Tasers and DWB

I think, out of a lack of understanding, too many officers think it is fine to use their tasers on people when they would not use their guns. As someone mentioned I agree that part of taser training for these itchy taser button officers should be getting tased.

Now for the majority of victims being black can be a combination of a higher rate of street crime by black criminals and some racist officers. I honestly do not think I can say much about it as I have not experienced it being white living in an area whose largest minority group is Native American.

In a perfect world, every police officer would be there for the right reasons and never snap, but it happens. The truth is at least our police officers are better than in many developing counties.

In our capitalistic society, people will be rich and people will be poor. The problem is in that the rich are so far from the poor and the poor loose hope. I wish it was not like this, but unless the United States reconsider its priorities. We could have sent 16,000,000 people through a state college for what the Iraq war has cost(www.costofwar.com). Again this is simplifying things perhaps too much.

Officers are tasered and maced as part of training. That's not the problem. And officers in some departments think that it's okay to use tasers when they would not use their guns because their departmental SOP says it is.

Quote:

The highly publicized case has brought attention to some stark statistics about police use of Tasers in the nation's fourth-largest city: Nearly two-thirds of those shocked with the high-voltage weapons over the last two years were black.

Not inherently bad, but certainly an indication that it's something to look at. As pointed out, it may be that crime rates in Houston are not equal across race lines (I would argue that this is due to factors other than race, though).

Quote:

Houston police officers are permitted to use Tasers any time they feel physically threatened by a suspect.

I don't think I like that. Under those procedures, the tasering of Weary was probably not all that out of line. Also, poor writing incorrectly makes it sound as if he was tasered while on the ground.

Quote:

In an opinion piece in the Houston Chronicle on Saturday, Police Chief Harold L. Hurtt defended his department's Taser policies, saying that using stun guns instead of handguns has saved lives.

This can be (and certainly is) true and tasers can be used when not necessary (also certainly true).

That all said, there's a balance to be struck with use of force - it's neither good to have a mindset that is too hesitant or too aggressive. Most departments have use of force models/continuums that they follow; these are based on levels of subject action and officer response:

Subject Action   /   Officer ResponseAssaultive           Deadly-Serious Physical    ForceInjury, DeadlyThe highest level of non-compliance with potential for deathor serious physical injury. This is the most infrequent.Responses include lethal force.Assaultive           Defensive-Physical Impact     TacticsThe officer perceives an attack on the officer or others, butthe attack would not result in serious physical injury (legally,this includes broken bones and worse) or death. Defense measuresare used to stop the non-lethal assault.Resistant            Compliance-Active              TechniquesThe situation is escalating and noncompliance is increasing.There is physical or mechanical defiance, and the responseis proportional.Resistant            Contact-Passive             ControlsThere is a confrontational environment and the officer has torespond through some degree of physical contact (usually low-levelcontrol holds or psychological manipulations).Compliant            Cooperation                     ControlsThe officer is simply present and talking.That's enough to gain compliance.

The actual use of force continuum for a department might look like this:

• Presence
  
• Verbal Commands
  
• Soft Hands: control holds, pressure points
  
• Chemical Spray
  
• Closed Hands
  
• Impact Weapons, Taser, LTL
  
• Deadly Force

An officer should use slightly more force than the subject: if a subject tenses his arm during cuffing, use a control hold. If the subject puts his fists up, pull spray, or in few cases, a baton. If the subject pulls a knife, pull a gun.

Tasers, then, usually fall just below deadly force. Few would argue with the use of a taser against a person holding a firearm or in any situation where deadly force would be legitimate. Yet many would argue with the use of a taser where the subject's actions only call for a control hold. It's up to police departments to decide where to draw the line. Many times, this works out fine. Other times, LTL (less than lethal force) is authorized too often or too rarely, neither of which are good.

Now, for the opinion bit. I think Houston tends towards authorizing tasing too often and I think that this particular example was almost certainly unnecessary. Also, I think that tasers should be allowed in a narrow range of cases where deadly force would be questionable. Taser use by officers should be checked out by their departments, and the departments should be checked up on by their city councils, county commissioners, or state governments. Independent reviews are a good thing when there are serious questions (as in this case) about use of tasers.

Here's the part that doesn't add up for me: ... he was pulled over about 1 p.m. failing to use his turn signal and not having a front license plate. ... did not put his hands on his car when ordered.

Why was he ordered to get out of his car in the first place? Why didn't the officers just write him a ticket and leave it at that? Is it standard procedure in Texas to order drivers to get out of their cars when giving them traffic tickets?

Nope.

However, those are technically arrestable offenses, and the courts have upheld some arrests for exceedingly minor offenses (incidentally, also occurring in Texas). In fact, the only two non-arrestable traffic offenses are speeding and open container.

So, technically they were not wrong in doing so in this case, but if combined with a consistent pattern of, say, pulling black men out of their cars and not whites or women, then it would be improper (not that you don't know this, I'm just saying that that would be true from the department's standpoint as well... technically).

Although, some officers just like to have people get out of their cars. I think it's just kinda mean [smile].

//edit. Actually, with a guy that big, I might rather leave him in the car.

[Edited by - Avatar God on December 5, 2006 1:35:12 AM]

About 1/3 of US police agencies use tasers.

Injuries caused:

Looking at TASER brand tasers:

It's estimated that over 120,050 subjects have been tased, and over 109,000 others have been voluntarily tased. There are 11,475 documented entries in their database, 11,201 of which indicate level of use:
Probes deployed in 6,831 incidents. (60%)
Drive stun in 2,571 incidents. (22%)
Laser only in 1,558 incidents. (14%)
Spark demo in 241 incidents. (2%)

Injuries in 10,485 incidents reporting injury rates:
None: 91%
Minor: 8%
(Puncture wounds from probes, abrasions)
Moderate: 0.3%
(Abrasions, skinned knee, carpet burn, testicle shot, penis shot, cut to mouth, cuts from falling onto glass)
Severe: 0.034%

On a personal note, I should add that "Holy shit, I'm being tased and it hurts" is not considered to be an injury.

Effects of Taser Use.

Tasers reduce officer and suspect injuries:
by 80% in Orange County, Florida
by 67% to subjects in Phoenix, Arizona
by 86% to officers in Putnam County (Sheriff's Department)
by 66% to officers in South Bend
by 50% to officers and by 82% to subjects in Austin, Texas
by 56% to officers and by 35% to subjects in Cincinnati
...and dozens of other police departments across the country.

Tasers reduce use of other types of force:
Columbus: During a six-month period in 2005, there were twelve document incidents where subjects attempting suicide were stopped and taken into custody, preventing their possible deaths. In 14 other incidents, officers were able to use tasers instead of deadly force to control subjects.
Cincinnati: Other types of force are used 50% less often.
Phoenix: Officer-involved shootings are down 54% after deploying tasers to all officers.
Oklahoma City: Officer-involved shootings down 58% in 2002 and another 15% in 2003.
Seattle: 2003 was the first year in which there were exactly zero fatal officer-involved shootings, largely a result of tasers.
Miami: Firearm discharges have dropped from 24 to 0 and physical controls have dropped from 493 to 103 after issuing tasers.
Dallas: 23 taser deployments prevented the "high likelihood" of deadly force in about one year.

Tasers reduce citizen complaints and lawsuits.
Madison: Zero complaints regarding taser usage
Cincinnati: citizen complaints are down 50% after deploying tasers
Oakland County: 0 excessive force lawsuits, with tasers listed at the same level of force as OC spray.
Long Beach: Liability claims are down 33%.

Workman's comp is down in many departments with tasers deployed.

Tasers can be excellent tools for police departments across the country.

However...

...tasers are considered to be less-than-lethal (LTL) force options, along with beanbags, pepper guns, sonic guns, and various other not-quite-deadly weapons. This assumes that use of tasers may result in death in some circumstances.

...tasers sometimes result in less (quantitative) use of force and more (qualitative) force used. That is, force may be used in fewer circumstances, but it may also be generally resulting in more force used in these incidents. In Austin, for example, tasers are used before batons - you can decide whether this is a good idea or not.

...tasers are used inappropriately in many cases. So are all types of force, but that does not make this one any less important.

...tasers do occasionally result in death. About 50 died between 2001 and 2004 soon after being tased. According to the ACLU, 148 people have died after encounters with police tasers.

It's tough to say why, exactly, but it's likely that the tasers contributed. Drugs, cardiac pacemakers and heart conditions are generally considered to be worrisome when combined with tasing: any electric charge will disrupt the heart beat, but any moderately healthy heart will immediately resume a proper beat.

Various studies have given evidence that stun guns result in heart attacks in pigs with pacemakers, even weaker charges may cause cardiac arrest in people with heart conditions, and charges half that of TASER's M26 can be dangerous. Britain has not approved tasers for general police use, deeming them not totally safe. Other researchers found little serious effect on hearts, except by increasing heart rates. Unfortunately, there is little definitive research either way.

Many taser-related deaths are also cocaine and alcohol-related deaths.

Medical examiners have never proven that a Taser was solely responsible for any deaths. No case against tasers has been successfully prosecuted.

What do do?

Long Beach, which has seen good results from taser usage, recommends departments consider the following (and I think this is a pretty good list):

• Create a searchable, computerized database to compare, cross-reference, and analyze TASER deployments within the scope of all use-of-force options.
  
• Include the following categories: Type of deployment (dart cartridge discharge or direct contact stun)
  
• Each deployment’s effectiveness
  
• Injuries to both officers and subjects caused specifically by TASER us
  
• Number of cycles used for each deployment
  
• How often the TASER is the only response to a combative subject versus how many times it is used in conjunction with other use-of-force options
  
• What effect TASER deployment has had on excessive force complaints and liability claims filed against the department
  
• When writing a deployment policy, clarify who the TASER should and should not be used against, in order to help avoid the potential for death or serious injury to subjects incapable of withstanding the stun.
  
• Discuss the type of clothing the subject is wearing to ensure the pulse of the darts can penetrate the garments.
  
• Perform a daily spark test (with dart cartridge removed) to keep the digital power magazine sufficiently charged for immediate field use. The spark test will also alert officers about any maintenance issues.
  
• Because the TASER may be used more frequently than other use-of-force options, conduct periodic refresher training for the force options used less frequently.
  
• Educate officers on the civilian TASER model (X26c) and its stun capabilities. Although the civilian model is less than the law enforcement model’s, the stun cycle’s timing increases from five to 30 seconds.

The ACLU suggests regulating taser usage better. The title of the report sums up much of the content: "STUN GUN FALLACY: How the Lack of Taser Regulation Endangers Lives." It's hard to argue with this: while tasers are amazing tools, they are no panacea and can be dangerous, but this can be mitigated through better regulation. Here's some of the summary they give:

Quote:

Original document Of the 79 departments surveyed, 56 have added Tasers to their weapons arsenals. Of those, 54 provided their Taser-use policies and/or training materials to the ACLU-NC, which concluded the following: Only four departments regulate the number of times an officer may use a Taser on an individual. The others place no restriction on the number of times a suspect can be shot. This is particularly troubling considering that several of the targets in California died after being jolted multiple times. Only four departments created any of their own training materials for their officers. The rest relied exclusively on materials produced by Taser International. The training materials produced by Taser International and relied on by local law enforcement grossly exaggerate the safety of Tasers, downplay their risks, and misrepresent medical studies on their effects. Most were published in 2003 and 2004 and are outdated considering the sobering facts that have come to light in the past year. There are a couple of explanations for these results. Certainly, the failure of many in law enforcement to ask tough questions early on and take a skeptical approach to Taser International's representations provide a partial explanation for the lack of regulation. But Taser International is also largely responsible for the uninformed use of Tasers because its questionable marketing practices and exaggerated safety claims provide the basis for local police policy. Given the increasing number of deaths associated with Taser use, the lack of independent studies on several critical safety issues, and the lack of policy governing the use of the weapon, the California Legislature and local law enforcement should act quickly to impose regulations on Taser use. The ACLU of Northern California therefore recommends several policy reforms including the following: Pass Legislation. The California Legislature should pass a law that allows Tasers to be used solely as an alternative to deadly force. The British Government currently employs such restrictions. Tasers are certainly a safer alternative to firearms, but until more independent safety studies are completed, law enforcement agencies should be restricted from using Tasers in non-life-threatening situations. Adopt Stricter Policies. Local government and local law enforcement should each independently adopt Taser policies. If local law enforcement will not restrict its Taser use to life-threatening situations, agencies should, at a bare minimum, adopt policies to minimize the risk of death such as prohibiting repeated shocks and protecting vulnerable populations such as the very young, the elderly and pregnant women. Revise Training Materials. Local law enforcement agencies should conduct comprehensive reviews of the Taser International training materials, revise them, and retrain all officers that have already completed the Taser International training.

I mostly agree with the ACLU. More research needs to be done. Policies need to be rethought in many departments. Training needs to be improved - many officers (and people) believe that tasers are non-lethal. I would add to this that reviews of taser use should be increased and done at a departmental level. I'd like to see the Bureau of Justice Statistics or DoJ try to meta-analyze some data.

Here are some articles to look through if you're interested:
Saftey Questions, Effects of Tasers on Heart Rates, Effect of Tasers, Taser Editorial, No easy way to zap Taser debate soon, ACLU-NC Report on Taser usage, APD Gone Taser-Happy, TASER International Field Statistics.

edit: Good lord I had some typos.

[Edited by - Avatar God on December 5, 2006 1:36:49 AM]

Quote:

Original post by LessBread Quote: African Americans... account for about half of the arrests in the city. Therefore, he said, the fact that 620 of the 982 suspects Tasered since 2004 were black was not statistically out of line.

Um, yes it is. By my back of the envelope calculations, that's out of line to the tune of 4 standard deviations or so.

Quote:

Original post by Avatar God Nope. However, those are technically arrestable offenses, and the courts have upheld some arrests for exceedingly minor offenses (incidentally, also occurring in Texas). In fact, the only two non-arrestable traffic offenses are speeding and open container.

Hold on. Speeding, and having an open container of alcohol in your vehicle, are each considered *less* worthy-of-arrest than each of failing to use a turn signal or missing a licence plate? (Or for that matter, anything else, such as having a broken tail-light?)

Actually, any traffic offense, no matter how minor, is arrestable. A woman was arrested for not wearing a seat belt in the land-mark case, Atwater v. City of Lago Vista.

I have spent a great deal of time researching traffic laws due to piss ant cops who have nothing better to do then fuck with people who ride their bikes at night, so I know what I am talking about.

I am also not saying all cops are like this, but with authority, a bad batch of apples,
really spoil the bunch. To any police officer who reads this.. I know your situation is analogous to the school yard bully who is genetically gifted, bigger stronger, and empowered by the system, and I know bikers at night might seem like the skinny nerd
on the school yard.. But please, I've known too many people who have died in car accidents because of drunk drivers, if you would just police real dangers instead of knocking hours off of the clock by wasting your time with someone you know poses no threat, maybe this country would be a less dangerous place, and maybe people would respect you more..

Avatar God: Can you cite a link that says all officers are tasered as a part of
training? All my google searches involving the tokens "officers", "tasered", and
various other bits just bring up thousands upon thousands of incidents of police
brutality, people dying, people going into diabetic shock, and all the thousands
of lawsuits against police and their departments..

Quote:

Original post by Avatar God ...data...

That was an interesting read. Thanks, AG.

Failing to signal while changing lanes is only against the law so that cops can come up with a good excuse to pull over a car full of Mexicans and see if the dog smells weed in there. They'd probably been following this guy for a while, had a vague suspicion that he was doing something bad, and pulled him over on a technicality. Maybe he called bullshit on that, and they pushed their response as far up the chain of escalation as they thought they could get away with.

It's douchebaggery on the cops' part, and they should get in trouble for it, but in bad neighborhoods at sketchy times of the night, it might be conducive to the public welfare for the police to be dicks.

And when it comes to perceived threats, when a 305-pound offensive lineman (they might not have known his profession, but that's a gigantic man) that you've known for exactly thirty-eight seconds is being uncooperative, that'll make you nervous. A guy like that could maim the crap out of you before you could blink, and it's a small consolation that your partner tased the guy after the fact when you're staring at the shattered chunk of femur that's sticking through your pants. I would doubt the effectiveness of a restraint hold if I couldn't get my arms around the guy.

Quote:

The truth is at least our police officers are better than in many developing counties.

If every other nation on earth spent $1/yr fighting global warming and the US spent $2/yr, you could claim the same thing. The only problem is, is that it still sucks.

Right or wrong, I still maintain that when the time comes for me to be unjustifiably tasered, I will be openly gad to take that rather than a nightsticking.

One in a few thousand chance of a stopped heart...
Busted teeth, collar bone and arms......

Yep, taser is still the winner. Hooray!

Quote:

Original post by Zahlman Quote: Original post by LessBread Quote: African Americans... account for about half of the arrests in the city. Therefore, he said, the fact that 620 of the 982 suspects Tasered since 2004 were black was not statistically out of line. Um, yes it is. By my back of the envelope calculations, that's out of line to the tune of 4 standard deviations or so.

I doubt the Houston Police Department hires it's spokespeople based on their ability to calculate statistics... Props to you for calling their bullshit.

It seems to me that if there is a traffic offense that warrants ordering the driver to get out of the car it's open container. It seems to me that a field sobriety test should be a mandatory response to finding an open container.

Quote:

Hold on. Speeding, and having an open container of alcohol in your vehicle, are each considered *less* worthy-of-arrest than each of failing to use a turn signal or missing a licence plate? (Or for that matter, anything else, such as having a broken tail-light?)

Hey, I didn't write the law.

Quote:

Original post by asm_fsm Actually, any traffic offense, no matter how minor, is arrestable. A woman was arrested for not wearing a seat belt in the land-mark case, Atwater v. City of Lago Vista.

Except for the two I listed (in Texas), yes - and thank you for that case! I simply could not think of the cases that dealt with that.

Quote:

I am also not saying all cops are like this, but with authority, a bad batch of apples, really spoil the bunch. To any police officer who reads this.. I know your situation is analogous to the school yard bully who is genetically gifted, bigger stronger, and empowered by the system, and I know bikers at night might seem like the skinny nerd on the school yard.. But please, I've known too many people who have died in car accidents because of drunk drivers, if you would just police real dangers instead of knocking hours off of the clock by wasting your time with someone you know poses no threat, maybe this country would be a less dangerous place, and maybe people would respect you more..

Wow. That wasn't really needed here. Can I ask - do I seem like a genetically gifted, assholish schoolyard bully to you? It's equally reasonable (that is, not at all founded on anything but logical fallacies) to say that all police are decent people trying to do their job in a world full of people that hate them, personally, with no good reason.

But yeah, there are some bad cops, and they make things worse at a far greater rate than, say, bad programmers.

Quote:

Avatar God: Can you cite a link that says all officers are tasered as a part of training? All my google searches involving the tokens "officers", "tasered", and various other bits just bring up thousands upon thousands of incidents of police brutality, people dying, people going into diabetic shock, and all the thousands of lawsuits against police and their departments..

Nono, sorry - my previous statement was waaay misleading: all officers I know have been tased, I should say. Some departments require officers to experience all LTL and spray they will use, others allow you the options of being being tased/etc (and nearly everyone partakes), and a few have no regulations on it.

Quote:

Right or wrong, I still maintain that when the time comes for me to be unjustifiably tasered, I will be openly gad to take that rather than a nightsticking.

Me too, but I'm pretty healthy so...

Quote:

Failing to signal while changing lanes is only against the law so that cops can come up with a good excuse to pull over a car full of Mexicans and see if the dog smells weed in there. They'd probably been following this guy for a while, had a vague suspicion that he was doing something bad, and pulled him over on a technicality. Maybe he called bullshit on that, and they pushed their response as far up the chain of escalation as they thought they could get away with.

Well, I can't argue with the second sentence there. It usually is a way to stop someone that there's no other reason to stop, but where there's still some sort of suspicion. And it's okay if it's not part of a consistent set of stops based on, say, race.

Quote:

And when it comes to perceived threats, when a 305-pound offensive lineman (they might not have known his profession, but that's a gigantic man) that you've known for exactly thirty-eight seconds is being uncooperative, that'll make you nervous. A guy like that could maim the crap out of you before you could blink, and it's a small consolation that your partner tased the guy after the fact when you're staring at the shattered chunk of femur that's sticking through your pants. I would doubt the effectiveness of a restraint hold if I couldn't get my arms around the guy.

Like I said, I might rather have left him in the car. By removing him, I'm creating a situation in which I have few choices but to tase him if he becomes uncooperative.

I just happened to run across these today on Wired:

Active Denial Systems Rolling Out
Active Denial Systems: Human Tests

More effective than the water cannon and sparks fewer visions of anti-civil rights police brutality. Perhaps just as few effects to health as well.

ADS is no panacea, it merely allows sadists to brutalize large numbers of people for asserting their Constitutional right of assembly. What happens when one overly gung-ho officer cranks up the output on one of those and fries a 1000 people? Is "oops" going to do it? Is the "bad apple" excuse going to do it? "fewer visions of anti-civil rights police brutality" you've got to be joking.

Let's see.... so the elements are: (1) an angry and/or desperate mob closely crowding around; (2) a private who is either (very unlikely) sociopathic or (very likely) scared shitless, and (3) a gun that can put large groups of people into a panic if you use it for three seconds, and fry the skin off their body if you use it for ten seconds. In panic, one third of the crowd knocks over another third of the crowd, with the remaining third of the crowd confused enough to run straight at the private, who responds to this horrifyingly unexpected turn of events by continuing to use the gun past the mandated five seconds well into the skin-frying zone. How is this an unlikely scenario? How will it not probably happen the first time?

Quote:

Original post by Avatar God I just happened to run across these today on Wired: Active Denial Systems Rolling Out Active Denial Systems: Human Tests More effective than the water cannon and sparks fewer visions of anti-civil rights police brutality. Perhaps just as few effects to health as well.

I'll be honest, this non-lethal stuff scares the shit out of me.

Yes. They have their uses but their misuses ...