Buckeye State Blog - Sure, Tasers are Non-Lethal. Riiight... - Comments

You're Right

Nick D — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 12:10:26 -0700

JMatthew, I'm in the computer business, my exposure to the law is limited to one business law class from the business program at Fisher. I went back and found out you're absolutely right, I mixed up factual causation and proximate causation.

I stand corrected.

facepalm

JMatthewL — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 10:39:10 -0700

"Proximate cause" and "but-for cause" are two separate entities.

"But-for" cause is also known as "factual cause" or "cause-in-fact." It means that, in the absence of X, Y would not have occurred.
"Proximate cause" is also known as the "legal cause." It means that X is a (if not the most) significant factor in causing Y, and that their link is not attenuated by an interposing chain-of-events.
The difference between the two is best highlighted by the classic "butterfly effect." Just because the butterfly flapping its wings is the "but-for cause" of a typhoon does not mean that it is the "proximate cause" of the typhoon.

Be careful when you unleash legalese, especially when you don't understand the language.

I COMPLETELY DISAGREE - Set phasers to "KILL"

Schmennis — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:06:37 -0700

Since MV has accused me of being a "cop" I will contribute my thoughts and experience.

I think that TAZERS should be made LETHAL.

Think of it, officers could have 2 settings.... "Stun" AND "Kill"

Here is why I think it is a good idea.

1. Officers would only have to carry ONE weapon.
With setting for level of intensity like, "Low", "Medium" or "High"
(like my new microwave)

Oh, "Low" isn't working let me crank that up for you..."

2. Public Safety - Tazers don't ricochet (less chance of killing or injuring innocent bystanders)

3. Gives officers more options when "Deadly Force" may be necessary

4. Public Security - Less mess (no bloody scenes that can psychologically traumatize witnesses)

5. Economical - No medical bills for the victims of shooting and no emergency crews to clean up bloody messes and fewer coroners and reduced internal investigation costs

6. Reinforces fear of consequences (who wants to be electrocuted to death)

7. Reinforces sworn officers authority (who wants to be electrocuted to death)

8. Increase the chance an offender will survive a deadly force encounter and live to be punished in the judicial system

9. Legal defense for Peace Officer (I didn't know it was on the "Kill" setting)

10. Reduced officer PTS - trauma, less administrative leave, better PTSD recovery chances when officer must use "Deadly Force"

11. Handguns are archaic, uncivilized weapons that are loud, messy and have the Tim Allen the Tool Guy, V-8, Neanderthal appeal. Why are we still using technology from the 1600's to fight crime?

GRRRRRRRR

Schmennis — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:07:57 -0700

People with medical conditions SHOULDN'T be putting themselves into questionable situations where they are faced with compliance or tazer.

Tazers should be made LETHAL......then jack asses wouldn't defy an officer and risk being shocked. If people were told Tazers are LETHAL they would be less inclined to fart around and risk the "shock"
(That doesn't even sound scary)
Ooo what are you gonna do..."Shock me?"

The other problem is the seriousness of ANY WEAPON. People don't understand that TAZERS fucking hurt and if used on them and they could DIE!

A buddy of mine hit me with a stun gun of like 60k volts ...ha ha NOT FUNNY! I hear Tazers are a lot worse! You can be killed with a Bic pall point pen, 12 inches of nylon cord, 3 inches of water or a 2 inch square of plastic wrap.
Life is fragile. And some people think they can survive 120k volts of electricity?

The other option is to follow Magi1 advice and return to handguns and eliminate the non-lethal option.

The other problem ISN'T the Tazer, it is THE DEFIANCE OF AUTHORITY.

An officer tells me to get down. I'm getting down!

Don't Taze me Bro!

If you don't comply with an officers request, Fuck you! Die!
*sarcasm* (or I mean...don't have a reasonable expectation of living)
Those are your options. The officers safety over yours, I think we should BOTH go home to our families, JUST COMPLY.

(Sorry for the profanity on that one)
I am in no way referring to Heidi Gill..I don't even know about that one...

Studies are ongoing

Brody — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:41:23 -0700

I haven't seen any conclusive studies, but most of these technologies are rather new. At least they don't use Mace anymore ;-)

how long has pepper spray

kJk — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:07:40 -0700

how long has pepper spray been used? how long have tasers been used? how many studies have been conducted into the use of tasers and resulting fatalities? that's LAME.

kJk — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:06:58 -0700

Tasers can be legally used in non-lethal situations

modernesquire — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:29:03 -0700

Because tasers do not carry the fatality risk that firearms do, almost all law enforcement departments have use of force policies that put taser use between pepper spray and tactical batons in their use of force continiums. I've never heard of any such policies being ruled by any court as excessive force. Tasers were never, ever, intended to only be used in lethal situations in lieu of a firearm. And the law has never required them to only be used in those situation.

As discussed above, the lady in Warren was a victim of excessive use of force as the taser use was wholly inappropriate, but not because she was not a lethal threat.

Again, pepper spray has killed. In fact, in documented cases far more than tasers have.

Which is more convincing?

JMatthewL — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:41:51 -0700

Point: Tasers are not worth their problems.
Counterpoint: Tasers are still more worthwhile than their alternatives.
Point: Tasers are less safe than pepper spray.
Counterpoint: Tasers are more safe than pepper spray for the cop and nearby bystanders.
Point: Pepper spray mostly incapacitates when you get it in a target's face.
Counterpoint: Tasers completely incapacitate when you get it anywhere on the target's body.
Point: Tasers are extremely painful when used.
Counterpoint: Bullets or batons are extremely painful when used and for days afterward.
Point: Tasers may cause people with pre-existing heart conditions to die.
Counterpoint: Bullets or batons may cause people of any condition to die.
Point: Taser companies try to distance their product from problems.
Counterpoint: Every company tries to distance its products from problems.
Point: Tasers are marketed as an alternative to lethal force.
Counterpoint: Tasers are an alternative to lethal force.

Again, Lethal situation vs non-lethal situation

JeanLR — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:31:45 -0700

What has happened is the taser has been introduced into situations that do not and never did require a lethal response. The taser is promoted, even on the manufacturerers website, as an alternative to LETHAL force.

If an armed or otherwise dangerous suspect can be tasered instead of being shot, that's where we're supposed to be reading about the merits of tasering.

But what we're seeing everyday is people, unarmed people, are being shocked with 50,000 volts for non-compliance, a situation where before police officers, well trained officers, have many other means to compel or subdue a non-compliant person.

People have been lead to perceive these weapons, tasers, as somehow "soft", and so thier more and more indiscriminate use, like on fare jumpers in Canada (google it), is growing and the use of these is can lead to the death of a simple misdemeanant or even a plain old innocent person.

The requirements demanded of an officer to prevent a tasing may be arbitrary and unknowable to the suspect, like that woman in Warren, she didn't know what to do to stop the officer from torturing her with that device.

Very sad and very True

Brody — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:02:08 -0700

Jean,

Your right tasers are being used on people who are non-compliant, but I would just point out - being non-compliant with a police officer is really really really really stupid risk... and a woman who continues to stand up when being directed to lie down by a cop is doing so at her own risk.

As far as I'm aware they don't have statistics on what you were asking, but as I said before every 14 seconds someone is arrested. If even 1/10 of those arrests involve the use of a taser then we aren't hearing of too many problems in relation to how much a taser is being used. (As I said it's not full proof - it's just the best we have now)

I think what this discussion highlights as much as anything is the risk that every officer of the law faces daily, and the need to make sure we are funding not only equipment used by a law enforcement agency - but also funding the proper training our officers receive.

Brody, you're making the point

JeanLR — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:09:50 -0700

Yes, as an alternative to lethal force but they're not being used that way~ the people being tasered are often simply non-compliant~

I'd be interested in seeing statistics about how often a taser was deployed on an armed suspect, a situation requiring either a lethal response by the police where the taser was used to save the suspects life.

I'd be interested to compare that to how often a taser is discharged against unarmed people, suspected criminals, or unruly or disorderly people resisting lawful arrest, and how many others were tased before they had a chance to submit to arrest without resistence, like that woman in Warren Ohio who was tased and tased because she stood up when directed to lay down.

Hey i'm Modernesquire's side - who knew

Brody — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:21:13 -0700

I acknowledge that taser's aren't full proof - and that they CAN kill you... But that's the price we pay to have police officers protect society.

I have yet to see, what anyone who is against taser's would like to see as the alternative?

The fact is there are over 850,000 Police Officers in this country, and an arrest is made every 14 seconds in this country, and we are talking about under 100 deaths of people who have knowingly put themselves in a situation where police force is being used.

Batons are a very physical weapon, that not only forces a police officer to physically engage a suspect, but puts them and the suspect in considerably more danger. Can lead to death for the suspect thru cracked skulls, blood clots, and heart attacks, and leaves the officer open to knife attack, being jumped from behind, hand to hand attack, and the dangers of a close encounter that a one on one confrontation brings (and that's only a few of the dangers.)

Pepper sprays has a lot of the same problems that the baton has because it is a close encounter weapon, plus it's the least effective of the major options for police, and has been known to lead to a few deaths as well.

Brandishing a fire arm leaves no room to negotiate. If you pull out the gun and the suspect doesn't cooperate or follow directions you are forced to use the gun because you have exhausted all lesser alternatives (and seeing that this is a Democratic Blog i'm just gonna naturally assume none of us want to see that). The fact is most cops will never have to brandish their firearm in the line of duty in their career, and even less have to actually discharge their weapon (That in my opinion is a good thing).

The Taser is a way for a police officer to engage in a situation with the most safety and least exposure to themselves, and in almost all cases leaves no lasting damage to the arrestee.

I guess I would just ask - if you are really that against the taser what would you rather see done?

Hi Dr Truth

JeanLR — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 07:21:26 -0700

Just thought I'd say that I appreciate you taking on Modern for his views, it's just that what he does is tie a person up in endless rambling tortured jumps and swerves of "logic" in an attempt to bury the argument in so much bullshit that you almost forget what you were talking about.

He's not someone who would ever question authority and obviously would comply fully with any order any authority figure would direct him, and cannot understand why other people have such problems with fully complying like a robot living in a manfactured world of perfect order where all police are perfectly trained and citizens of this nation had better not be too bothersome while asking former Presidential candidates touchy questions for instance.

He cannot understand that giving a taser to someone and telling them they can't really hurt anyone with it by simply using it to force compliance with an order, lawful or not, is a license for abuse. The problem with tasers is that they are supposed to be used AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO LETHAL FORCE, not to be used willy-nilly to force the compliance of citizens. Poorly trained officers won't get the distinction, and if you're going to tell me that well-trained officers are deploying the taser in any way other than as an alternative to lethal force, then thier conduct is willful and one can connote what you will from that assumption...

I have to say ... this is

Magi1 — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 19:59:16 -0700

I have to say ... this is what this blog should be about ... getting to the heart of issues is what everyone truly wants, and sometimes you can't get there without differring ideas and opinions. This thread is proof that ideas can be vetted and discussed for a better understanding of the issue and what people think of it. Good job all!

"Republicans don't need black voters, but they want them. Democrats don't want black voters, but they need them" - Rev. Jesse Jackson

Sure, Tasers are Non-Lethal. Riiight...

Nick D — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:12:08 -0700

From the AP Wire:

Man visiting Miami U stunned by Taser, in critical condition Sunday, April 20, 2008 8:50 PM
ASSOCIATED PRESS OXFORD, Ohio — A man police stunned with a Taser after a bar fight near Miami University was in critical condition at a Cincinnati hospital.
University Hospital said Kevin Piskura, 24, of Chicago, remained in critical condition today. He was transferred from McCullough-Hyde Hospital in Oxford.

Oxford police said Piskura, a 2006 Miami graduate, was stunned by police after fighting with officers who were trying to arrest a friend on a disorderly conduct charge.

Police said the friend had fought with bouncers at the Brick Street Bar. Butler County prosecutors were reviewing the officers' actions.