Police Tasing is as American as Apple Pie and Baseball

[lame54]

Run time: 03:38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXkwa9uFBss   Posted on YouTube: August 06, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: August 08, 2009 By DU Member: lame54 Views on DU: 2721

 
It doesn't matter if you are a sober season ticket holder with two knee replacements.
as in this next vid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6GDE0d7SXw

[Stuckinthebush]

1. The cops don't have to use diplomacy anymore

they can simply taze you if you don't do what they say. Clearly this guy was telling them to fuck off. I'm sure that pissed off the officers. In the past, it was more messy to slam him in the head with a stick so they used more diplomacy. Now, they just taze the person who is being belligerent. Makes me sick.

[DrDan]

3. clearly had it coming - he was given the opportunity to comply

apparently - then he thumbs his nose.

Seems fully warranted.

[Stuckinthebush]

7. I agree that he needed to be removed

but he did not have the taze coming. That is violence. What he did didn't warrant that level of violence. Three cops could have pulled him up and out of the seat.

[rd_kent]

12. "What he did didn't warrant that level of violence"

What makes you say that? He was asked several times to get up and leave, he was grabbed on the wrist by the officers and he jerked away, became more belligerent and agitated. What was the next step?

[grahamhgreen]

31. God forbid he sit there and watch the game!

[rd_kent]

39. But he was not doing that!

The cops didnt just randomly choose this guy.

[grahamhgreen]

59. What was him crime? I missed that nt

[rd_kent]

64. I would appear

that he was drunk, belligerent and disturbing others around him.

Regardless, from what I see, the police were justified. We may not agree on that, but thats why they call it opinion.

[unapatriciated]

67. so what is the excuse for the police in the second vid?

do you justify that one also? She was not drunk, compiled with their request and was still dragged out and tased.

[DrDan]

43. I agree - they could have. And there may have been more chance of someone getting hurt doing that.

We agree he needed to be removed. I see no reason the police need put their bodies at risk because of some drunk acting foolishly - and refusing to obey lawful orders. I do not feel the least bit sorry for him.

[lame54]

13. the crowd who witnessed it first-hand seemed to disagree with you

[DrDan]

42. yeah - I heard the comments - I also saw the

police trying to talk to him and saw him thumb his nose at them.

I see where they did nothing wrong. I am sure we will know soon enough how the judge sees it.

[grahamhgreen]

30. Why dont we just bring back summary executions!

[DrDan]

41. ridiculous

[grahamhgreen]

60. But it goes so well with torture!

:sarcasm:

[EFerrari]

71. Had it coming? WTF? What other forms of violence do you endorse?

The man was a threat to no one. If these goons had language, they could have handled it without force.

[Wizard777]

2. Belligerent Fan Appreciation Day's are always fun.

Free tasering, bracelets, and transportation to the nearest jail cell. It's everything they've ever wanted. You have to give the fans what they want.

[rd_kent]

4. Not seeing too much af a problem here.

Belligerent drunk guy refuses to follow instruction from a police officer gets tazed. Duh!

[rhett o rick]

6. Right, he is just lucky they didn't shoot him. Seems to be at their option. nm

[rd_kent]

8. Yeah! They should have just shot him.

Seriously? What an inflammatory comment.

[rhett o rick]

14. Hey I was just going along with you. Cops seem to taser anyone that won't cooperate. Occasionally

they decide to shot them. They aren't held accountable for any of it. People are dying from being tasered all the time. Why was it necessary to taser that drunk? Cuff him and haul him out. Nope, gotta make him sorry he disrespected a cop.

And you don't see a problem?

[rd_kent]

24. "People are dying from being tasered all the time". Really?

Please provide data on that.

[grahamhgreen]

32. From 2007 Rocky Mt News - 300 people have died after being stunned with Tasers

Since Tasers began being used in Colorado, seven residents have died after being subdued with the devices, Mark Silverstein, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, said Tuesday.

In the United States and Canada combined, 300 people have died after being stunned with Tasers, he said.

..........

70 people died in the United States after being shocked with Tasers in 2006, according to the Amnesty International 2007 annual report.

6 suspects in Colorado have died after being Tasered since 2002, according to the Colorado ACLU. Monday's death would be the seventh.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5632116,00.html

[rd_kent]

37. 300. How many tasers were used without killing?

Need a percentage here. Im willing to bet that < .5% of all taser usage by the police results in death. More people drown in their bathtub every year.

[grahamhgreen]

58. Right on! How many whips have been used without a death!

[Piewhacket]

62. agree with grahamhgreen, bathtub statistics are not relevant rd_kent.

while this circumstance is not exactly a poster child for
police abuse, it still has problems.

remember, police are NEVER permitted to use ANY force unless
there is proper cause. and even if there is cause, which is
not entirely clear from the video, police are NEVER permitted
to use unreasonable force in effecting an arrest.

So what force is unreasonable? A jury (without any LEO relatives)
sometimes decides that.

here there is some doubt whether the use of a taser was reasonable
in view of the to the risk of death or other serious injury from
tasers. The safety of using these weapons is in doubt*, and the
standard for using them is set too low, improperly low. unlawfully
low. perhaps criminally low.

*(not to mention the risk some stressed out whackout will reach
for his gun and later have to have his lawyer pretend he thought
it was his taser.)

In addition many people might also wonder if three officers are on
hand to arrest a nearly incapacitated drunk, then how did the drunk
end up with a broken arm, other than by the abuse or negligence
of police.? y'know?

anyway, see post #20 by asdjrocky , who also makes this point.

[rhett o rick]

34. There is a lot of data on the internets. I'd be glad to provide you the data, but somehow

I don't think it will change your mind.

Curious, do you support single payer? or even a strong public option for health care? Seriously, I am interested.

[rd_kent]

38. My mind is very open.

I just do not see the fatality rate of taser usage being very high. Sure, people get killed, but the rate of death by taser is most likely way less than the number of people who drown in their bathtub.

Health care? Not sure where you are going with this, but I will bite. Yes, 100% in favor of single payer. As retired military, my health plan is fantastic. Not sure why a similar program is not available to all.

[rhett o rick]

40. I understand the percentage is low. I just think the police are overly zealous in the

use of tasers. I do apologize for automatically assuming that because you favor strong police methods that you might be leaning strongly to the right. I have recently run into one such poster that I suspect isn't a Democrat but here in DU to disrupt. We should be able to disagree without me getting snarky.

I don't like the use of statistics to justify clearly dangerous police method. I think that tasers should be restricted to be used only on those that become violent. I have seen police use tasers on people that were handcuffed and on the ground, IMO just to get them to shut up.

[izquierdista]

53. Look it up yourself you lazy slug

It ought to keep you busy for a few days.

[rd_kent]

55. Where did that come from?

Have we been at it with each other somewhere else? Nonetheless, I have plenty of stuff to do, thanks.

[DrDan]

44. nope - why should the police risk their bodies trying to manhandle this drunk

immobilize him - he asked for it from what I saw

[lame54]

15. like yours wasn't?

[rd_kent]

25. Uhm, no. I explained my self in a lucid, comprehensive manner.

Dont see what is inflammatory about it. Nothing sensational or hyperbole used.

[lame54]

27. I love the condescending ending Duh!

[rd_kent]

29. What? Condescending?

Not following you. I made a statement of opinion and followed it up with a rational, unemotional response.

[rhett o rick]

5. Getting to taser people is one of the job benefits. nm

[rd_kent]

9. Sounds like you are jealous.

[rhett o rick]

16. Yeah that's a logical extension. I am curous, what do you think about Blackwater? nm

[rd_kent]

26. Not sure what that has to do with this incident

But I am 100% against the use of private mercenaries. Blackwater seems to have committed what may amount to murder at best and war crimes at worst, and they need to be prosecuted.

[rhett o rick]

35. Nothing. I just assumed, and apparently was wrong. That since you are defending the police

use of tasers for unruly people, I thought maybe you were a gung-ho, might is right kinda guy. Again, I was wrong.

[rd_kent]

56. No worries, Bro.

I get ahead of myself sometimes too, usually with disatrous results. Having a fued with another member now, as I allowed my emotions to work the keyboard.
I seem to be in the minority when it comes to defending the cops. Mind you, not a blanket defense, but a "wait until we know everything" mentality that seems to lack here on DU when a story comes out about the cops. There are plenty of bad cops out there, for sure, but most of them do their job with honor and integrity, and I think many people forget that. Those folks do a job that many cant or wont do. They deserve the benefit of the doubt, but if they screwed up, they should be hammered for it.

[rhett o rick]

18. Self delete, duplicate.

[Piewhacket]

10. Uh.. It is a given that police routinely use unlawful force...

and that tasers and their misuse are a BIG problem.

but this doesn't seem to be a particularly
great example. it depends... the video doesn't
tell us everything we need to call it.

probably worth an inquiry by HIS attorney.

[asdjrocky]

11. Cops are nothing but a bunch of scared little pansies now.

All of their training is about keeping the officer safe, not the public. There was a time when a cop would scuffle but now they just pull the tazer, especially when it's an old man or woman.

Fucking pigs.

[bertman]

19. Big talk, asdjrocky. So you think a "scuffle" would have been a safer alternative?

I think you're an internet hero who thinks putting rocky in his screenname makes him tough.

[asdjrocky]

20. Funny,

Been my name all my life buddy. I got it because my dad was Golden Gloves and so was I. Spent most adult life working in one bar or another and it's from that experience that I derived most of my experience with cops. My experience tells me they are not the best people on the planet, and cowards unless they are in very large groups.

As far as a scuffle goes, I'll put a pair of handcuffs on you and have you on your knees in 3 seconds with no blood. It's not that hard to do if you know how to do it. Trust me, they taze because it's fun and easy. The reason they use tazers is so you can do it from a distance. Have you ever been tazed? Have you ever seen it happen up close?

Nobody here is a hero, some of us have perhaps seen a bit more of the harder world out there. Here, or out there, I'm the same guy.

[bertman]

57. Sounds like you need to train the police, rocky, since you're so good that you could "put a pair

of handcuffs on you and have you on your knees in 3 seconds with no blood." Of course, you don't have to do this day in and day out like the boys and girls in blue have to do.

If those cops had put cuffs on that guy and had him on his knees in three seconds the same folks would be yelling "police brutality" and "they didn't have to do that. The guy wasn't doing anything wrong." It's a no-win situation for the police.

No, I have not been tasered and I hope I never am. But then I don't feel the need to give the police a hard time either.

And congratulations on your Golden Gloves! That's impressive. What weight class?

As far as seeing the harder world out there, I'm one of the lucky ones who hasn't had to see it except on a few occasions. But I have friends who were/are cops who have seen it and every one of them is glad to have a taser rather than have to go physical on a perp. I respect their opinions because they're good people who are trying to do a tough job the best they can.

[asdjrocky]

61. No. The last thing I want to do is train police.

But it could be done. Show any of your cop friends the video and ask them how they would cuff the guy.

And I didn't say knees, I said belly. Big difference, a guy on his knees is still dangerous and can really do some damage to himself or others. You can't do a lot on your belly, ask your cop friends about that as well.

And I spent a lot of years handling a lot of drunk people. It has nothing to do with tough and nothing to do with strong. It has everything to do with smart and a lot to do with balance.

As for boxing? I did it for my dad mostly who was a champion. I only made the tournament one year and I bombed badly. Those other guys wanted to hit me in the face you know. That was a long, long time and about 30 some years ago. If I remember that far back I was 115 to 120 or so. I guess it was flyweight or bantam. Some people have it, and some people don't, my dad did, I didn't.

And I'm really sorry if it seems like I'm coming off as some kind of a tough guy and I'll admit cops can really get under my skin.

By the way, if your grandma doesn't know how, anyone that really knows anything about defending themselves can teach her how to take down a drunk. It's no great skill.

[bertman]

63. Unfortunately, all of my grandmas have passed on, but I agree that it's a good skill to have.

And, you're right, it's not that hard to do.

"Those other guys wanted to hit me in the face you know." LOL.

[rhett o rick]

36. A couple of good cops could have easily handled a drunk old man. They should have handcuffed

him and escorted him away. Instead they had to tase him multiple times to make their job easier. And it almost started a riot. Not that they care. They have their tasers. Using a taser should be a last resort.

[DrDan]

51. why not make their job easier and remove the risk of injury to themselves

seems logical to me.

The guy deserved it. He should have obeyed their requests. He didn't. He paid the price.

[unapatriciated]

66. so did the woman in the second vid pay the Price?

did she also deserve it?

[DrDan]

68. hard to tell - the police claim she punched and kicked a couple of times after

being asked to comply with their requests.

Being 54 and having bad knees does not allow her to set the rules.

She has sued. It will be interesting to see how a judge rules.

[unapatriciated]

69. did you not hear the news commentator's statement?

or her statement? she did comply. The news stated that none of the witnessed saw her kick nor did any of the vids record her kicking. I guess the police are never wrong.
Over crowding of seats pushed her into the aisle, she had a seat that she paid for so what rule did she break?
There was not a reason for them to haul her off since she had complied and squeezed back into her seat. Again what rule did she break to warrant being carried off? She did admit to a kick only after being carried out thrown faced down and the police twisted her knee.

[DrDan]

70. well . . . sounds like there might have beena reason

" . . . refused to move out of the aisle at Camp Randall Stadium was Tasered and arrested during a scuffle involving herself, her husband and three UW-Madison police officers shortly after kickoff of the UW-Penn State football game on Saturday.

"Margaret Hiebing, 54, of Madison was charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest while her husband, Roman Hiebing Jr., 65, same address, was charged with disorderly conduct, according to UW-Madison police."

in addition sounds like a couple of officers were somewhat injured by her kicking.

http://www.badgerbeat.com/news/article/id/309236

[unapatriciated]

72. I read that and chose to get all sides. So here is a story with a different prospective.

http://athleticbusiness.com/articles/default.aspx?a=1955&template=print-article.htm

Eyewitnesses insist they saw a woman sitting innocently in a stadium aisle, unable to reach her seat in an overcrowded row as an Oct. 11 football game began at the University of Wisconsin. Police reports paint a picture of a woman kicking and screaming as she was about to be handcuffed, ejected and cited for violating Camp Randall Stadium policy regarding aisle blockage. That's when things really got out of control — or were, in fact, controlled — depending on whose interpretation of events one chooses to embrace.

The decision by UW police to use an electronic incapacitating device on Margaret Hiebing, a 54-year-old season-ticket holder and Badger athletics booster, came as a shock to those seated nearby and touched off a charged debate as to whether the use of force was appropriate to the situation. "It was pretty frightening," Brent Perzentka, one of more than two-dozen fans who signed a statement condemning what they considered to be an overly aggressive security response, told Madison ABC affiliate WKOW. "Most of us in the section were pleading with the officer and then the responding officers to stop. She didn't do anything wrong."

but hey, all police tell the truth all the time.

[DrDan]

73. as do the "victims of police violence"

neither of us were there - I just think both sides need to be aired in front of a judge with available evidence and witnesses.

I just have my doubts that the police just picked a couple of innocent fans and began the harassment to the point of a taser being used.

but hey . . . might have happened just that way.

<I am still willing to await a judge's verdict before closing the issue in my mind. But if you are satisfied with the validity of your view . . . who am I?>

[bertman]

17. Those of you who think this tasing was uncalled for should consider what the other

option, forcibly removing this fan, might have entailed. That would have required at least four officers given the size of this guy and his accompanying bad attitude. That could have been a wrestling match down an aisle with steps every two or three feet and fans sitting in the adjacent seats. If one of the officers or the man had fallen onto an innocent bystander and injured that person there could have been serious physical damage.

In this case, tasing was the best way to get this dickhead to do as he had been repeatedly asked WITHOUT endangering those around him or the cops.

[peace13]

21. If cops can't remove this person without administering a life threatening device....

they should get more training. They endangered and disrupted all of the people in that area of the stadium. People who had paid for entertainment got a lesson in the ways of our police force.

[rd_kent]

28. But that is what they did!

Removed this person without administering a life threatening device.

http://www.yourlawyer.com/articles/read/11882

Less than 200 deaths. Compared to the number of times a taser is used? <.1% result in death. More people die from drowning in their tub.

[lame54]

23. you think this was the first drunk guy at a baseball game?...

they've been around a lot longer than tasers

[DrDan]

45. getting drunk does not allow one to disregard lawful orders

the action was appropriate and safe

[asdjrocky]

22. Man they had so many opportunities to get cuffs on that guy and get him on his belly.

Watching the tape carefully I've spotted 5 chances where it could have been done before they started using the tazer. I'll say it again, cowards.

[DrDan]

46. call it what you like - that cretin had 5 chances to obey the lawful orders

and he didn't - he deserved what he got

[asdjrocky]

47. So, by your definition "getting what he deserved"-

Does that mean there will be no court, no charge of disorderly conduct? Because if he "got what he deserved" then we'll just let the police hand out the justice as well.

What a great idea. 35 in a 25 gets you tazed, but only once, unless it's a school zone and then it's twice.

Selling pot in very small amounts can be like, three tazings and a knock on the head with the club. Of course, the cops will have to keep the pot for evidence.

What about the real crimes? The ones that go mostly unsolved by our crack police departments all over the country, you know, rape, murder, HUGE corporate larceny? That's easy, the cop decides the punishment. It will be great fun to see how that works out, the freepers should love it. Hell, he/she is an all powerful person there to dish out whatever punishment someone deserves. Think of all the money we could save, no more pesky lawyers and judges. Miranda, shermanda.

Seriously, I have the cuffs on that drunken idiot in 3 seconds. Look at the guy standing behind him. Why doesn't he reach for cuffs instead of the tazer? Because he's a pansie, and his training tells he first and foremost NOT to get himself hurt. Also, there's the added benefit of tazing being fun, especially when you got all you buddies around to back you up. If you don't know that, then you speak from little to no experience.

It's not the cops job to give people what they deserve. Really, sit down and think about what you are suggesting.

[DrDan]

48. of course he deserves his day in court - he also has the responsibility to

obey the police. They obviously tried to get him to cooperate. He refused. What was their recourse? They could let him win his tantrum. They could try to remove him by force - of course they put themselves at risk. They could taze him. I think they took the appropriate action. This guy gave them little choice - and they responded appropriately. Now the judge can weigh in. We should know before long his/her opinion. I would bet we will see support for their action taken.

[asdjrocky]

49. I'm nearly certain the judge will support the action of the police.

They almost always do. Doc, I'm telling ya, in cuffs and on his belly in 3 seconds without the use of a tazer. The funny things about weapons is whenever you get a new one, you want to use it.

Recent quote from new show on TLC, Police Women of Broward Co. promo: "It's always a good time to use a tazer." This is from a young, blond, fresh looking officer.

These cops are playing with their favorite toy in front of everyone and getting away with it. Also, you failed to answer my point about cops dishing out instance justice when no one needed to be hurt.

[DrDan]

50. we obviously see it differently

you start with the premise that the police are "playing with their favorite toy" - playing to the audience.

I see the police taking appropriate action with a drunk who refuses to obey their requests.

Instant justice? I don't consider it instant justice for his behavior. I see it as the police doing what was needed to maintain order in a public venue - exactly what the police are charged to do.

[asdjrocky]

52. First-

My premise was not that they were playing to the audience, totally the opposite in fact. I was saying they are getting away with playing with their favorite toy in front of everyone. Your original reply to me with the use of the word "deserved" in it only goes to prove what I'm saying. We've become so desensitized to the brutality that is dosed out daily by these people that we don't even realize what they are doing.

Later on, they all laughed while someone did a funny impression of that old drunk shaking as the volts ran through him. Then, they all hi-fived.

We do ever so obviously see it differently.

[DrDan]

54. your mindset is to demonize the police - that is clear from your various posts

your previous experience with police leads you to believe they can do nothing right - whatever action they take is going to be wrong in your mind.

Desensitized? hardly. Just willing to let the police perform the job they are hired to do - and to do it with as little risk to themselves as possible.

[grahamhgreen]

33. We live in a police state that tortures, and defenders are enablers, IMHO. Heck, I'm even afraid to

post that comment!

[Seldona]

65. Civil liability is small recourse.

But it is rather satisfactory. ;)

[Tim01]

74. This one is worth watching.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riWv4soQmmw&feature=related

and this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95qZtwJNjxk

[Capt. America]

75. Fuck the police state.

[rd_kent]

77. Wow, what an insightful, thought provoking post.

Or did you just listen to NWA and that was the only thought going through your head?

[Capt. America]

78. My post is just a summary of #33. Perhaps you would like to comment on his/her's as well.

[Supply Side Jesus]

76. *Yawn*

Outrage Outrage Outrage

Actions have consequences. Live with it.