NOW Can We Outlaw Tasers?

Also make sure any cop who thinks this is appropriate behavior is fired immediately and barred from every owning a weapon of any kind.

Karoli at Crooks and Liars:

What the hell? The days of friendly Officer Pete and career day fun are long gone. Now the cops bring tasers to teach kids what happens when they disobey.

A 10-year-old boy attending a Tularosa, N.M., Intermediate School’s Career Day expected it to be fun and educational, but instead he ended up in the emergency room.

The boy, identified as R.D., blacked out after receiving 50,000 volts of electricity when struck by a police officer’s Taser gun.

Rachel Higgins, a guardian appointed by the court to protect the child’s privacy filed a lawsuit Oct. 26 in 1st Judicial District Court in Santa Fe County against Police Officer Chris Webb and the New Mexico Department of Public Safety on behalf of R.D., claiming that Webb fired his electronic control weapon at the boy on May 4, 2012.

Webb has been charged with battery, failure to render emergency medical care, unreasonable seizure and excessive force.

Higgins will appear in court to represent the boy because the family members live in a small town and do not want to reveal their identities.

The lawsuit claims police officers drove their patrol cars onto the intermediate school campus, where Webb asked a group of boys which one would like to clean his patrol unit.

R.D. raised his hand to say he did not want to clean the police officer’s car.
Webb then said, according to the lawsuit, “Let me show what happens to people who do not listen to the police.” He then “shot his Taser gun at the boy’s chest,” said the family’s attorney Shannon Kennedy of the Kennedy Law Firm of Albuquerque.

I hope the judge or jury awards the kid millions and this cop goes to jail for a very, very long time. There is no excuse -- zero -- for that kind of sadistic behavior toward a kid, or anyone else for that matter.

See also. 

Tased Nearly to Death for Not Rolling Down Broken Car Windo

Time to take tasers away from cops.  No, time to outlaw the fucking things.

Think Progress:

A 17-year-old Missouri teen was put in a medically-induced coma for brain injuries received during a struggle with a police officer. Witnesses allege that Bryce Masters’ head hit the pavement after he was handcuffed and dropped on the ground by Officer Tim Runnels.

Masters was pulled over by police Sunday afternoon, due to a warrant for a woman associated with the car he was driving. Police claim the boy would not open his window, while Masters’ friends contend that the window switch was not working.

“The driver refused to exit the vehicle,” said Sgt. Darrell Schmidli. “A struggle ensued, a Taser was deployed by the officer. The driver was finally removed out of the car. A struggle ensued once he was moved out of the car.” But witnesses argue that Runnels used excessive force against Masters, putting his foot on the teen as if he were putting out a cigarette, as the teenager convulsed on the ground. Witnesses also claim that an emergency unit had to resuscitate Masters before he was sent to the hospital.

The Kansas City division of the FBI is currently investigating the Independence Police Department, but the department maintains that it acted within legal grounds. Major Paul Thurman believes Runnels, who has worked with the Independence police for three years, used the Taser in accordance with officer policy.

Runnels was placed on administrative leave.

That means he gets paid to not work. Although if it means he's not on the streets tasing innocent kids for no reason, it's a bargain.

To Protect and To Serve

Firedoglake:

Lawsuit against Arkansas cops after one cop tased a woman for not showing her breasts

Fire that cop. Fire the guy who trained that cop. Fire the guy who hired the guy who trained that cop. And fire the elected officials who approved a police budget that purchased tasers.

95-year-old Executed for Refusing to Obey Orders

Maybe if we take their military toys away they'll stop acting like special ops assholes treating innocent citizens like terrorists armed with nukes.

Diane Sweet at Crooks and Liars:

This report has left me stunned. A Taser and bean bag rounds shot at a 95-year-old man who -- for whatever reason -- refusing to get into an ambulance?!? WTF?

The 95-year-old resident of an Illinois nursing home died early Saturday, hours after being shocked with a Taser and bean bag rounds in a confrontation with police.

Via:

"Officers were called to the 100 block of Main Street in Park Forest at 8:42 p.m. when the man became combative with a private ambulance company attempting to involuntarily transport him for medical treatment, Park Forest police said. The facility is Victory Centre of Park Forest, a "supportive living" center for senior citizens, according to the company's website.

The man was threatening facility staff and paramedics with a metal cane and a two-foot metal shoehorn when officers arrived, police said.

He refused to drop the items when commanded and instead grabbed a 12-inch butcher knife, police said.

The officers attempted to Taser the man to no avail and then struck him with bean bag rounds, which finally caused the man to drop the knife, police said."

John Warna, 95, was conscious and talking when he arrived at the hospital, according to police.

However, he was pronounced dead by 2:30 a.m. according to the Cook County Medical Examiner's office.

Digby:

I'm sure they had no alternatives. These strapping police officers must have felt terribly frightened by a senile 95 year old man. They had to shoot him full of electricity and kill him. What else could they do?

And anyway, no harm no foul. If they hadn't tasered him to death they would have had to shoot him dead with their guns. Because everyone knows that tasers are only used in cases where officers would otherwise use their service revolvers. Amirite?

You know, I suspect that cops used to have a few other tricks up their sleeves to deal with frail, demented geriatrics other than torturing them with electricity. I guess those are lost arts. Torture is the number one go-to when authorities want cooperation from anyone, regardless of the situation, no matter how much overkill it is. It saves time and teaches the public a lesson in bowing down to authority on command.

I'll bet that old man won't try that again any time soon.

Oh wait ...

Talking, Teachers and.Tasing

When an unarmed teacher can disarm a gun-wielding shooter who has already wounded one person and do it using nothing but words, while police officers have to use lethal tasers to control unarmed citizens who have harmed no one, there's only one explanation:

 

Taser-wielding cops are cowardly bullies who need a dangerous penis-substitutes to show everybody's who's boss.

 

And nobody cares more about child safety than teachers.

 

Tasered for Being A Deaf Crime Victim

I've lived my whole adult life grateful that in the United States we have police who work for us, the local residents, not some tyrant who can order them to round us up and torture us on any pretext.

But these days, I shock myself by realizing that if I had an emergency which required law enforcement assistance, I would think long and hard before calling the police.

Because apparently even in the liberal and peaceful Northwest, the cops can't tell victims from perpetrators, and don't even try to figure it out before firing.

Diane Sweet at Crooks and Liars:

A deaf woman from Tacoma, Washington called 911 seeking help from police because she was being attacked inside her own home, but when she ran out to meet police officers, they fired a stun gun at her and took her into custody.

After being hit with the stun gun, Lashonn White fell to the sidewalk leaving her bruised, bloody and confused. No interpreter was present, and she was denied one during her three days of incarceration.

“All I’m doing is waving my hands in the air, and the next thing I know, I’m on the ground and then handcuffed. It was almost like I blacked out. I was so dizzy and disoriented,” White said.

Witnesses said White began bleeding heavily from her knuckles and the right side of her face swelled up immediately after she hit the pavement following the Taser jolt.

Charged with simple assault and obstruction of a public servant (law enforcement officer), White spent 60 hours in jail before a prosecutor requested that no charges be filed in her case.

Neighbors who witnessed the incident, and spoke to Tacoma police at the time, gave vastly different accounts from the officer's police reports.

More on this from KIRO in Tacoma.

 I don't know how many multi-million-dollar lawsuits it's going to take before this shit stops, but I hope we get there before something happens for which I have to call the cops.

"Stupid and Disrespectful Is Not Against the Law"

I don't think any of us who have escaped negative encounters with law enforcement really appreciate what's happened to American police officers in the last decade.

Digby::

I supposed he's lucky he didn't get tasered on some pretext and thrown into the hospital:

Robert Bell had just left a West Village bar last August when four New York City police officers walked by. A moment later, the Edison man "expressed his dislike and distrust for police officers by raising his middle finger toward them," according to a lawsuit he just filed.

In other words, Bell gave the cops the finger.

One of the officers noticed and confronted Bell, seeking an explanation.
"Because I don’t like cops," the financial services recruiter replied. He was then handcuffed, taken into custody and held in a jail cell for two hours before being released and issued a summons for disorderly conduct. Bell’s criminal case was soon dismissed when the arresting officer, Peter Play, failed to appear in court.

SNIP

I believe this happens all the time, actually. Many of the tasering incidents I chronicle are the result of citizens failing to be properly respectful toward authority rather than threatening to the police or others. It's a fine line, I understand, and I suppose the cops can be forgiven for failing to see the difference in many cases. But that is all the more reason for not using pain compliance willy nilly.

SNIP

The best cops don't react to "disrespect" and understand they have better things to do than police the attitudes of the citizens. Unfortunately, there are also plenty of officers who have internalized the military mentality that permeates our police agencies these days and feel that they are in a war zone where attitudes are a threat.

This case is pretty clear cut. And the victim is filing a federal law suit:

Legal experts and law enforcement officials say Bell has a case, and courts have generally backed his position in similar instances. What he did could be seen as offensive in some circles or defiant in others, they say, but it was not illegal.

"I can’t arrest you for giving me the finger, any more than I can arrest you for calling me nasty names," said Jon Shane, a retired Newark police captain who is now an assistant professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Manhattan. "Sure it’s stupid and disrespectful. But it’s not against the law."

That's right, being stupid and disresepectful is not against the law. I wish more of my fellow citizens understood this, much less the police who are often far too quick to take offense and call it a threat.

On that note, here's some good news about an asshole who took offense and over-reacted.

Not Better Than a Bullet

Sometimes a bullet - especially if it misses a major organ or artery - is survivable, even for the young, the elderly, the unhealthy.

But if you're a child, an old person or physically compromised, a taser is likely to kill you.

Kevin Gosztola at Firedoglake:

Law enforcement and correctional agencies in Arizona, the state where TASER International has its corporate headquarters, often use Tasers “preemptively” against citizens, according to a recent ACLU of Arizona report. Even if citizens do not present an imminent safety threat to officers, officers will use the Taser. They’ll also use it “offensively as a pain compliance tool,” a use TASER International anticipates in its training material and agency policies.

The report, which the ACLU of Arizona claims is the “most comprehensive survey of Taser use by law enforcement agencies in Arizona to date,” illuminates the following key findings: Tasers are widespread among law enforcement, providing officers with Tasers does not guarantee lower levels of use of lethal force, officers often receive inconsistent guidance on when it’s appropriate to use a Taser, agencies lack clear guidance on Taser safety including the use of Tasers against vulnerable populations, law enforcement is too reliant on TASER International for training and agencies lack data collection and other mechanisms for monitoring Taser use.

The ACLU of Arizona recommends the implementation of a “strong accountability mechanism” for Taser use that would include data collection. It suggests law enforcement re-assess where the use of a Taser should be on the “use-of-force continuum.” Furthermore, it calls for more regular training on Taser use and the establishment of a statewide body to review Taser use and develop policies and training resources for law enforcement.

The finding that Taser proponents are completely off when they argue in favor of Tasers because deployment of lethal force will decline is perhaps the most significant finding of the report. The report calls attentions to the fact that “TASER’s marketing campaign has always been that Tasers are a safe alternative to the use of lethal force.

SNIp

After completing an analysis of Phoenix Police Department use-of-force reports, The Arizona Republic found 377 incidents involving the use of a Taser. In nearly nine out of ten of the incidents, the subjects had posed no imminent threat to officers with any weapons.

SNIP

Vulnerable people, such as children, elderly, pregnant women and those with heart problems, are widely understood to be at risk of death or injury if they are subjected to the voltage of a Taser. The ACLU report shows the alarming reality that much of Arizona law enforcement lacks guidelines on what to do if faced with a “vulnerable” person.

Ten agencies were found to be silent whether to Tase pregnant women. Only four agencies explicitly ban tasing pregnant women. Twelve agencies were found to be silent on the tasing of children or the elderly. Only one agency explicitly prohibited tasing young or elderly people. And, eleven out of ten agencies had no policy on using a Taser on a subject multiple times, an action that has been seen as a key factor behind ECW-induced deaths.

SNIP

Taser use has been posing increased liability for law enforcement. As of September 2010, five deaths from Taser use were occurring on average each month.

Courts have found Tasers constitute the use of “excessive force” and thus violate the Fourth Amendment, provided the Taser was used in an instance when its deployment was unjustified. Victims of Taser use can seek compensation but only if an agency’s use guidelines are deficient and if training is so poor that it could be considered “deliberately indifferent.

Memphis, Tennessee, San Francisco, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, have all opted to ban the use of Tasers.

I've never worked for law enforcement, but I know more than a few who do, and who should not be permitted within 500 yards of any object that could potentially inflict harm on another human being.

The problem with tasers remains what it has always been: the label of "non-lethal" frees those carrying them from the hesitation that accompanies pulling a gun. Those who would never pump multiple bullets into a subdued suspect think it's fine to keep shocking someone who's already bound and down.

Execution by Taser for Kid on Bike

How many thousands more will get the death penalty by electrocution for the capital crime of not submitting instantly to a cop's hysterical demands?

As always, Digby:

Here's an excellent story in the St Petersburg Times about tasers. People are beginning to notice that the police are using these things willy nilly --- and it's killing people.

As I've said before, if a prescription drug were shown to have killed this many people the government would have withdrawn it from the market and class action lawsuits would be pending no matter how many people the drug had also helped. For some reason few people seem to think that all these deaths of innocent people by electrocution at the hands of police are cause for concern:

Late one night in October, a 17-year-old on a bike was chased by a police officer in a cruiser. When the boy refused to stop, the officer aimed his Taser out the driver's window and fired. The boy fell off the bike and the cruiser ran over him, killing him.

Victor Steen was the fourth person who died in Florida in 2009 in an incident in which a Taser was used. It was the 57th such death since 2001, according to statistics compiled by Amnesty International and the St. Petersburg Times. At the time this placed Florida first in the nation as the state with the most fatalities related to Tasers, a weapon that delivers an incapacitating electrical jolt.

Number 54 was a mentally ill man in Fort Lauderdale who was hit with a Taser in April as he wandered in traffic, refusing to go with police. He had a heart attack and died at a hospital.

SNIP

Taser International, the maker of the weapon, denies that these deaths were caused by its product. Yet, these four unconnected cases illustrate a worrisome trend in Taser use.

There is no question that Tasers frequently save lives by offering law enforcement officers a nonlethal means of stopping people who present a threat to the officers, the public or themselves. But as the four fatal cases from 2009 show, Tasers are also being used to subdue people who appear to pose no threat.

Read on for the details.

This is truly a terrible problem. Thousands of people are dying now. It's giving police officers a distorted sense of power and they are losing their good judgment. (Tasering a kid on a moving bike in traffic? What was he thinking?) And despite what Taser International says, people who knowing or unknowingly have heart conditions shouldn't have to die because they don't instantly comply with an police officer's order. The mentally ill or those having an epileptic fit shouldn't have to die because they can't process those orders or physically comply with them. It's a downright Orwellian excuse that because tasers often kill people who are sick or on drugs, they aren't responsible for the deaths.

And that doesn't even get into the civil liberties implications of this weapon which are horrific --- shooting electricity into citizens to gain compliance used to be known as torture, but now is considered a law enforcement "tool" so benign that nobody blinks an eye when it's used haphazardly against people who just happen to look at a cop sideways (which happens frequently.)The idea that in a free society the police are allowed to shoot people full of electricity for any reason is beyond bizarre.

Taser Killers Win By Cheating

When you have to cheat, when you have to lie, when you have to game the system to win, you've proven that you're wrong, you're guilty, and you deserve to lose.

But it was just a black guy who died. Just a guy with bipolar disorder wandering around naked, not harming anybody. Just a Marine veteran.

A federal jury verdict exonerating a Metro Louisville police officer in a Taser-related death has come under attack after the foreman was accused of researching the case on the manufacturer’s Web site and using the information to sway other jurors.

The case is one of a rising number nationally in which jurors have used iPhones, BlackBerrys and home computers to gather and send information about cases, undermining judges and jury trials.

Attorneys for the estate of Larry Noles, who died in 2006 after officers shocked him with a Taser, want a judge to set aside the Dec. 4 verdict in which the jury cleared one officer and was unable to reach a verdict on another.

Lawyer Garry Adams said in a motion that one day after the jury finished its deliberations a juror called him to say that at least two jurors, including the foreman, whom she described as “the principal advocate for police,” consulted Taser International’s Web site and used information from the site to try to persuade other jurors.

The juror who called Adams, identified only as T.B., later testified under oath, telling U.S. District Judge John B. Heyburn II that both jurors mentioned that the company’s Web site claims that Tasers are “non-lethal” and cannot cause fatal injuries.

“It really, really bothered me that they were using that ... instead of what was really said in the courtroom,” T.B. said.

SNIP

Noles’ estate claimed that Metro officers Michael Campbell and Matthew Metzler deprived Noles of his civil rights by using excessive force to take him into custody when they found him naked at Seventh Street and Algonquin Parkway, although he posed no threat to them or to the public.

Assistant County Attorney Frank Radmacher, who represented the officers, told the jury that Noles’ death was a tragedy but that the officers followed department policies in trying to take him into custody so he could be brought to a hospital for treatment.

Don't tell me there aren't emergency responders in Louisville who know how to get a mentally ill person to a hospital without killing him, because I know goddamn well there are.

Take a few of the millions of dollars Louisville's going to have to pay in future settlements otherwise and pay those responders to train police officers in non-firearm, non-taser methods of persuasion.

One Court Makes Sense on Tasers

From Digby, who has been pounding on the outrageous misuse of tasers longer than anyone, finally some good news:

The 9th Circuit issued what may be a landmark ruling on tasers, and not a moment too soon:

A federal appeals court on Monday issued one of the most comprehensive rulings yet limiting police use of Tasers against low-level offenders who seem to pose little threat and may be mentally ill.

In a case out of San Diego County, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals criticized an officer who, without warning, shot an emotionally troubled man with a Taser when he was unarmed, yards away, and neither fleeing nor advancing on the officer.

SNIP

A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit affirmed the trial judge's ruling on Monday, concluding that the level of force used by the officer was excessive.

McPherson could have waited for backup or tried to talk the man down, the judges said. If Bryan was mentally ill, as the officer contended, then there was even more reason to use "less intrusive means," the judges said.

"Officer McPherson's desire to quickly and decisively end an unusual and tense situation is understandable," Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw wrote for the court. "His chosen method for doing so violated Bryan's constitutional right to be free from excessive force."

[...]

"Certainly the officer should be able to articulate the reason the force (was used), and a mere resistance to comply may not be enough," said Sheriff John McGinness.

It's not. The idea that police can use it to subdue people at their discretion in order to make their difficult jobs easier is just wrong. The police can't hit people over the head with a baton if they smart mouth them or refuse to immediately comply and they shouldn't be able to shoot them full of electricity either. Just because it doesn't leave marks doesn't mean it isn't cruel and brutal.

This issue will wend itself through the courts for some time. I would imagine we'll see a Supreme Court ruling. Considering the current court, I'm sure Taser International hopes so.

Read the whole thing.

Now it's the death penalty for acting weird - watch your ass

From Suburban Guerilla, via Digby, yet another predictable result of letting cops depend on weapons instead of non-violent enforcement.

Fiorino called for backup, and she and responding officer David Burk considered taking Oliver in for a psychiatric evaluation, because they thought he might be mentally unstable.

When Burk tried to get Oliver to cross the street, Oliver "struggled and pulled away from him," according to the ruling.

Without warning, Fiorino Tasered him in the stomach, bringing him to the ground. Once the five-second pulse wore off, she Tasered him again. The witness said Oliver never got up after the first Tasering, and never hit, punched, kicked or threatened the officers.

Oliver, who was lying on the hot asphalt, allegedly screamed that it was "too hot." Fioriono said she may have Tasered Oliver 11 or 12 times, explaining that she kept pulling the trigger until he stayed on the ground. Her Taser log showed eight times in two minutes, with each shock lasting five seconds.

After officers handcuffed Oliver, he began foaming at the mouth, according to Fiorino. She said she was unable to remove all the Taser prongs from his body.

Read the whole thing.

Digby says:

This is the logic that pervades the taser argument: The taser isn't harmful so we shouldn't be held responsible for killing people with them.

Actually this court decision is a step in the right direction. They at least held that there should be some probable cause before you kill someone with a taser. It isn't much but it's better than the idea that these deaths are "accidental" or caused by the police custody disease called "excited delirium." At least they acknowledged that police can't electrocute and kill citizens for no reason whatsoever.

Maybe someday we'll even reach a point where courts will acknowledge that cops aren't allowed to kill anyone for any reason but self-defense and that electro-torturing people into compliance is excessive force. It's hard to believe it isn't obvious that allowing police to commonly and reflexively use this level of pain, no matter how transient, is an authoritarian method worthy of the worst dystopian nightmare, but since huge numbers of people in this country seem to think the screams and terror they cause are really, really funny I guess you can't really blame the cops for assuming it's perfectly acceptable. The killings though, that might just be a step too far even for the jokesters. Maybe.

Here's the crime for which the man I'm sure those officers still call the "perp" received the death penalty: He waved down the officer, requesting help because someone across the street was shooting at him. Then he refused to accompany the officer who wanted to detain him for psychiatric evaluation.

Unfortunately, the lesson likely to come out of this unjustified homicide is not the desperate need for police training in non-violent methods, but the importance of immediately and cheerfully obeying any police order, no matter how unnecessary, unjust or potentially dangerous.

Unsafe In Any Use

When even the manufacturer admits a product is lethal, it's time to stop using the product.

Well lookie here. It seems that Taser International might be just a teensy bit afraid that their "product" might be killing people:

The maker of Taser stun guns is advising police officers to avoid shooting suspects in the chest with the 50,000-volt weapon, saying that it could pose an extremely low risk of an "adverse cardiac event."

SNIP

This would be what is known as CYA. They are telling police agencies that if they get sued Taser cannot be held liable since it issued this disclaimer. This is the first time they've ever admitted that their weapon can be lethal.(They have admitted in the past that it can be dangerous since people often can't break their falls when the electricity incapacitates them.)

SNIP

The truth is that tasers are not benign, they are torture devices that are being used indiscriminately in the false belief that police have a discretionary right to subdue anyone they choose using this form of violence. And now even the manufacturer admits they can kill people:

SNIP

It's a very nice convenience for police to be able to subdue citizens with either the threat or delivery of terrible pain that will knock them to the ground. It saves time and energy and makes their jobs easier, no doubt. I'm sure they were more efficient in the days when they could take their billy club to people's heads with impunity too. But in a free society, police aren't at liberty to mete out punishment or demand instant compliance, particularly in a nation that has a constitution that guarantees all people certain rights to due process --- even if it makes their job easier. Police work is, by definition, an unsafe profession and one simply can't tear up the constitution and allow police to use violence in the name of efficiency and social control. The temptation to do that is one of the reasons we have a constitution in the first place.

At this point citizens are being told that they can be tasered for any reason the police choose, and have no recourse, because tasers are harmless (except for the searing pain they cause, which is evidently something we as citizens just have to put up with.) But they aren't safe and they shouldn't be legal, at least not the way they are used today.

Read the whole thing.

One of the secondary consequences of Smirky/Darth's everything's-a-nail worldview is that local police departments see overwhelming, unconstitutional force as the answer to every problem, no matter how non-violent.

From "school resource officers" shooting disabled kids dead to military weapons being used on peaceful demonstrators, law enforcement has lost its ability to enforce the law with anything short of violence.

Violence breeds violence. If your local sheriff is claiming he needs more and bigger weapons to deal with rising crime, you should ask how many handcuffed, helpless suspects he's tortured in the last year.

Shocking

Digby remind us that while the outrage of repug-undermined health care reform has everyone's attention, other outrages are flying under the radar.

They whooped and hollered when they heard about it.

Taser International unveiled its first new stun gun since 2003 on Monday, a device that can shock three people without being reloaded.

SNIP

While the device can be used against three people, it targets the same person more than once. Smith said each barb would deliver a separate shock.

Gosh, that is such a great improvement. Instead of having to reload to shock people multiple times while they are already compliant and in custody, they can do it in rapid succession. After all, it only leaves a couple of tiny marks.

I hear Taser is working on something really innovative: a chip that can be implanted in every citizen which can be activated by remote control to drop you to the ground writing in pain whenever the authorities perceive that you are being uncooperative. Wouldn't that solve all of these problems? And seriously, what would be the principle against against it?

And that's not all - they figured out a way to make it into an even bigger outrage for taxpayers. Read the whole thing.