No more tasers on restrained persons in OC, So Cal

[Cryozombie]

I think it would depend on the level of restraint... its been pointed out here that being "restrained" doesn't mean controlled. We train to fight in cuffs in my dojo, and (I can't but...) several of the students can "roll out" of the cuffs, meaning cuffed behind thier back, they can drop into a backroll and come out with the cuffs in front... if someone did that, I'd say maybe a tasing would be in order.

But say... strapped to a chair and unable to move? I'm thinking... no.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Ray,
Not Funny! :disgust::rpo: Unless you have had to patch them back together when some moron has done just as you suggested can I ask to please refrain from making such "jokes".
Lori M

Agreed. People who hurt kitties will come back as mice in their next life. FACT.

 

[Archangel M]

Depends on what the wording of the policy is. If "restrained" is defined as handcuffed its a stupid policy because handcuffed doesnt mean "not dangerous".

If a policy is in place for purely political reasons its a stupid policy.

If a policy is made so things "look better" its a stupid policy.

 

[Makalakumu]

Depends on what the wording of the policy is. If "restrained" is defined as handcuffed its a stupid policy because handcuffed doesnt mean "not dangerous".

If a policy is in place for purely political reasons its a stupid policy.

If a policy is made so things "look better" its a stupid policy.

Well, that depends, now doesn't it. Certain things look better then others because certain things are actually kinda bad...like torturing a restrained person into compliance.

Tazing someone looks bad, but is sometimes neccessary. Tazing someone who is completely restrained for whatever reason looks bad because it is bad.

 

[Makalakumu]

Seeing as how I am not quite sure of your definition of restrained person, as you have yet to define it.

And for what do you think a taser is used. It is to cause someone to submit to the authority of the police. This means that if someone is resisting, it may be justified to use a taser on them, whether they are restrained or not.

And as soon as you start to make unrealistic demand on the ability of police officers to defend themselves, then that is when you stop having police.

Okay. How about we say restrained means that a person is not capable of effectively resisting.

When is it okay to taze someone in that position?

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Okay. How about we say restrained means that a person is not capable of effectively resisting.

When is it okay to taze someone in that position?

Sounds like a good definition to me.

Based on that, it is never ok to do that.

 

[Archangel M]

Well, that depends, now doesn't it. Certain things look better then others because certain things are actually kinda bad...like torturing a restrained person into compliance.

Tazing someone looks bad, but is sometimes neccessary. Tazing someone who is completely restrained for whatever reason looks bad because it is bad.

No, I dont see it that way. Some things (Id say many things in LE) "look bad" to people who have no clue as to the necessity of the action.

Using batons or hands and feet to the upper arms and legs of a fighting opponent can gain compliance and cuffing with as little damage as some bruising. But when the police are shown doing it to a fleeing gunman from an armed robbery its the centerpiece in a police brutality story. Because it "looks bad" some depts "leadership" will eventually come out with a police against it because its easier than having the nads to stand up and say the officers did what was necessary with a legal ammount of force, regardless of the appearance.

OTOH, if the restrained person is incapable of resisting and the force is applied out of anger, spite or amusement then there should be some people getting fired.

 

[arnisador]

"Restrained" is a vague term. In general, I can imagine using a Taser on a restrained person; e.g., a handcuffed person trying to bite an officer who was leading him to a cell. What are the alternatives? Beating him into compliance? Putting a gag on him without being bitten in the process? After the third instance of saying "Stop doing that or I'll tase you" it seems to me that tasing is one of the more humane reasonable options available to the authorities.

Obviously, there must be a policy and force should be used judiciously.

 

[Empty Hands]

OTOH, if the restrained person is incapable of resisting and the force is applied out of anger, spite or amusement then there should be some people getting fired.

I would strike out "fired" and replace with "jailed."

 

[Big Don]

I would strike out "fired" and replace with "jailed."

I wouldn't strike "fired" I would qualify "Fired Immediately" and add "Arrested, charged and prosecuted"