Topic awaiting preservation: Comply or else...

To protect and serve?

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/video/taser_video3a.html


Ramasax

(Edited by Ramasax on 06-07-2005 00:21)

Please comply with your local authorities. They bring down crime rates, ensure a safer environment, they guard you while you sleep.

Smartmouthing anyone who's threatening you with a weapon, wether this is a police officer, a decent person or a raging loon isn't advised in any case.

The SUV woman propably didn't expect the cop to react like he did, but she had to expect a reaction.

What did she expect? The cop was only doing his job, and she was not complying. You follow orders, plain and simple. Cops have no idea what to expect out of someone, no matter who they are. You disobey an order, you pay the price.

first thought: *jesus* what a stupid bitch.

2nd thought: ok, the tasing really wasn't necessary there. of course....he did tell her several times he was going to......so........................

I understand your point, ram.

i agree with the sentiment, overall.

But it has to be noted that in order to 'protect and serve', sometimes you do need to hurt people. May sound bad, but it's just a basic truth. She may not be the gun toting crackhead that was about to kill someone's baby.....but.....

Jesus how stupid can you be though??

Actually I almost posted this a couple of days ago when I first saw it.

At first I thought the guy had a bit of a short fuse. Then I realized 2 things. First what else is the cop supposed to do? Second (and perhaps most important) this wasn't his first trip to the car. If you listen he tells the woman her license is suspended which is why he's asking her to get out of the car. If you watch the "The Traffic Stop" video you can see the attitude he was dealing with.



.:[ Never resist a perfect moment ]:.

(Edited by bitdamaged on 06-07-2005 02:28)

quote:

---

They bring down crime rates, ensure a safer environment, they guard you while you sleep.

---

I sure feel a lot safer knowing that this dangerous woman is off the street. Perhaps they should go after the real criminals for a change rather than criminalizing people just trying to live their lives.

quote:

---

Cops have no idea what to expect out of someone, no matter who they are.

---

I seem to remember a time when the police did not force compliance through torture, and shooting electrical wires which penetrate the skin and discharging 50,000 volts of 'lectricity into their body is just that. They seemed to manage fine without them before Taser International began getting these very lucrative contracts with our law enforcment across the world. They may have had to spend an extra bit of time using their brains and actually talk to a citizen they have sworn to protect in a civil way back then rather than resorting to force as a first resort, but IMO the extra expense of our tax dollars was well worth it to keep secure the civil rights of our people. We are sliding down a slope folks.

Over a hundred people have died at the hands of law enforcment because of these things in the US alone and there are other options, especially in a case such as this. You are right, they didn't know what to expect of this woman. They didn't know if she had a weak heart or any other health problems which may have made tasering her lethal.

Agreed DL, she was a dumb ass, and surely not a model of civil disobedience, but tased multiple times over a routine traffic stop? Nah, I don't think our founding fathers had that kind of abuse in mind when drafting a constitution for this "free" nation.

What of the pregnant woman who was tasered for refusing to sign a ticket? I would hope some of you would at least have a problem with that or were they just doing their job in this instance also?

My point is not that she should not have been arrested, but that the cops are now using these devices regularly as a way of forcing compliance through pain. Two big stong men such as these surely could have handled one little woman refusing to get out of her vehicle without resorting to such extreme measures.



Ramasax

Ramasax, she wasn't complying with the police force. All she had to do was do what they asked, MANY FREAKING TIMES. They asked her to put down the cell phone. She kept talking. They asked her to put it down again. She started to finish the conversation. THey asked again. She wouldn't.

Then, they ask her to get out of the car. SHE ARGUES WITH THEM! What the heck; they did their job using no force whatsoever. Yes, they hurt her. He gave her LOTS of express warning before using the taser. A taser causes no damage, it only hurts. (It looks more like it was a shock stick, btw; not the sort of taser that launches the two spears. I doubt her skin was penetrated.)

Ramasax, I hate to tell you this, but forcing compliance WITH THE FREAKING LAW is the way the world works. And it's the way the world ought to, unless you're an anarchist. I'm not. I like order. Therefore, the police force using force is completely acceptable to me. And I will comply with the police until they breach the law or until the law becomes unreasonable, which thus far being asked to drop a stupid cell phone is not.

---
Website

quote:

---

At first I thought the guy had a bit of a short fuse.

---

It seemed that way to me at first, as well, but I discovered that the first video that's linked to above was not the entire stop. She was being a contentious bitch well before what we see there, which you can watch in another clip.

The officer had stopped her for doing more than 50 in a 35 and she did nothing but talk back to him, accusing him of illegally using a radar gun (?) and other ridiculous nonsense, from the first moment he approached the car. The first words out of her mouth were backtalk. (Again, what we see in the clip above was not the first he had spoken to her.) He then discovered she had a suspended license and was attempting to arrest her when she refused to comply even to hang up her phone, effectively resisting arrest, which prompted him to pull out the taser. And instead of making any effort at all to do as she was told -- even at this point -- she continued to talk to her friend on the phone and narrate the situation!

She then cried in a pretentious fashion I've only ever heard 4-year-olds do when trying to get attention or sympathy, which to me further demonstrates this woman's self-centered disregard for the seriousness of what was going on around her.

This idiot was driving dangerously in a residential area and doing so without a license to be behind a wheel in the first place -- we can only speculate what offense she had committed to have her license suspended, though it may have been enough for the officer to consider her dangerous when he made the approach for the arrest -- and then she topped it off by showing complete disrespect for the situation and for the officers, treating her phone call as more important than the law. She even contested toward the end that all she was ever doing was trying to talk on the phone (which she humorously referred to as her "touchtone"), again demonstrating her selfish dismissal of reality and shrugging off the multiple offenses she had committed. (Which I know others will trivialize, so I'll list them again: speeding, driving without a license, resisting arrest and whatever she had done that was bad enough to have had her license taken away to begin with.)

She was not practicing civil disobedience. She was being a child. And children shouldn't be driving SUVs. I'm glad they were getting her off the street and I think she deserved what she got.

Edit: Wallaby got in ahead of me.

quote:

---

It looks more like it was a shock stick, btw ...

---

It actually was a taser; you can see them removing the wires when they handcuff her, which is confirmed in the commentary.

Regardless, she wasn't getting shocked simply for not hanging up the phone. She had escalated the situation prior to that.



(Edited by Wes on 06-07-2005 04:11)

Good eye, Wes. That particular clip is much shorter than the actual stop.

http://www.big-boys.com/articles/policetazer.html

I've been doing a little reading about other's reaction. Quite a few folks are saying that there are alternatives to Taser. I can't help but wonder if the outcry of police brutality would be the same if the officier had used a baton or a choke-hold.

When an officier has to use force - Taser or otherwise - someone is gonna get hurt.

My experience with police has been reasonable. If I take it easy and remain calm, they do the same towards me. The two stops that I had went quick and easy because because I didn't give them any shit. Hell, the sheriff that arrested me that one time was a real nice guy.

He was like, "I'm here to arrest you."
I was like, "Alright."
He was like, "Cool."
He took it easy on the handcuffs and everything.

quote:

---

Regardless, she wasn't getting shocked simply for not hanging up the phone. She had escalated the situation prior to that.

---

And if you listen to the end, the woman actually took a swing at one of the officers, which constitutes an auto-tase... In addition, he told her repeatedly "if you don't get out of the car, I'll have to tase you." Seems like a pretty simple equation to me: if you don't want to get shocked, do what the officer says.



(Edited by synax on 06-07-2005 04:52)

quote:

---

I seem to remember a time when the police did not force compliance through torture, and shooting electrical wires which penetrate the skin and discharging 50,000 volts of 'lectricity into their body is just that. They seemed to manage fine without them before Taser International began getting these very lucrative contracts with our law enforcment across the world. They may have had to spend an extra bit of time using their brains and actually talk to a citizen they have sworn to protect in a civil way back then rather than resorting to force as a first resort, but IMO the extra expense of our tax dollars was well worth it to keep secure the civil rights of our people. We are sliding down a slope folks.

---

And I seem to remember a time when we didn't have camera's recording the actions of our police ofiicers which could be used to condemn them. Perhaps you're still reliving this pipe-dream of yours where, in the 50's everything was just dandy - there wasn't much crime and the policemen all went to home to see what kind of pie Aunt Bea made today...

Regardless of the technology available, police forces (or anyone else in a position of authority or security situatio0 is open to corruption, to over reaction, and to undue scrutiny and hindsight.
Before the introduction of tasers, perhaps she would simply have been beaten with night stick - would that be ok? There aren't really many lucrative contracts for nightstick manufacture...would that help ease your conspiracy complex?

Or are you suggesting that such things only happen *now* - that they didn't happen "then"?

Wake up!

quote:

---

Agreed DL, she was a dumb ass, and surely not a model of civil disobedience, but tased multiple times over a routine traffic stop? Nah, I don't think our founding fathers had that kind of abuse in mind when drafting a constitution for this "free" nation.

---

Are you actually aware of the actions of these historical figures, or only of their grand writings?

Did they have tarring and feathering in mind? Plenty of that went on...along with plenty of other things consisting of humiliation, violence, theft, etc. Certainly with their high ideals, such things as slavery were condemned in the constitution! Oh...wait, it was actually preserved...

Please - lose the melodramatics for a moment.

Bottom line: she was warned *many* times that if she didn't stop her idiotic and erratic behavior, she would be tased. In her arrogance and stupidity, she payed no mind. She got tased. Unfortunate that it went that far, yes. Unacceptable? Hardly.



(Edited by DL-44 on 06-07-2005 05:04)

Google News Search:

taser + dies

Nobody sees this as a problem?

Whatever then. I'll crawl back into my hole.


Ramasax

(Edited by Ramasax on 06-07-2005 05:25)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taser

"It is described as non-lethal (officially "less-lethal", meaning it is not intended to kill, and usually does not kill, but does on rare occasions)."

How about googling for death by beating? Or by falling? Or by simply just sitting there and having a stroke, since people do die in any number of ways whether it is dangerous or not. Just because a taser can (and does) kill in some instances, doesn't mean it does commonly. And, quite frankly, I'd rather be zapped with very low harm than bashed over the head with a stick or shot in the leg with a gun to subdue me.

"It actually was a taser; you can see them removing the wires when they handcuff her, which is confirmed in the commentary." > Good eye, thanks for correcting me.

---
Website

Well, I can remember the time when I was in the army, and we were on weekend leave, and we all decided to "invade" one of the local watering holes...and some marines there at one of the tables thought it might be a good idea to let a few comments drop...

The ensuing ruckus soon consumed the whole bar.

Didn't take very long for the MPs to come - and they certainly didn't ask first - they just started swinging those batons.

So there is me, with my hands held up, didn't stop the MP from giving me a dose of baton.

*shrugs*

Looking back on it now, I would of preferred the taser...

quote:

---

Nobody sees this as a problem?

---

quote:

---

Results 1 - 10 of about 58 for taser dies.

---

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3A%3Cimg+src%3D&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=shooting+death&btnG=Search+News

quote:

---

Results 1 - 10 of about 14,700 for shooting death.

---

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3A%3Cimg+src%3D&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=beating+death&btnG=Search+News

quote:

---

Results 1 - 10 of about 7,410 for beating death.

---

In the big picture? No.

I think it's also important to note that these police officers are putting THEIR lives on the line everytime they go out on the job. It's THEIR lives for OUR safety. The taser was introduced as a non-lethal way to subdue a hostile subject in the event of conflict - it protects BOTH the person being zapped and the officer doing the zapping.

quote:

---

I think it's also important to note that these police officers are putting THEIR lives on the line everytime they go out on the job. It's THEIR lives for OUR safety. The taser was introduced as a non-lethal way to subdue a hostile subject in the event of conflict - it protects BOTH the person being zapped and the officer doing the zapping

---

Was it the talking on the phone or the cigarette smoke that put these officers lives on the line where they felt obligated to use potentially lethal force against this women?

There's a big difference between subduing a violent suspect and a women mouthing off. I've viewed the clip a few times now and I don't see where these officers felt threatened.

quote:

---

She may not be the gun toting crackhead that was about to kill someone's baby.....but.....

---

but what DL, she yelled real loud? Maybe the officers felt if they didn't attack her their hearing would suffer in the future?

In regards to the whole 'good ol' days' concept. When I was a kid, I remember the police letting drunk cops or firemen off the hook when they got pulled over. Sometimes they were even drunk on duty. If that happens today, it's certainly a lot less than it was 20-30 years ago.

-jiblet

Another thing that I read in some other threads about this is that the woman wasn't originally on the phone when she was stopped, she made the call afterwards and then refused to hang up. She brought it on herself entirely.

And I think she was trying for an Oscar for her performance after she was tased the first time. I've never heard such fake crying and moaning from anyone over the age of 5 or so. I laughed when the officers said that they'd been tased and it didn't hurt as much as she was making it out to, but then I thought about it and people's pain thresholds are different. Still, not as bad as she's acting though, and certainly not for what? 5 minutes or however long she was moaning on the ground?

_____________________

coeur de feu
Qui sème le vent récolte la tempête!

quote:

---

but what DL, she yelled real loud? Maybe the officers felt if they didn't attack her their hearing would suffer in the future?

---

It really is very simple, no matter how much of an argument you wish to make of it.

She didn't do what she needed to do. She was argumentative and combatitive.
She was warned repeatedly what would happen if she did not stop.

She didn't stop.

What she was warned would happen....shockingly enough.....happened.

~shrug~

I have no problem with that whatsoever.

It is very simple DL. Lethal force by arresting officers should be reserved for protecting oneself or the public - NOT for disposing of a women yelling.

Argumentative? Combative? One would think she was being pulled over & potentially ticketed for hundreds of dollars. She might have gone a little overboard but nothing THAT unusual that police officers don't see a hundred times a day. Take your own advice and wake up! People are less then willing to comply when they're pulled over are you suggesting that everyone needs to be tased?

I guess the thing that concerns me about this story is the severity of the justice dealt by the judg.. er police officer.

Would you be making the same arguments if he popped a cap in her leg? Surely the amount of resistance she was putting up deserved something more along the lines of being physically restrained and thrown in the back of the car with handcuffs on.

DL-44 you make fair points about her being more than just fair-warned, but was the judgement of the situation by the police officer correct? Sure he didn't get himself into any harm and gained power in the situation, but was it the correct method, we're not yet in millitaristic states yet!

Cheers,

Jestah, they tased her because she took a swing at one of the officers! If you watched the video as many times as you claim, then you'd of noted that.

SHE PHYSICALLY THREATENED THE OFFICERS, not to mention she blatantly disobeyed their orders repeatedly. The law is the law ALL the time, not just when you feel like obeying it.

I'm with DL on this one, she got what was coming to her. There's no police brutality in this case - the only time they laid a hand on her was to help her to her feet.



(Edited by synax on 06-07-2005 20:51)

Is taking the swing at an officer the same as an autonomic response when somebody forcibly handles you? This is a standard line that cops use so they can add more charges...ie it is bullshit.

quote:

---

Blaise: I guess the thing that concerns me about this story is the severity of the justice dealt by the judg.. er police officer. ... we're not yet in millitaristic states yet!

---

Exactly.

Ramasax

quote:

---

Jestah, they tased her because she took a swing at one of the officers! If you watched the video as many times as you claim, then you'd of noted that.

---

Synax can you be more specific? Are you commenting on the clips posted by Ramasax & WJ? I've watched them several times and prior to the officer attacking her I don't see her doing anything really wrong.

She closed the door when asked to. She complied with his request for license & registration. We don't get the chance to find out whether or not she would have complied with the cell phone/cigarette request because as the clock notes he gives her SECONDS before attacking her!

So what's the ONE request she fails to honor? She fails to exit her car with a weapon pointed at her! She should be attacked for that?

If you were in her position, I think you'd be lucky to get out of the situation without soiling your pants.

quote:

---

but was the judgement of the situation by the police officer correct?

---

I've said several times so far - perhaps it wasn't.
But given the circumstances, I'm not going to second guess it in hindsight.

This is definately a case of 'mountains out of molehills' and there are *far* more important examples of the abuse of power by police. To focus energy on this is silly. To make this some sort of rallying point for police brutality or government power is belittling to the real issues.

To all who think that this officer used unreasonable force in this instance:
What would you have had him do instead?

That is a genuine question - what would you have done? What should he have done? What would have been more appropriate?

quote:

---

If you were in her position, I think you'd be lucky to get out of the situation without soiling your pants.

---

If I were in her position, there would have been no episode because I'm not a fucking idiot.

a) You don't trash-talk an officer, that's just plain stupid
b) You don't LIGHT A CIGARETTE and USE YOUR CELLPHONE when you get pulled over, that's just plain stupid
c) When someone is POINTING A GUN in your face, you do what he says. If you don't, that's just plain stupid
d) When you've been placed under arrest, SHUT THE FUCK UP AND COMPLY - if you don't...well you see where this is going

I think I'll just settle on the fact that *I* think she got what she deserved and everyone else can think what they please.

Yeah the lady certainly had the power to lead these sequence of events in a much more favorable direction. Yet, what ever happened to just slapping people with a few criminal offenses for not cooperating and letting them pay the price in court? How about Failure to Comply with a Police Officer or Resisting Arrest?

I think the woman was a bit irrational in her decisions, and you'd never see many people resist like she did. I think tasering would be a bit extreme and a lazy approach to solve the problem for this situation. Looks like a cop starved for action. Maybe some problems at home?

quote:

---

To all who think that this officer used unreasonable force in this instance:
What would you have had him do instead?

---

Give her a fucking ticket for every offense she violated up to the point of her tasering...simple.

(Edited by Thumper on 06-08-2005 03:12)

you give tickets for resisting an arrest?

Well, not a ticket, but a criminal charge. It is a misdemeanor to resist arrest.

quote:

---

This is definately a case of 'mountains out of molehills' and there are *far* more important examples of the abuse of power by police.

---

I think the taser issue IS a big problem, and very important. There are few guidlines for their use, and as such they are being employed too quickly by undertrained officers instead of them taking the time to learn to control a situation by other means.

To answer your question reitsma; what would I have done? Well first it depends on the laws of Florida and this particular municipality. If I had the lawful right to detain and/or arrest this woman for the offenses specified, then first and foremost I would have been a little more patient and explanative first. We do not need impatient and zealous people policing us, a little less testosterone and a little more self-control and possibly some understanding and empathy for her situation. This was a routine traffic stop for cripe sakes! People respond better to kindness than they do to orders. Is that too much to ask from those who serve us? Otherwise what is the difference between the police and criminals? Should we fear our law enforcment as well as those they are supposed to protect us from?

If spending a few extra minutes of my day trying to talk to the woman, person to person, not Almighty Cop vs. Lowly Civilian, did not work, and she was still acting like an asshat, and I was under obligation to bring her in, I would have grabbed her arm and removed her from the vehicle, being that I am twice her size that would probably be a fairly effortless endeavor, thus allowing the other officer to grab her other arm and apply the cuffs. If I had to take a slap in the face to do so, I would rather that than resort to such a painful, tortuous measure. Ever been tasered?

If I was under no real obligation to bring her in I would have written her ticket/citation and let the judicial branch do its job.

Had I tasered her, not that I would have, but just for the sake of argument, I would not have tasered her a second time for not being able to get on her stomach and put her hands behind her back right away, knowing full well what 50,000 volts can do to the human nervous system. I also would not have claimed that she took a swing at me when she clearly did no such thing.

Where do we draw the line here? If this is ok for most of you guys, then I ask again, what of the use of a taser on a pregnant woman who refused to comply? What of the man strapped to a hospital bed forced to give a urine sample? What of the use of tasers on young children? The elderly? A man in diabetic shock? How about protestors employing their right to petition the government for a redress of grievances? Where does it stop if nobody sees any problem?

And to go back a bit, I don't have a conspiracy complex. A conspiracy is hidden, and this is quote open. Taser International has been caught on multiple occasions paying local councilmen and officials to push their products on their police forces and others.



Ramasax

quote:

---

DL-44
there wasn't much crime and the policemen all went to home to see what kind of pie Aunt Bea made today...

---

heavenly =)

quote:

---

Jestah
There's a big difference between subduing a violent suspect and a women mouthing off. I've viewed the clip a few times now and I don't see where these officers felt threatened.

---

I feel the same, but realize full well that my wife and kids could very easily be without a father and husband as a result of my heart. Procedure is taught and refined as times go by, and for good reason. Let the times judge the actions according to the instruction. Or somesuch.

quote:

---

Jestah
I've watched them several times and prior to the officer attacking her I don't see her doing anything really wrong.

---

Aside from not complyng (repeatedly) with the wishes of the authorities?

quote:

---

reitsma
What would you have had him do instead?

---

you've nailed it, they do as they are trianed, they are trained according to experience of those who have gone before, the training will likely change as the ACLU and the likes of ramasax (no offense) sees fit.

quote:

---

'naxer
If I were in her position, there would have been no episode because I'm not a fucking idiot.

---

not sure I agree 100% but yeah!!!! =D

ramasax I applaud your senssibilities but I really don't think you can fault the police officers in question here, perhaps the training you may have a case. Maybe that will be refined because of this case, maybe not, my views often differ from those that rule =) I think the first 4 paragraphs above are sensible but you tail off into the un-rational side of existence with the rest. The majority of us dun die when tazed, the minority that do I'd advise to comply with a man pointing a tazer at em in record time. If an officer can't take measures, measures that have been trained into him him, to protect himself, there would soon be no force to protect and to serve.

Me? I would have gone the soft route, maybe taken in a rather unruly wench without incident (aside from a cool 'unruly wench' video to show at the policeman's ball), maybe dead from a gunshot {non-phone hand}, who's to say?



edit: bbCode can't we all just get along?!

(Edited by JKMabry on 06-08-2005 07:52)

quote:

---

the training will likely change as the ACLU and the likes of ramasax (no offense) sees fit.

---

Comparing me with the ACLU? Offense taken, but that is ok, on this issue I suppose it is accurate.

I don't really fault the police officers per se, just the fact that they throw these new toys at them and it becomes an unregulated quick fix in which many innocents are harmed as well as those deserving it.

quote:

---

I think the first 4 paragraphs above are sensible but you tail off into the un-rational side of existence with the rest.

---

How so? I'd be happy to clarify anything in a more rational fashion if you like, complete with links to actual news articles from local papers around the country regarding both tasers used in those ways and bribing of officials by TI (minus the protestor one, I threw that in for melodramatic effect, as DL says, although tear gas and other nice things have been used against them by our peace officers).

Ramasax

I think it bears mentioning that there may have been prior instances of violence that showed up on this woman's record when the officer ran her ID. Again, we don't know what she may have done to have her license suspended in the first place. So whatever the officer discovered on her record may have prompted him to treat her as dangerous.

Frankly, I think this woman simply needed a few more spankings as a child. So she got the adult version instead.

quote:

---

Frankly, I think this woman simply needed a few more spankings as a child.

---

Now that I can agree with.

I'll volunteer to give her spankings now, if you think that will help...

Go for it DL, she's all yours.


Ramasax

DL - you're game. I couldn't last a second in the same room as that whining goose.

Are tasers harsh? Yes. But there's more than the safety of the 'victim' (the civilian) at stake here. This woman may be completely harmless, but policemen know enough (or are trained enough) to know from previous experiences that reaching into a car to apprehend a person is not an option. You are far to vulnerable. Ok, so this lady was only armed with a cigarette and a cellphone. There is still the inherent risk to the officer that is simply avoided by making the civilian exit the car themselves, with hands visible at all times. If this lady had outstanding arrest warrants for murder, this is clearly the procedure they would have followed; it makes sense to apply this procedure to all instances where the driver needs to exit the vehicle.

Honestly, in my opinion the only problem in this whole situation is the woman's stupidity.

Cop made one serious error...should have tasered a second time then sprayed her.

She was clearly deliberately trying to drive herself into hysteria after already dusplaying an attitude which essentially said "Go ahead, I dare ya".

So they did.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

quote:

---

reitsma said:
Honestly, in my opinion the only problem in this whole situation is the woman's stupidity.

---

Bang on.