilities now. Some states are definitely behind the curve on increasing the speed limits on interstates. In residential and surrounding areas, I don’t think we will see speed limits increase. This is to protect kids and other pedestrians. After working a ton of fatality accidents, I can deal with slower speed limits in these areas. I will admit that I tend to have a heavy foot and drive faster than I should. The fear of getting pulled over and possibly getting a ticket helps keep me hovering close to the speed limit.
When I was sworn in as an officer, I agreed to enforce the laws of the state and uphold the U. S. Constitution. Traffic laws are designed primarily to keep the streets safe. More officers and citizens are killed in traffic accidents than by homicide, which validates the importance of enforcing these laws.
Once again, thanks for an excellent discussion!
Matt
Do you really think it’s acceptable that a citizen can receive a potentially life threatening injury for simply failing to obey a directive?? I accidentally did so once as it was inconceivable to me at the time that I was the person being spoken to .. human brains often take 10 seconds to process information in a shock situation. I’ll expect to be Tasered for that now instead of someone grabbing my arm and making note of themselves. This is an affront to basic human rights.
Isn’t there something Police are taught about relevant level of force?
The treatment of ordinary citizens as such greatly lowers community respect for police and generally impedes police ability to integrate with the community and do their job. This is where US policing has gone so wrong and why it is that the crims are that much more aggressive towards police.
I live in Australia. There hasn’t been a single Police officer killed this year by a criminal altercation (bush fire and car accidents however). A citizen was killed last Friday (12-june) by a Taser in Brisbane yet we’re spending 10 million Monday buying every front line officer a Taser. I think that may be the 2nd case this year (of death).
I also question the statistics on offer. In Australia apparently 200 violent assaults and 3000 general assaults were recorded against police but yet there were over 27000 violent assaults against non police and 45000 other assaults. 66% of violent offenders were drunk and 70% of the assaults occured after midnight in or near a licensed venue.
So for 200 police officers - none of whom were killed - we’re willing to start using life threatening devices?
It also seems Police are generally wimpish and of poor regard with how they use the device and overly self protective - it’s not like they thought it was a guaranteed safe job when they applied. Police officers should NOT be expectant of a risk free work life just as miners and firemen also aren’t (but you should be readily able to protect yourself with standard means - hand to hand, chemical spray, baton, gun etc.)
How can you possibly sanction the use of these barbaric devices????. You’re becoming worse than the criminals (and a lot of people I know think similiarly). It’s also just starting an arms race - and we’re all better off without that.
First, the main foundation of your argument is flawed. You identify a TASER as a life-threatening device and imply that is its purpose. The purpose of a TASER is a non-lethal option for use of force. All non-lethal options for use of force have the possibility of killing someone, even just using your hands. Driving an automobile to get home can be deadly force but we don’t characterize it as such because that is not its intended use.
Should a person receive a TASER cycle just because they failed to obey a directive?
Sometimes. Under the right circumstances the officer absolutely should because the officer has given the suspect an opportunity to peaceable desist his/her lawbreaking actions but they have refused or are deciding what action to take. The problem with deciding what action to take is that lets the suspect control the outcome of the situation. Many times their decision is to fight or flee. Now, the situation has escalated and more injuries are possible because more force will have to be used to take them into custody. Better to gain control quickly and with a weapon that has been shown to produce fewer injuries of suspect and officer.
Sometimes there are circumstances that the TASER should not be used because the officer was in little danger and lower forms of force would have been more appropriate. In these cases, the decision making of the officer is what you should be ranting about, not the weapon itself. It is hard within the law enforcement profession to admit and learn from mistakes because the admission will result in a lawsuit.
You bring up a situation where the person is shell-shocked and cannot response quickly. I agree that circumstance can occur and when possible the officer should take that into consideration. However, often that excuse is given when in reality they are weighing their ability to fight or run.
Isn’t there something Police are taught about relevant use of force?
Besides pointing you to the welcome message of our site, officers are taught about use of force in the academy and get some update training as the years go by. However, there is always a difference of opinion about what is reasonable. In general, police do a decent job considering the amount of money invested in their training. Like everything else if more money and time was invested, better decisions would be made.
So for 200 police officers – none of whom were killed – we’re willing to start using life threatening devices?
Again, you mislabel TASER as life threatening. Part of the purpose of a TASER is definitely to reduce the number of deaths and injuries to police officers. We are human you know. We have wives, children, and parents that are very concerned about our well being. The communities we serve are also concerned about our well being because we have saved many of their lives, captured many of the criminals that violently hurt or raped them, and recovered property that was stolen from them. But you also ignore the other purpose of TASER is to reduce the number of deaths and injuries to suspects.
How can you possibly sanction the use of these barbaric devices?
For all the reasons listed above.
Your becoming worse than the criminals.
You are fundamentally wrong here. Your lack of objectivity reveals your intense need to hate the police for some personal reason.
Now, it is my turn to ask a question.
What do you recommend as an alternative that would be as effective at stopping suspects that are bigger, stronger, and possibly under the effects of alcohol and drugs?
Please be sure to provide some evidence such as the statistics you used earlier.
I apologise for just jumping in here, but I think the concern of the ordinary person when they see a news story about someone getting tasered by a uniformed officer or security person is that the person getting tasered WASN’T bigger, stronger, under the influence of drugs or alcohol, behaving in a threatening manner or violently! We all wonder just what is to stop a uniform doing that to me? In such circumstances we wonder if it would have been more professional to behave in a less confrontational way if neither violence nor life were threatened, while someone is angry and mouthing off or refusing to be compliant. Professionals should not have their buttons pushed to make them whip out their tasers or other weapons of force and we’d like to see more use made of reasoned discussion and/or writing citations which can be posted to the person to mull over when they have had a chance to cool off and think about their behavior.
In the article called “The TASER Generation: Issues for New Police Officers” at http://www.spartancops.com/taser-generation-issues-police-officers/ , poster “Scott” says:
For a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail
When your favorite tool is a TASER, you tend to tase everything, even when it is not the best option. This can be reflex. We you repetitively use something you stop consciously thinking about it, like driving a car. That reflex can cause you to tase someone that could have been handled a better way. I have seen people tased that posed almost no threat to officers and muscling techniques would have more appropriate. Tasing old people and small females often fall into this category.
This statement by one of the site’s contributors would tend to call into question many of the assertions made by Matt in the article and comments section. Everyone but him in this comments section seems to be well aware that in just about any interaction with police officers today, being Tased by an overzealous officer is a real possibility. Anyone with any significant experience in activism and protesting is aware that police are regularly using Tasers to inflict pain punitively and not only in self-defense scenarios. Even regular, noncriminal citizens are justified to fear any contact with police. I am sure that Scott is acting in good faith and that he is a model officer, but it is naive and offensive to imply that only criminals are interested in counteracting the effects of Tasers.
Jacob,
Let me start by reminding you that this is a police use of force blog. Our target audience are the honest, hardworking police officers who arrest criminals. We do not write for activists, protestors or any other citizen who fears that an overzealous police officer will Tase him for no reason. While the vast majority of officers act reasonably and within the law, there is a small percentage of officers who should not be in the profession. We do not endorse their actions, but we will not write our articles centered around that theme.
I assure you, Scott and I are on the same page. The concerns Scott pointed out in his article have nothing to do with my article or comments. For this article, I mentioned criminals wearing ThorShield or Taser-proof clothing. I did not mention honest citizens wearing these items because honest citizens will not be in the position to be Tased by one of our readers in the first place. Our concern with the Taser generation is not that officers will torture people with Tasers, it is that officers may come to rely so heavily on Tasers that they stop using all other forms of force, causing their other skills to deteriorate. At some point, the Taser will fail and the Taser-dependent officer could find himself in a vulnerable position if he cannot efficiently transition to another force option. A symptom of this could be where the Taser is used lawfully, but it was not the most appropriate weapon (i.e. old people and small females).
For me to enjoy science fiction movies, I must first suspend my disbelief. For you to enjoy our blog, you may need to read it from the perspective that police officers are honorable professionals.
I think I would have to agree with RadioMoose, Jacob, Adam, and Shawnotron….police officers are turning to there tasers waaay too quickly, and it’s not just for citizens that are bigger, stronger, or on drugs, what about the:
1. The 73-old lady that was pulled over? (ill admit she did have an attitude but is that illegal nowadays?)
2. The “don’t taze me bro” guy, they had at least 6 guys on top of them, they could have lifted him up and carried the dam guy out instead of tasering him
3. The man at the airport that didnt know how to speak english (and actually died from this incident)
4. The student that was tasered in a library after refusing to show his I.D….I mean seriously? The whole I.D. check thing is made to keep bums from chilling in the University’s library, taking up space and whatnot, but this student was just minding his business and studying…You know what those university police should have done? They should have called out the attention of everyone in the library, and ask people to vote: “all raise their hands if you think this guy should be escorted out” and “all raise their hands if you don’t mind this guy staying in here and studying” and when everyone votes for the latter, the university police leave and there: They have served the public. End of story. No news headlines, everyone is happy. Is that so hard?
5. The unarmed 14-old girl who was running away, did she pose a threat to the police officer? Yes she was running away, but does that really deserve a taser shot? She didn’t pose a threat to anyone, she was afraid of the cop (and nowadays she is right to be afraid) and decided to run. So instead of tasering her why didnt he just run after her and catch her? Or are the police agencies becoming too relaxed on officer fitness requirements?
6. The man who was pulled over on the highway, refused to sign the speeding ticket, and was tasered in the back as he was walking away…Really? In the back? Do you turn your back away from somebody you are going to engage in a fight with? The police officer already had all his information, just mail the ticket to him and be done with
I would have to say that I’m not the only who is becoming annoyed with police officers and taser guns. YES, the majority of police officers are good, hardworking people….but there are too many times where police officers fail to defuse a situtation verbally and are too quick to taser an individual and there are waaaaayy too many times where a police officer refuses or fails to reason or negotiate with a person into complying with their demands and simply arrests the individual on “disorderly conduct” or “resisting arrest (even if it’s only verbally)”
Police officers are given their power FROM the people, that means me, adam, shawnotron, jacob, radiomoosee and the other 300 million civilians in the U.S., to protect and serve us….I agree that you guys do a wonderful job protecting us but the “serving us” needs some work on….There are some situations where just “letting it go”, giving a warning, or actually talking it out, explaining, and/or negotiating would give a better result than arresting that person or fining him.
As for the taser-proof material, why can’t an ordinary citizen have it to protect himself? Are we automatically criminals for wanting to protect ourselves? Taser guns are available to civilians too, which means that “real” criminals can buy and use them too, and what’s better to use for a crime than a weapon that “incapcitates a person” and essentially leaves no trace of injury? So is it so wrong to want to protect ourselves from this?
And for the “I did not mention honest citizens wearing these items because honest citizens will not be in the position to be Tased by one of our readers in the first place” argument, we have body amour and gas masks available to the public, are you saying we shouldn’t be allowed these either?
and honest citizens do get into the position to be tased sometimes, its called protests, where honest citizens gather in a large group to protest their anger about some issue, and this is protected under the 1st amendment….and when police start shooting bean bags, pellets, tear gas, and even bullets (remember that student demonstration?…) indiscriminately into crowds, would it be too much to ask for protection from this?
By the way, this technology is not a secret, it’s just that no one has put the effort to manufacture it for civilians yet, the materials and the knowledge are not new
Kristian, I am familiar with some of the incidents you mention and would like to add my opinion.
1. I personally think the officer could have restrained her by physical force but I bet a struggle would have ensued. I think you may be misinformed by watching TV where an officer simply spins a subject around and cuffs him. It often turns into a struggle. If she had resisted, anti-police types would be complaining that the big bad officer manhandled the little old woman. Police just can’t win in that situation. Look at the results though. The woman has no bruises or broken arms. She got tased and got put in cuffs with no injuries. Isn’t that a success? You have to remember that any use of force is ugly and just because it looks pretty doesn’t mean it is wrong.
2. Why in the world would the police carry him out? That is a ridiculous suggestion. Try carrying a grown man who wants to be put down and see how it works out. I don’t think an officer should be exposed to being kicked in the face just to avoid using a taser. It was obvious from the video that those officers tried to use physical force to restrain the guy but had great difficulty in doing so. Add the fact that they were in a crowded room and needed to get it under control as soon as possible and the taser seems very reasonable to me. Once again, the subject was tased and the put in cuffs with no injuries. A prolonged struggle with officers would have resulted in at a minimum, bruising and abrasions. Another successful use force here.
3. I don’t know anything about this incident so I can’t comment.
4. So the police should have taken a vote on whether they enforce the law or not? This is so ridiculous it is hard to comment on without smothering you in sarcasm. We don’t put law enforcement up to a popular vote. The guy should have shown his ID and he decided to resist. My arguments are the same for this one as #2.
5. I don’t know the details of this incident.
6. The whole purpose of signing a ticket is because it is a promise to appear. Technically, you are under arrest when you are pulled over but promising to appear is a legal way to let the police send you on your way with minimal hassle. By refusing to sign, this guy was saying that he was not going to take care of the citation. That means he is under arrest. That means he cannot go back to his car. What would have happened if he got it? I predict there would have been a pursuit and that is dangerous.
After reading your posts, I think that your problem isn’t with the taser really. I think you have a problem with authority figures. Sorry but we have to enforce the laws and just because we strap on a badge doesn’t mean that we have to risk injury when we have the means to avoid it. Soldiers get paid to go war but they still try to avoid getting killed. It’s the same thing.
I am very late to this conversation and I will not address any of the “taser abuse” comments but I wanted to add something a little lateral from the typical LEO or civilian response. I am a paramedic and often if a taser is used and the suspect sustains an injury via a fall or the probes wont come out we get called. I would like to reiterate Matt’s comment that anyone willing to sustain multiple cycles “has a high level of commitment to fighting the police”. I’ve heard it all in the back of the bus, and by their own admission, cause im not a cop so they’ll talk to me, they wanted to Get away, kick the cops ass, kick whoever’s ass, dont want to go back to jail etc. and they weren’t gonna let anything stop them. We had to work on a 16 y/o kids head lac with him handcuffed and held down, AFTER 3 cycles. tasers do save lives, and i would rather treat probe wounds, and fall injuries then broken bones and GSWs
Adam,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us. I think your perspective as a paramedic adds a great deal to the discussion.