Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Necroshea wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 Necroshea wrote:
Not sure what all the commotions about. Works the same way outside of school. Do something cops don't like that isn't against the law? Get tazed. Or pepper sprayed. Or shot.

I didn't know that US police officers are legally allowed to taze or pepper spray people who are not disobeying the law.

You'd be amazed at what police officers are allowed to do. What's that, they aren't allowed to do what they did? Well it's your word against a police officer, and the rest of his department attempting to cover it up.

Yeah, I'm aware of that but I'm not sure it is something that police officer's do frequently.

A lawsuit claims an New Mexico state police officer stunned a 10-year-old boy with a Taser after he refused to wash the officer's car.

an New Mexico state police officer

an New

What is this crap?

He claimed it accidentally discharged though the likely investigation will figure that one out. Still it's the same as pointing a loaded gun at them, even jokingly you have to be cautious and expect that there's a chance it might accidentally go off like this. It may have been unintentional, but it was definitely stupid.

For a second I thought you were saying he was a new officer to Mexico, until my grammar Nazi kicked in.

And some forumites wonder why some of us don't like talking to cops if we can avoid it.

 BlapBlapBlap wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
So he should throw himself on to his taser? What purpose will that serve?

Humour.

Exactly!

 d-usa wrote:

 BlapBlapBlap wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
So he should throw himself on to his taser? What purpose will that serve?

Humour.

Exactly!

Spoiler:

*Looks down*
"GUN!"
*ZAP*

It sort of reminds me of this fatal shooting. While no one died in the OP's situation, again this sort of casual use of the taser really needs to be curtailed - TBH I'd reconsider having them as standard issue. I know the argument is that the taser is a life-saving device since the only other alternative is the gun, but a lot of these situations show that they wouldn't have employed the gun either.

I'm not explaining myself well, so let me try again - I think that if cops only had guns, there'd be less police brutality. Somewhere along the line we accepted that "pain compliance" was an OK thing and I'm not so sure it is. I think it's another tool that helps divide police from the community. I'd also be OK with use of the taser to be considered the same as a shooting on the department side, so far as automatic suspension and review no matter what the case. That might be a good middle ground.

 Ouze wrote:
this fatal shooting

That was chilling to read.

Mattman154 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
this fatal shooting

That was chilling to read.

I'm surprised more people didn't riot some more after he spent only 11 months in jail for it. Man what a terrible situation.

 Ouze wrote:
It sort of reminds me of this fatal shooting. While no one died in the OP's situation, again this sort of casual use of the taser really needs to be curtailed - TBH I'd reconsider having them as standard issue. I know the argument is that the taser is a life-saving device since the only other alternative is the gun, but a lot of these situations show that they wouldn't have employed the gun either.

I'm not explaining myself well, so let me try again - I think that if cops only had guns, there'd be less police brutality. Somewhere along the line we accepted that "pain compliance" was an OK thing and I'm not so sure it is. I think it's another tool that helps divide police from the community. I'd also be OK with use of the taser to be considered the same as a shooting on the department side, so far as automatic suspension and review no matter what the case. That might be a good middle ground.

Except without tazers cops will return to "stick time" as it's often called. I'd rather take a tazer than 3 adult men with billy clubs and shot gloves anyday.

My experience? Avoid any cop with a shaved head and fingerless gloves. The good old fashioned mustachioed cops tend be a lot nicer, preferring to treat you like a person, rather than a "bad guy." God I hate 9/11 for making that an acceptable term.

I love the "moustache test" for police humanity.

 n0t_u wrote:

A lawsuit claims an New Mexico state police officer stunned a 10-year-old boy with a Taser after he refused to wash the officer's car.

an New Mexico state police officer

an New

What is this crap?

He claimed it accidentally discharged though the likely investigation will figure that one out. Still it's the same as pointing a loaded gun at them, even jokingly you have to be cautious and expect that there's a chance it might accidentally go off like this. It may have been unintentional, but it was definitely stupid.

It is a state lol, believe it or not...

He was pointing out the use of "an" instead of "a" in that sentence.

It would more properly be written as "A New Mexico ...".

An, only makes sense if the state's name started with a Vowel.

An Indiana, An Alaska, etc.

 Ouze wrote:
I love the "moustache test" for police humanity.

Mustache Test : PASSED

dogma wrote:You know, in certain older civilized cultures, when men failed as entirely as this one may have, they would throw themselves on their swords.

You need to stop watching Serenity while you sleep.

 chromedog wrote:
He was pointing out the use of "an" instead of "a" in that sentence.

It would more properly be written as "A New Mexico ...".

An, only makes sense if the state's name started with a Vowel.

An Indiana, An Alaska, etc.

Sorry, it was late and I was half asleep.

Kids these days need a good lesson in respect but a taser.....

I mean a belt would be sufficient

 Ouze wrote:
It sort of reminds me of this fatal shooting. While no one died in the OP's situation, again this sort of casual use of the taser really needs to be curtailed - TBH I'd reconsider having them as standard issue. I know the argument is that the taser is a life-saving device since the only other alternative is the gun, but a lot of these situations show that they wouldn't have employed the gun either.

I'm not explaining myself well, so let me try again - I think that if cops only had guns, there'd be less police brutality. Somewhere along the line we accepted that "pain compliance" was an OK thing and I'm not so sure it is. I think it's another tool that helps divide police from the community. I'd also be OK with use of the taser to be considered the same as a shooting on the department side, so far as automatic suspension and review no matter what the case. That might be a good middle ground.

Check out this book, Deadly Force: http://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Force-Firearms-American-Enforcement/dp/B005M4J8DE/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1357743157&sr=8-4&keywords=deadly+force

It covers an evolution of police equipment and training to include issuing of non-lethal devices. After reading it I decided giving cops tasers is better than giving them just batons and guns... Just arming them with guns and nothing else would not be a good thing. They would resort to lethal force a lot faster.

Couple things.
The cop is a Transportation officer, you know like those cops that assaulted the guy in a wheelchair in DC. Am I to believe that in New Mexico when your tractor trailer is overweight you get tazed: you'd think we'd have heard of this by now.
The lawsuit was filed in October and the article you linked is from November. While I'm all for feigned shock and outrage; it's usually customary to work up that anger closer to the issue or to build some sort of argument of your own in addition to your months old news. Or you know provide resolution.
Let's all wait in rapt antisipation of the obvious victory of this family against the state of New Mexico. You may not get your pound of flesh from the idiot in question though since demanding school children wash your car and tasing those who refuse is clearly "in the line of duty" and he has qualified immunity: right? Because whatever review board gave him a 3 day suspension is filled by fething morons. I'd call for his head on a pike and settle for his job...if this wasn't so old.
Yawn, stretch, fart.

Yeah, stupid. I had the misfortune of getting tazed around the same age, it felt like I was getting bit and burned at the same time. Except it was all over my body. It was over 20 years ago but I remember it like yesterday.

I still cant comprehend how the cop thought it was a good idea.

I think, as suitable punishment, the guy should stand and get tased by the boy AND all the people who witnessed it happen, then get removed from the force and pay all of the boy's medical bills 100% out of his own pocket. That'll show him. Also, for every penny he's short on the bills, the bill collectors get to tase his nutsack.

I'm just in favor of people getting tased if they deserve it. *ZOTT!!*

 timetowaste85 wrote:
I think, as suitable punishment, the guy should stand and get tased by the boy AND all the people who witnessed it happen, then get removed from the force and pay all of the boy's medical bills 100% out of his own pocket. That'll show him. Also, for every penny he's short on the bills, the bill collectors get to tase his nutsack.

I'm just in favor of people getting tased if they deserve it. *ZOTT!!*

Would that not qualify as Cruel and Unusual punishment?
Also thi story sounds....well, odd to me. The cop just pulled out a tazer and shot it at the kid? And the Kid has PTSD? It sounds like a lawsuit that is frivolous to me. Why dont we hear the cops side of the story? While I doubt there is many situations the require to tazering of a kid, his story would be appreciated.
If this is true, then he sound like someone with a power complex.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
The cop just pulled out a tazer and shot it at the kid? And the Kid has PTSD? It sounds like a lawsuit that is frivolous to me. Why dont we hear the cops side of the story? While I doubt there is many situations the require to tazering of a kid, his story would be appreciated.

You don't really get how young kids "work" do you? I'm guessing that you don't have any of your own and / or are a bit on the younger side yourself?

There is NO SITUATION whatsoever that could possibly require the tazering of a 10 year old! Also the version of the cop was that it was an accidental discharge which also doesn't matter because he shouldn't have pointed the tazer at the kid under any conceivable circumstance. He should be fired on the spot and should pay the costs for the kids counselling and injuries.

PhantomViper wrote:

There is NO SITUATION whatsoever that could possibly require the tazering of a 10 year old!

If the 10 year old happened to be holding a gun, I could understand using a taser on him. Not that a 10 year old would use a gun with the intent to kill, but that he might do so accidentally.

PhantomViper wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
The cop just pulled out a tazer and shot it at the kid? And the Kid has PTSD? It sounds like a lawsuit that is frivolous to me. Why dont we hear the cops side of the story? While I doubt there is many situations the require to tazering of a kid, his story would be appreciated.

You don't really get how young kids "work" do you? I'm guessing that you don't have any of your own and / or are a bit on the younger side yourself?

There is NO SITUATION whatsoever that could possibly require the tazering of a 10 year old! Also the version of the cop was that it was an accidental discharge which also doesn't matter because he shouldn't have pointed the tazer at the kid under any conceivable circumstance. He should be fired on the spot and should pay the costs for the kids counselling and injuries.

What do you mean "Work"? and I do have kids in my family. None near 10 but i do.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

What do you mean "Work"? and I do have kids in my family. None near 10 but i do.

Then how can you say that getting tazered won't trigger a PTSD response in a 10 year old? "woken up in the middle of the night holding his chest, afraid he is never going to wake up again," is a very likely response from a young child that suffered through a situation like that. Heck, I've seen young adults that went through things like car accidents that had the same type of reaction for months afterwords!

 dogma wrote:

If the 10 year old happened to be holding a gun, I could understand using a taser on him. Not that a 10 year old would use a gun with the intent to kill, but that he might do so accidentally.

Alright, I know I shouldn't, but I'll bite: why wouldn't a 10 year-old use a gun with the intent to kill?

 dogma wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

There is NO SITUATION whatsoever that could possibly require the tazering of a 10 year old!

If the 10 year old happened to be holding a gun, I could understand using a taser on him. Not that a 10 year old would use a gun with the intent to kill, but that he might do so accidentally.

Electrical shocks will usually trigger involuntary muscle responses, wouldn't this make the kid more likely to actually pull the trigger accidentally?

PhantomViper wrote:

 dogma wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

There is NO SITUATION whatsoever that could possibly require the tazering of a 10 year old!

If the 10 year old happened to be holding a gun, I could understand using a taser on him. Not that a 10 year old would use a gun with the intent to kill, but that he might do so accidentally.

Electrical shocks will usually trigger involuntary muscle responses, wouldn't this make the kid more likely to actually pull the trigger accidentally?

Depends on where he's hit. I believe the muscle response moves in a radius out from the point of impact, so the kid would be dropping to the floor before the muscles for his hands got hit. So while the gun could go off it probably wouldn't be where he was aiming originally.

And FWIW, shooting him with a gun wouldn't be much better. Thats just as likely to cause him to pull the trigger.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
I think, as suitable punishment, the guy should stand and get tased by the boy AND all the people who witnessed it happen, then get removed from the force and pay all of the boy's medical bills 100% out of his own pocket. That'll show him. Also, for every penny he's short on the bills, the bill collectors get to tase his nutsack.

I'm just in favor of people getting tased if they deserve it. *ZOTT!!*

Would that not qualify as Cruel and Unusual punishment?
Also thi story sounds....well, odd to me. The cop just pulled out a tazer and shot it at the kid? And the Kid has PTSD? It sounds like a lawsuit that is frivolous to me. Why dont we hear the cops side of the story? While I doubt there is many situations the require to tazering of a kid, his story would be appreciated.
If this is true, then he sound like someone with a power complex.

Possibly, bu the guy shot a 10-year old kid with a taser. One that was unarmed. Gross stupidity of the highest order. Also, I firmly believe in punishment for crimes matching the crime-you tase a kid, be prepared to suffer the same.