Is it OK to tase a 9 yr. old?

[Tgace]

Re-reading the article about the 66 yo woman incident. I would say that the best point was made by the police rep. who stated that the confrontational attitude was the root of the problem. While the officer may have been within the policy and, going by the "letter of the law", justified in arresting the woman and using an approved level of force if she resisted...why did it come down to that? Ive dealt with plenty of @#$% from folks who didnt like the fact that I was giving them a ticket. "Some" cops may esclate the situation with words (im not saying abuse, just tone/volume). I think thats the root of this and the target of the punishment they recieved.

 

[OULobo]

Sounds right to me.

 

[Tgace]

I was led to believe that the "use of force continuum ladder" is not a method of "ramp up" to force as much as it is a list of available appliable force options presented in relation of class to the other options. IE you aren't required to travel up the ladder to reach an appropriate action, only know what reaction is appropriate for the victim's . . . er. . . suspect's (j/k) action. I'm not suggesting that the police call to get approval before using force in all situations, only that they be held legally and proffesionally liable for actions that exceed what is laid out in said ladder, and that the ladder be drawn by the citizenry to be a hardline set of true rules, not just a policy suggestion. I'm not advocating binding the officer's hands, I'm only holding that they be held responsible for flawed decisions, like the rest of the people they are patroling.

Yes that is the current "ladder model". However there were plenty of agencies and jurisdictions that were retooling it to the "ramp up" model to avoid liability. If some still are I dont know but I wouldnt be suprised. Thats why the "force wheel" came out, where options were more fluid than the ladder. Based on the lawsuits Ive seen in my dept. I would say that cops are being held liable....the town (and some cops) have had to pay up for force decisions. Just because you dont see it in the paper or TV dosent mean it isnt happening.

 

[Doc]

Did anyone consider it could have been to keep her from hurting herself? In many instances it could be preferable to physically overwhelming her in certain instances. On the face it does appear unnecessary, but I've learned after 30 years of law enforcement never second guess an incident without having all of the facts.

 

[OULobo]

Did anyone consider it could have been to keep her from hurting herself? In many instances it could be preferable to physically overwhelming her in certain instances. On the face it does appear unnecessary, but I've learned after 30 years of law enforcement never second guess an incident without having all of the facts.

How would pain compliance help in stopping someone from hurting themselves (ie. purposly causing themselves pain)? Tasers aren't system disruptors, just pain compliance tools.

 

[loki09789]

How would pain compliance help in stopping someone from hurting themselves (ie. purposly causing themselves pain)? Tasers aren't system disruptors, just pain compliance tools.

I would say that sending an electric current through a person's body would be considered system disruption. Why? Because, while the pain is being induced, there is also disruption of the natural electrochemical system.... call it overload, override or what ever you want, but while a Taser is active, your system is disrupted. On a straight behavioral model, if someone (in the case of a TASER/LEO situation) is telling you 'do xyz or you will get tazed' and you refuse, then feel the pain being induced, at some point you will make the connection (like a Pavlovian Dog) that you IF you comply with instructions THEN you will avoid a shock/pain.

I would say that a TASER is both a system disruptor and a pain compliance tool. Has anyone looked at the companies information about how they designed the tool, what THEY say it is or is not (pain compliance, system disruptor or what ever)?

 

[KenpoTex]

How would pain compliance help in stopping someone from hurting themselves (ie. purposly causing themselves pain)? Tasers aren't system disruptors, just pain compliance tools.

I don't think Doc meant "hurt herself" as in: Ouch! but rather "hurt herself" as in: concussion, broken bones, etc. Any type of "pain compliance" technique or method is just that, in other words, since it hurts they stop whatever they were doing before someone (themselves or the officer) gets injured.

 

[Doc]

I don't think Doc meant "hurt herself" as in: Ouch! but rather "hurt herself" as in: concussion, broken bones, etc. Any type of "pain compliance" technique or method is just that, in other words, since it hurts they stop whatever they were doing before someone (themselves or the officer) gets injured.

I have "tased" individuals on many ocassions to prevent them from injuring themselves. People ramming their heads against walls, etc. The disrupting effect of the taser allows you the opportunity to restraint them in a manner where they cannot cause themselves further injury. The fact the officer asked for a "backup" on a nine year old is a major clue. The fact he was called on a nine yeard old and needed back up is also a major consideration.

Trying to hold a determined "mental" without injuring them regardless of age is very difficult because they can exhibit enormous strength. Although I find this may have been an unusual circumstance, because I don't know all the details I allow for a reasonable possibility based on my previous thirty years of LE experience. Also the question as presented is a loaded one, and although mentioning handcuffs, I'd bet dollars to donuts because of her age she was cuffed in the front which presents an additional dynamic to consider. The answer cannot be "never" or "always." S••t happens, and often.

 

[OULobo]

I would say that sending an electric current through a person's body would be considered system disruption. Why? Because, while the pain is being induced, there is also disruption of the natural electrochemical system.... call it overload, override or what ever you want, but while a Taser is active, your system is disrupted. On a straight behavioral model, if someone (in the case of a TASER/LEO situation) is telling you 'do xyz or you will get tazed' and you refuse, then feel the pain being induced, at some point you will make the connection (like a Pavlovian Dog) that you IF you comply with instructions THEN you will avoid a shock/pain.

I would say that a TASER is both a system disruptor and a pain compliance tool. Has anyone looked at the companies information about how they designed the tool, what THEY say it is or is not (pain compliance, system disruptor or what ever)?

TASERS pass current through a small portion of the body with the intent of causing pain, not necessarily disruption. In many cases TASERS do not cause any disruption whatsoever, especially in cases where the person it is used on is charged with adrenalin, emotionally disturbed (as in this case) or high. The behavioural model only works on someone that is seeking to avoid pain, not a disturbed person that is seeking pain, to which a TASER is an easy pathway.

I don't think Doc meant "hurt herself" as in: Ouch! but rather "hurt herself" as in: concussion, broken bones, etc. Any type of "pain compliance" technique or method is just that, in other words, since it hurts they stop whatever they were doing before someone (themselves or the officer) gets injured.

While that makes more sense, the application of pain compliance on an individual that either doesn't register pain or isn't opposed to it doesn't make much sense.

I have "tased" individuals on many ocassions to prevent them from injuring themselves. People ramming their heads against walls, etc. The disrupting effect of the taser allows you the opportunity to restraint them in a manner where they cannot cause themselves further injury. The fact the officer asked for a "backup" on a nine year old is a major clue. The fact he was called on a nine yeard old and needed back up is also a major consideration.

Trying to hold a determined "mental" without injuring them regardless of age is very difficult because they can exhibit enormous strength. Although I find this may have been an unusual circumstance, because I don't know all the details I allow for a reasonable possibility based on my previous thirty years of LE experience. Also the question as presented is a loaded one, and although mentioning handcuffs, I'd bet dollars to donuts because of her age she was cuffed in the front which presents an additional dynamic to consider. The answer cannot be "never" or "always." S••t happens, and often.

Now that I can see. That a TASER would give the temporary opportunity to restrain an individual, is something that makes sense to me. As for the issue of calling for backup, many police agencies have policy in place that requires officers to call for back up when dealing with children, women and the emotionally disturbed to avoid accusations and liability. This paritally negates any clue calling back up gives as to how the officer is capable of handling the child.

 

[Doc]

TASERS pass current through a small portion of the body with the intent of causing pain, not necessarily disruption.

I'm sorry sir but you are incorrect. It was designed and is used as a dysruption device, not a paim compliant tool. In fact it was born out of the use of drugs that created a lack of feeling of pain, and enormous strength to the users to over ride the nervous system without creating injury. The alternative previously was ineffective chemical agents on this type of personor, or blunt force trauma. The taser represented a humane alternative. The fact that it is not 100 percent effective means nothing. Nothing is 100 percent effect. When I "shoot" you with a firearm it hurts, but the firearm is not a paim compliance device. I am either trying to "stop" you or "kill" you and whether it hurts or not, is immaterial. It it also a statistical fact the taser has a higher effectiveness rate than the firearm per use.

As a court appointed legal expert in police use of force, as well as a long time defensive tactics instructor and university lecturer on the subject in conjuction with my thirty year background as a police officer, I suggest you re-examine your thoughts on the subject. It is these type of misconceptions that give the civilian population the wrong impressions. The job is not to inflict pain but to induce compliance. Of course it would be nice if everyone would just lay down, put there hands behind their back and say "uncle." But they don't.

 

[bignick]

taser's are disruptive to the nervous system...

my judo/jujitsu instructor is also in law enforcement...and when they were testing tasers they had four-five people linked together and tased one...the current knocked them all down...

that isn't current "passing through a small portion of the body"...

as for them not being 100%...as stated earlier nothing is...also, he's seen instances where people have been tased and their muscles "freeze"...the officer's were ordering the person to the ground and the person literally couldn't move to comply...so the officer's kept tasing and tasing...and ugly situation to be in

 

[AaronLucia]

The ends justify the means.

 

[OULobo]

I'm sorry sir but you are incorrect. It was designed and is used as a dysruption device, not a paim compliant tool. In fact it was born out of the use of drugs that created a lack of feeling of pain, and enormous strength to the users to over ride the nervous system without creating injury. The alternative previously was ineffective chemical agents on this type of personor, or blunt force trauma. The taser represented a humane alternative. The fact that it is not 100 percent effective means nothing. Nothing is 100 percent effect. When I "shoot" you with a firearm it hurts, but the firearm is not a paim compliance device. I am either trying to "stop" you or "kill" you and whether it hurts or not, is immaterial. It it also a statistical fact the taser has a higher effectiveness rate than the firearm per use.

As a court appointed legal expert in police use of force, as well as a long time defensive tactics instructor and university lecturer on the subject in conjuction with my thirty year background as a police officer, I suggest you re-examine your thoughts on the subject. It is these type of misconceptions that give the civilian population the wrong impressions. The job is not to inflict pain but to induce compliance. Of course it would be nice if everyone would just lay down, put there hands behind their back and say "uncle." But they don't.

Thank you for your proffesional tone. The immaterial nature of pain when you are "stopping", "shooting" or "killing" someone (your parenthesis, though I don't see any room for interpretation on such words) is only immaterial to you as the LEO, to the person you use it on, it is far from immaterial and that pain could lead you to loose your job on excessive force claims. I don't think I need to comment on stats of effectivness, most people know the "three types" saying. While I respect you background on the subject, it does lead me to the possiblity of your bias, as a long time officer and defensive tactics instructor your outlook may be skewed a bit. I believe your quote was, "The job is not to inflict pain, but to induce compliance.", yes, through pain. If it was used as a disruptor then there is no need for compliance from an unconscious or disrupted person.

taser's are disruptive to the nervous system...

my judo/jujitsu instructor is also in law enforcement...and when they were testing tasers they had four-five people linked together and tased one...the current knocked them all down...

that isn't current "passing through a small portion of the body"...

as for them not being 100%...as stated earlier nothing is...also, he's seen instances where people have been tased and their muscles "freeze"...the officer's were ordering the person to the ground and the person literally couldn't move to comply...so the officer's kept tasing and tasing...and ugly situation to be in.

The linked people example shows what electric current does when the path of least resistance is through many people. With one electrode on either end of the loop, the current is forced to pass through everyone to complete the curcuit. The intended use of a taser is to apply the prongs or electodes to the same person. In a small application area of the body. The path of least resistance in this case in through the small area of flesh between the prongs. This means the current is never forced through the areas that could cause disruption or worse (death or brain damage). Consequently who said anything about tasers being perfect or not. I only pointed out the limitations of using pain compliance on emotionally disturbed individuals.

 

[Tgace]

Fired Probes=System disruption. You dont really feel the pain until the pulse stops (cant do much of anything until the pulse stops)

Taser electrodes (non-fireable "prongs" on the gun itself)=Pain compliance tool.

 

[OULobo]

Fired Probes=System disruption. You dont really feel the pain until the pulse stops (cant do much of anything until the pulse stops)

Taser electrodes (non-fireable "prongs" on the gun itself)=Pain compliance tool.

Okay, then how do junkies and roid ragers still manage to pull out the prongs while they are still pulsing.

 

[Tgace]

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/stun-gun2.htm

 

[Tgace]

TASER FAILS TO HALT MAN WITH KNIFE
By IAN ITH - Seattle Times staff reporter

Seattle police say that more than 90 percent of the time, the 200 high-tech electric guns they have at the ready do exactly what they are supposed to do: jolt violent suspects into submission so police don't have to shoot them.

But not early yesterday morning.

When shots from two M26 Taser guns failed to stop a knife-wielding man, a SWAT officer shot the man dead.

As police and the weapon maker were left trying to explain why the high-tech weapons failed, they were quick to again point out that nonlethal weapons are not foolproof. And they aren't meant to replace shooting people, if that's necessary.

"The M26 is not a magic bullet," said Steve Tuttle, a founder of Taser International of Scottsdale, Ariz. "I wish my advanced Taser was a perfect weapon, but it's not. Nothing works all the time. We've made what we feel is the most powerful nonlethal weapon out there, but obviously the man chose his own destiny by lunging at the officer with a knife."

The department has purchased 194 Taser guns since last December and has been gradually introducing them in the field this year as part of a special program to use more nonlethal weapons.

It was prompted by the controversy surrounding the April 2000 fatal police shooting of David Walker, who was skipping down a Lower Queen Anne street and waving a knife. Walker had a history of mental illness.

The shooting was ruled justified, but critics said Walker's life might have been spared if nonlethal weapons, such as stun guns, had been quickly available.

Even then, police warned the public that Taser guns wouldn't mean the end of police shootings.

"We told you at the outset that this (program) is not a panacea, and it wasn't in this case," Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske said yesterday.

About 1,000 police departments in the country have purchased the weapons, and reports show that the guns work 94 percent of the time, the company says.

"It's the closest you can get to causing incapacitation, as long as you get a good hit," Tuttle said.

Seattle police have used the new guns about 80 times, with a success rate of 92 to 94 percent, said SWAT Officer Steve Ward, who helps train fellow officers to use the devices.

A department report released this month studied the first 37 times Seattle police used the shock guns and said that most of the time they were used against assault suspects, mentally ill people and drug dealers.

Of those 37 incidents, 55 percent of the suspects were white, 34 percent were black and 10 percent were Asian, the report said. Two of the suspects were women, and no one was injured beyond small welts from the electricity.

Bellevue police have 10 of the M26 guns, but they have used them only twice in the past five months, once successfully, department spokeswoman Marcia Harnden said.

In July, they shocked and subdued a 50-year-old, mentally ill man who was brandishing knives and a hatchet in his apartment. In September, officers zapped a man in downtown Bellevue who was high on drugs and resisting arrest. But the Taser malfunctioned.

"We had to rush him, and it ended up being an all-out fight," Harnden said.

Seattle police also keep other nonlethal weapons, including bean-bag rounds fired from special shotguns.

Coincidentally, Kirkland police Monday night used a tube-shaped device that shoots a hard plastic bullet to subdue a 40-year-old man who had poured gasoline on himself and was about to flick his cigarette lighter. He was captured without serious injury and taken to a hospital for a mental evaluation, police said.

All officers with the Special Response Team — Kirkland's version of SWAT — are trained to use plastic bullets as well as Tasers, police said.

Yesterday, Seattle police said they weren't sure why their Taser guns didn't subdue the knife-wielding man, who was 23.

Tuttle, the Taser-company spokesman, said Seattle police told him the first shot appeared to work, until the man broke the tiny wire connecting one of the shock probes to the gun. The second shot from a second gun probably didn't hit the man with both probes.

SWAT trainer Ward said that's purely speculative at this point as police investigate the death. But Tuttle said both scenarios are common with the M26.

"These wires are really thin things, and they can easily be broken in a rough situation," Tuttle said. "And you need both prongs to carry the electrical contact."

There are plenty of other situations that could cause Taser guns to fail, Tuttle and Ward say. Low batteries. Loose connections. Suspect out of range or wearing thick clothes.

In one case in another city, Tuttle said, police shot the probes at a man in a biker jacket. The probes both hit a large metal zipper, which defused the electricity away from the man.

In a Canadian case, Mounties shot a man in a hooded sweat shirt. One probe hit the dangling drawstring on the hood, too far from the suspect's body to shock him.

Because the weapons aren't perfect, the company — and Seattle police training — demands that when using a Taser against an armed suspect, another officer should stand by with a loaded pistol ready to fire.

"Even if this device was working, if (the man) was still coming after that officer and slashing, they're going to have to use lethal force," Tuttle said. "In this case, it's good that it was there because it saved that officer's life."

Seattle Times reporters Dave Birkland and Michael Ko contributed to this report. Ian Ith can be reached at 206-464-2109

 

[8253]

In order to determine justification, further info would be needed. I personally dont believe that tasing a 9 year old would be the right thing to do. As far as justification goes in Ohio, a taser is a compliance weapon that is lower on the use of force continum than oc. Basically if a person is not doing something that they are told to do then according to the use of force continum, they would be tased(if equiped) before oc is used. Which at the office where i work, basically weapons are not used unless they have already started to physically fight with you, and then it depends on how well you are able to handle the person. Once again though, i see no justification in tasing a 9 yo.

 

[TonyM.]

I can't actually believe someone admitted to using a taser to prevent a mentally incompetant person from banging their head. This makes me angry beyond belief.

 

[OULobo]

In order to determine justification, further info would be needed. I personally dont believe that tasing a 9 year old would be the right thing to do. As far as justification goes in Ohio, a taser is a compliance weapon that is lower on the use of force continum than oc. Basically if a person is not doing something that they are told to do then according to the use of force continum, they would be tased(if equiped) before oc is used. Which at the office where i work, basically weapons are not used unless they have already started to physically fight with you, and then it depends on how well you are able to handle the person. Once again though, i see no justification in tasing a 9 yo.

The continuum must be different per department. My local police department gave me a copy of the force continuum that they use and it states that "striking structural areas, Mace, Tear Gas, Electrical Devices and Baton Restraints" are together in a catagory, and between the less escalated "Striking Motor Points or Muscle Masses, Take Downs, Joint Manipulations and PPC" catagory and the more escalated "Baton Techniques or L.V.N.R." catagory. This was taken from Samuel Faulkner, as a side note ther are listed special circumstances and subject factors that effect placement on the continuum, of these the subject factors are Age, Sex, Size, Skill Level, Multiple subjects/ officers, relative strength. I think that our nine yr. old falls under the lower catagories of all these subject factors.