Video Proof of why you should OBEY the Cops when they pull you over...

[DarkFury]

Oh... this is messed up. But honestly, that lady brought it on herself.

She obviously didn't follow "Chris Rock's" advice on how to deal with the cops...

http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/palmbeachpost/video/taserarrest.mov


Note: this clip has some foul language... proceed with due caution.

[tupacboy]

dude that lady is dumb...

[MrGreg]

I can't see what's happening in the car, so I won't go so far as to say she deserved it... but she had every chance to avoid it.

[Thesifer]

Im not too sure the second tase was called for.. Some people have different pain tolerances than others.. and she may have really not been able to do what he said at that point.. the first one.. she had every chance to avoid tho.. but according to what I Saw.. she never got "Violent" so a taser might have been a bit extreme.. Cops tend to enjoy using force when they are pretty sure they can get away with it.. Even if they dont warn you.. if it isnt on camera.. then they just do it anyways..

[eSDee]

Geez what the hell did she do to deserve that? Did she really take a swing at the cop? That really seemed a bit inhumane. I can't imagine what the person on the other side of the phone was thinking.

[brainsmile]

well I think she was being a bit defiant by being on the phone. But I'd move if something that looked like a gun was pointed at me.

[yippiekiyeh]

Was race an issue?

[chadlnc]

She was setting that up for a lawsuit from the very start. It started with making sure her mom knew what was going on over the phone and then continued with the forced fake crying. Really if you have kids or have spent anytime around them, you know forced crying when you hear and honestly her's needs a little work.

No it wasn't nessecary, she could have just complied and got out of the car http://www.gotapex.com/forums/images/icons/tongue.gif

[CynJon]

She obviously didn't follow "Chris Rock's" advice on how to deal with the cops...

"Get a white friend?" :heh:

[Jeffbx]

Oh man -

And the Oscar goes to... the driver! She played the victim from the second she was pulled over. I'll tell you what - if a cop points a taser at me & tells me to get out of the car, whether I think it's necessary or not, my butt will be out of that car in a hurry!

[nickel]

draaaaaaaaama queen right there. as far as feeling sorry for her, if she would have cooperated after being asked and warned repeatedly before she got tased it wouldn't have happened. it's on tape. she's to blame.

and no... i don't see how race is an issue here. she was driving with a suspended license. that's why she was pulled over. she was defiant and didn't do what the cops told her that's why she was tased.

[oblongmelon]

She was setting that up for a lawsuit from the very start. It started with making sure her mom knew what was going on over the phone and then continued with the forced fake crying. Really if you have kids or have spent anytime around them, you know forced crying when you hear and honestly her's needs a little work.

http://www.gotapex.com/forums/images/icons/tongue.gif

Boy you got that right-she was telling whomever was on the phone that they were going to arrest her before she was even tased....
Chaching!$$$$$$$$$$$$$, and then to say when they were going to SHOOT HER? lololol chaaaaaaaaaaachingbling$$$$$$$$$

[Merlin]

I would like to see what becomes of this. As I see it the police tazed a non violent person not once but twice. Why? Because she was on the phone and they didn't like it. Also the cops said she took a swing at them. I bet he said that for a little CYA action on the tape. It is not the best video but I didn't see her move toward anyone. And if she didn't - then they just did it out of spite, and who doesn't want to be spiteful to people on cell phones :P

Obviously the police need to control the situation when harrassing citizens - opps I mean performing traffic stops, but from the looks of that video they went way overboard.

And I have to disagree with the rest of you - getting a beatdown by police is not something any non-violent person "has coming to her."

[Burzhui]

Beautiful, just beautiful :)

"Yall are racist" She deserve every bit of it, talking on the phone with your license suspended, not respondig to a police officer, yea that'll get you tazed.

[nickel]

what state did this take place in? anyone catch that?

--------------------------------

I would like to see what becomes of this. As I see it the police tazed a non violent person not once but twice. Why? Because she was on the phone and they didn't like it. Also the cops said she took a swing at them. I bet he said that for a little CYA action on the tape. It is not the best video but I didn't see her move toward anyone. And if she didn't - then they just did it out of spite, and who doesn't want to be spiteful to people on cell phones :P

Obviously the police need to control the situation when harrassing citizens - opps I mean performing traffic stops, but from the looks of that video they went way overboard.

And I have to disagree with the rest of you - getting a beatdown by police is not something any non-violent person "has coming to her."
they told her to get off the phone and out of the vehicle repeatedly. she was not complying. so he told her she would be tased if she didn't comply. he warned her. he didn't just taze her out of the blue.

so you are the cop Merlin. how would you handle her and get her to comply?

i guess i don't see having sympathy for her because she was pulled over for having a suspended license which is reasonable, and she was asked reasonably to get off the phone and out of the vehicle several times. if i were her, i would have complied with the law enforcement officials or else faced the consequences.

[DarkFury]

Honestly...

The last time the cops pulled me over... I was FULLY cooperative with them. I was even nervous that he wouldn't give me enough time to get my license and registration out of my glove box in thinkin' that I might be goin' for a weapon or something.

Here in Indy... if you even give the slightest hint of "trouble" they will call for backup and you'll have at least 3 squad cars pull up within minutes.

I've seen it way too many times... car stopped and 4 or 5 officers present and ready to draw weapons. Last thing I wanna do is get a "beat down" by the Law... cause honestly you gonna lose either way in that fight.

Pretty much... she shoulda just gotten off the phone and complied with the officer's request. The LAST thing you wanna do is start arguing with them... cause once you piss them off... all hell can break loose.

[Merlin]

so you are the cop Merlin. how would you handle her and get her to comply?

Honestly I don't know. But a full blown violent response to a non violent person seems a bit off to me. I agree that she should do what was instructed. That is not the issue. For me the issue is when does this level of violence become acceptable. And just because it is non lethal does not mean it is non violent.

[nickel]

Honestly I don't know. But a full blown violent response to a non violent person seems a bit off to me. I agree that she should do what was instructed. That is not the issue. For me the issue is when does this level of violence become acceptable. And just because it is non lethal does not mean it is non violent.
i dunno... you don't seem to have an alternative action as a means to end the situation, and i don't think there was one.
if she wasn't warned that she was going to be tased, and given ample time to comply so that wouldn't happen, i would have to agree more with you.

[bbrian]

I agree with Merlin. Just because someone isn't complying with a command doesn't mean a cop can get violent with them. It means they can use force to get them to obey the command. Force != Violence. The tazer is supposed to be an alternative to the night stick or firing a gun at them, not an alternative to wrestle someone out of a car or to get them to get off the phone. That's just silly. Cops are trained on how to pull someone from a car and how to subdue them without physically harming them.

Tazers are supposed to be non-lethal, but there's still instances where people have died from being tazered.

For those saying she deserved it, had she died from being tazered would it still have been warranted? If so, why not just shoot her?


if she wasn't warned that she was going to be tased, and given ample time to comply so that wouldn't happen, i would have to agree more with you. If he had warned he was going to shoot her, would it have been ok to shoot her too?

[Grubbie]

Honestly I don't know. But a full blown violent response to a non violent person seems a bit off to me. I agree that she should do what was instructed. That is not the issue. For me the issue is when does this level of violence become acceptable. And just because it is non lethal does not mean it is non violent.


What else were they supposed to do? Ya the second tase maybe not needed. However, they were attempting to arrest her and she didn't follow instructions. Disobyed an order from an officer(well a couple, get off the phone and exit the vehicle). Ya he could of tried to pull her out of the car, but that could of been worse.

In the end, I think the cop should of been like, mam we are placing you under arrest for a suspended license, please step out of the car. If then she didn't, and continued to blab on the phone. THEN you can say, if you don't step out of the car, I will tase you.

I just think they should of told her she was being arrested and she needed to get out of the car. But she was dumb and didn't follow orders, I was waiting for her to faint at the very end and fall over and scream in fake pains.

[nickel]

I agree with Merlin. Just because someone isn't complying with a command doesn't mean a cop can get violent with them. It means they can use force to get them to obey the command. Force != Violence. The tazer is supposed to be an alternative to the night stick or firing a gun at them, not an alternative to wrestle someone out of a car or to get them to get off the phone. That's just silly. Cops are trained on how to pull someone from a car and how to subdue them without physically harming them.

Tazers are supposed to be non-lethal, but there's still instances where people have died from being tazered.

For those saying she deserved it, had she died from being tazered would it still have been warranted? If so, why not just shoot her?

If he had warned he was going to shoot her, would it have been ok to shoot her too?
no, the situation didn't warrant a gun. don't be silly.

i think you make a big assumption thinking that it would be easy to get that woman out of the vehicle and on the ground without hurting her. she obviously wasn't going to go easily.

followup would be nice, because i'll bet she suffered no ill effects from the tazing. i think her carrying on was a big act.

*paging gug!!!!*

[bbrian]

Did the situation warrant a night stick and beating her with it? Again, the tazer is an alternative to other physically harmful tools that the police have at their disposal. Lots of people resist the police, but resistance should be met with force, not violence.

My dad is CLEAT instructor and has been in law enforcement for 15 years.. I have no doubt the cop could have pulled her out of the car without hurting her. I wrestled all through high school and I spent a lot of time 'resisting' my dad during his training. He has pulled me out of cars, wrestled me to the ground from standing and running positions, and taken guns from me. All without hurting me. And believe me I resisted with all my might. I didn't want my dad out wrestling people to the ground without being able to do it well. I'm not saying that their techniques don't have a chance of hurting you and that they may be uncomfortable while being performed, but you have almost zero chance of dying while being physically subdued. The chance of being hurt is really in the control of the person being subdued.. the more you resists the more likely you are to be hurt during the manuever. While helping my dad I would resist to the point that I was worried I was going to break a bone if I didn't do what he was trying to get me to do. I'd take that any day over a tazer..

btw-In order to get a tazer my dad had to be tazered. I don't think any state requires this, so a lot of officers have no idea what it feels like. I asked him to tazer me and he wouldn't do it.

[Merlin]

Again, I don't know what would have been the best thing to do but from just watching the vid it seemed really over the top.


...mam we are placing you under arrest for a suspended license, please step out of the car.
That is the other part that bothered me. At first he just asked her to get off the phone there was nothing mentioned about being put under arrest. It is hard to tell o lot from just some video but it looked to me like the arrest was nothing more than a response to her being on the phone and the cop not liking that. Maybe the suspended license is just as true as the "swing" she took at them.

[BrewMaster]

Gugenheim surely knows better, but I think cops are issued tazers for exactly this kind of situation. A cop shouldn't have to wrestle an adult out of a car or negotiate them out of a car because they want to talk on the phone. A traffic stop is not a democratic process. You do what the cop f*cking says or else you can't bitch about the consequences. So maybe the second taze was a bit excessive. But that certainly doesn't mean he shouldn't have tazed her to begin with.


btw-In order to get a tazer my dad had to be tazered. I don't think any state requires this, so a lot of officers have no idea what it feels like. I asked him to tazer me and he wouldn't do it.
according to the video, both of the cops involved had been tazered before (probably like your dad, so that they can get their tazer).



That is the other part that bothered me. At first he just asked her to get off the phone there was nothing mentioned about being put under arrest. It is hard to tell o lot from just some video but it looked to me like the arrest was nothing more than a response to her being on the phone and the cop not liking that. Maybe the suspended license is just as true as the "swing" she took at them.
A swing you can make up. A suspended license is not something a cop can make up. Either her license is suspended or not. It's not a matter of opinion. She didn't disagree about the license. Also, she seemed to know that she was going to be arrested from the start so I suspect she knew exactly why they pulled her over.

[Thesifer]

draaaaaaaaama queen right there. as far as feeling sorry for her, if she would have cooperated after being asked and warned repeatedly before she got tased it wouldn't have happened. it's on tape. she's to blame.

and no... i don't see how race is an issue here. she was driving with a suspended license. that's why she was pulled over. she was defiant and didn't do what the cops told her that's why she was tased.


Uhmm what? .. The Cop knew who the driver was and that her License was suspsended before he pulled her over??

[BrewMaster]

Uhmm what? .. The Cop knew who the driver was and that her License was suspsended before he pulled her over??
they have these things on the back of cars called license plates. if they run that, they can tell that the owner of the car has a suspended license. and if the owner is driving the car, well, they can put 2 and 2 together.

[bbrian]

Here's the rules my dad's department follows for when NOT to use a taser:

for the dispersal of non-violent persons;
for disorderly crowds;
in situations where people are exercising their constitutional rights of free speech or assembly;
at random;
or as a threat to gain compliance or information.

He said the general rule is the person must first be violent towards them before they can use it, which is probably why the cop mentions the lady swinging at him. The sheriff tells his department to avoid problems that they should only be using it as an alternative to lethal force, since tasers have killed people. He also mentioned that a lot of manufactures are no longer calling them non-lethal weapons and are instead calling them less-lethal weapons.

[RIVERWIDOW]

All she had to do was get her *ss out of the car. She choose not to do it after repeated requests(orders) What the Hell did she think was going to happen if she didn't comply? I am sick to death of people crying foul because they get in trouble but don't want to take responsibility. She totally deserved it. A simple step out of the car would have prevented the whole thing but as others have stated , I think she smelled $$$ from the git go. All over a suspended license. What an idiot. :censored:

[nickel]

Uhmm what? .. The Cop knew who the driver was and that her License was suspsended before he pulled her over??
what are you talking about? :confused:

[RIVERWIDOW]

Uhmm what? .. The Cop knew who the driver was and that her License was suspsended before he pulled her over?? They have computers in their cars. She probably committed a nono like bad stop or something and they ran her license.

[cadetevon]

A funny thought...sorta… came to me while watching this vid... I’ll tell you what: if my son (9 years old) had a fit like that on me, I'd kick his @$$.

All that fake crying like that... no, way. Just listening to her made me want to tazer her.

She was repeating everything to her mother like she was laying pipe to sue later. I wonder if she knew she was being taped?

Seriously though, that fake crying makes me nuts. Like parents used to say in the day, "You want something to cry about?"

The lady said, "I'm suing the sh!t outta you all."

License suspended, didn't follow instructions, resisted arrest (albeit non-violently), then was surprised that she was being arrested?

Then at the end she didn't even want to get in the car? Bullsh!t.

They had to struggle with her the whole way. Even at the end she wasn't being compliant.

She had OODLES of warnings, the cops were calm the entire time, and she was resisting the entire time.

:shrug:


All she had to do was get her *ss out of the car.


:stupid:

[Jeffbx]

They were talking about this on the radio here yesterday, and apparently she was pulled over for speeding, and they found out *after* they ran her license that it was suspended.

She was charged with speeding, resisting arrest & driving with a suspended license.

They also said there was an investigation into the officer's actions, and they followed the proper procedures to the letter (they actually quoted the investegator as saying their actions were a 'textbook example of proper taser use'). They are fully supported in their use of the taser with a non-coopertating suspect.

Now, I agree that the 2nd zap MAY have been one too many, but if I were in their shoes, I would have done the same thing. Why would I want to risk my own safety to reach into someone's car to try to get them out? At that point, they had no idea if she had a weapon, was on drugs, etc.

[eSDee]

I don't know if I would discount her crying as fake crying, especially if she was scared. If they shot her in the chest then remember women don't have as much muscle as men and so it probably hurt a lot more than when one of the cops was tazered in training. She shouldn't have resisted arrest there's no doubt about it. But I just don't think it was justified to tazer her twice.

[Merlin]

Now, I agree that the 2nd zap MAY have been one too many, but if I were in their shoes, I would have done the same thing. Why would I want to risk my own safety to reach into someone's car to try to get them out? At that point, they had no idea if she had a weapon, was on drugs, etc.
Or you could simply use a little more paticents and see if the whole thing could be avoided altogether.

[mcs328]

So what should do if you believe the officer is not a real law enforcement agent and request a second patrol car to validate the first officer? We've had very few instances of police impersonation but I did hear you have a right to request another officer before you can comply with any instructions for your own safety.

Anyways the second taser I think it totally unnecessary but I think she totally deserves the first one.

[Grafalgar]

Some more video and commentary from a cop:

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

[Markel]

I think you need to see things from a cop's perspective. If he wants to live to see his grandchildren, he has to assume that anyone he stops may be a wanted/fleeing murderer, drug dealer, etc. (and most of the times he will find out otherwise, but the one instance when his carefulness pays off it could save his life). When the person refuses to obey his orders (especially after the fifth time or so, as in the video), the cop's suspicions have to go up. These guys are under a huge amount of stress every day of their jobs (not many of us could face death if we make a slight mistake on our jobs) and I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt.

That being said, I also have little compassion for a bad/bully cop who misuses his authority (although from what I can tell on the video, this was not the case).

[BrewMaster]

Some more video and commentary from a cop:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/video/taser_video3a.html
very good finf Grafalgar. interesting to hear the training officer's comments as well as see the video from the beginning. they actually ran her driver's license.

[gugnheim]

btw-In order to get a tazer my dad had to be tazered. I don't think any state requires this, so a lot of officers have no idea what it feels like. I asked him to tazer me and he wouldn't do it.

Every program I know requires it. Every. We've been tazed, maced and gassed! We go through it every year, not just once. Every single officer who is issued one knows what it feels like.

And you do it so you don't have to wrestle someone out of the cabin of a vechicle. That only promotes the potential for injury, both to officer and subject. Inside the cab is the subject's territory, with the possibility for concealed weapons, etc.

What if she was high on something? I'm 6 ft, 275, and I have been physically THROWN by a subject on pcp who we had on the ground. Who also had been tazered three times with no effect. Believe me, there was no "voilence" to that situation, just necessary force. The officers were calm and very professional. A lot of "lip" is thrown at us, to try and incite us anymore. We're trained well to ignore it. Don't lecture us on restraint, I took a brick to the face(thank God for the helmet) thrown by a nine year old during the riots here a few years back, and we never considered responding.

I also see a lot of confusion with the arrest. Just because you are "under arrest" doesn't mean you're gong downtown. It's just a holding state to place a subject in while more information can be gathered safely for all the parties. She (minus the suspended license) might have been let go with tickets to get the car fixed and to go to court for the speeding, even after the attitude, but her refusals killed that.
Gug

[BrewMaster]

thanks for your thought Gug. we were waitin' for ya.

[RIVERWIDOW]

Or you could simply use a little more paticents and see if the whole thing could be avoided altogether.

Oh, please. While they are taking their time and PATIENCE with her, 3 other
people are being mugged, shot, robbed etc. It would have been over in 2 minutes if she had done what they said. This whole thing is totally on her. :censored:

[bbrian]

Every program I know requires it. Every. We've been tazed, maced and gassed! We go through it every year, not just once. Every single officer who is issued one knows what it feels like.

And you do it so you don't have to wrestle someone out of the cabin of a vechicle. That only promotes the potential for injury, both to officer and subject. Inside the cab is the subject's territory, with the possibility for concealed weapons, etc.

What if she was high on something? I'm 6 ft, 275, and I have been physically THROWN by a subject on pcp who we had on the ground. Who also had been tazered three times with no effect. Believe me, there was no "voilence" to that situation, just necessary force. The officers were calm and very professional. A lot of "lip" is thrown at us, to try and incite us anymore. We're trained well to ignore it. Don't lecture us on restraint, I took a brick to the face(thank God for the helmet) thrown by a nine year old during the riots here a few years back, and we never considered responding. I don't doubt you for a second, however I don't agree that using a potentially lethal force on someone whom has shown no violent tendancies. What if they aren't getting out of the car because they are incoherent, having medical problems, mental episode, etc.. (obviously she wasn't). If it is obvious that normal/reasonable take down methods aren't going to work (the pcp dude), then I have no problem with using tasers.

Not every program around here requires it. My dad's department passed out pepper spray and 1 officer was volunteered to be sprayed so they could see the affects. None of the other officers were sprayed. Other departments around here do the same thing with tasers.

[Merlin]

Oh, please. While they are taking their time and PATIENCE with her, 3 other people are being mugged, shot, robbed etc.
Wow, sounds like crime is really off the chart in your hood.

[RIVERWIDOW]

Wow, sounds like crime is really off the chart in your hood.

No, I actually live in a relatively crime free area. I just happen to be old enough to remember that you do what a cop tells you. I just get sick of no one being at fault but the good guys. I realize there are bad cops out there but i think it is much better now then it was even 10 years ago. I support our local police until some one proves to me that they screwed up .What I was saying is, while they are trying to cajole this chick out of her car there is someone else going down they might have been able to help. Think about the down side of this behavior. Some kid gets stabbed and dies because no one can get there fast enough because they are playing around with some loser who doesn't want to get out of their car. Explain that to some ones parents.

[Merlin]

What I was saying is, while they are trying to cajole this chick out of her car there is someone else going down they might have been able to help. Think about the down side of this behavior. Some kid gets stabbed and dies because no one can get there fast enough because they are playing around with some loser who doesn't want to get out of their car. Explain that to some ones parents.
Understood. The point I was trying to make is that there IS enough time for them to do their job effectively without going to extremes. And if your area is as nice as you say then I think you would value having poilce that difuse situations rather than escalate them. Good cops don't have to throw gas on a fire just because they can. Now I don't know that these cops were wrong but they did have a non violent person tazes multiple times in under 2 minutes.

[zippyjuan]

I think cell phones make people stupid. People on them are in their own world of the conversation and are unaware of what is actually going on around them. I read somewhere that someone on the phone while driving a car has the same reactions as an 80 year old. They don't realize that others can hear every word they say sometimes and don't think about what they are doing. Some won't stop talking for anything. Like this lady.

[Airencracken]

Understood. The point I was trying to make is that there IS enough time for them to do their job effectively without going to extremes. And if your area is as nice as you say then I think you would value having poilce that difuse situations rather than escalate them. Good cops don't have to throw gas on a fire just because they can. Now I don't know that these cops were wrong but they did have a non violent person tazes multiple times in under 2 minutes.

:stupid:

Question everything.

[cadetevon]

Now I don't know that these cops were wrong but they did have a non violent person tazes multiple times in under 2 minutes.


Yet, no tazing would have occured at all had the woman at fault, you know, the one breaking several laws, would have simply followed directions.

[bbrian]

I don't see anyone condoning her behavior. I don't see anyone saying she wasn't at fault or that she didn't need to be arrested. I just think the cop went a little over the line. Do I think he needs to be fired or disciplined? Hell no.. especially not if he was following his departments guidelines on taser use.

I think the people making policies on tasers need to take tasers more seriously. They should be concidered potentially lethal... which they aren't in most places. Even amnesty Intl has been cautioning on taser use citing that there are no good studies on potential harmful affects of tasers. Police departments across the US are taking taser manufacturers at their word and using them on non-violent people..

I guess I'd rather see cops be taser happy than gun happy.. ;)


Understood. The point I was trying to make is that there IS enough time for them to do their job effectively without going to extremes. And if your area is as nice as you say then I think you would value having poilce that difuse situations rather than escalate them. Good cops don't have to throw gas on a fire just because they can. Now I don't know that these cops were wrong but they did have a non violent person tazes multiple times in under 2 minutes. :stupid:

[RIVERWIDOW]

Understood. The point I was trying to make is that there IS enough time for them to do their job effectively without going to extremes. And if your area is as nice as you say then I think you would value having poilce that difuse situations rather than escalate them. Good cops don't have to throw gas on a fire just because they can. Now I don't know that these cops were wrong but they did have a non violent person tazes multiple times in under 2 minutes.

But how did they know she was non-violent?? And yes the cops in our area do try to keep the violence at a minimum. But, you cant know if someone is going to turn violent . I guess what I am saying is I would rather have they
err on the side of their own safety because they are not the ones breaking the law. :shakehand

[Merlin]

Yet, no tazing would have occured at all had the woman at fault, you know, the one breaking several laws, would have simply followed directions.
I didn't see her break any laws, did you?

And again she was wrong for not doing as instructed. It was a mistake on her part. Everyone is in agreement on that issue.

[bbrian]

Yet, no tazing would have occured at all had the woman at fault, you know, the one breaking several laws, would have simply followed directions. But the use of force needs to be justified.. you could say the EXACT same thing if the cop had shot her with a gun. It still doesn't mean it is justified. :rolleyes:


But how did they know she was non-violent?? And yes the cops in our area do try to keep the violence at a minimum. But, you cant know if someone is going to turn violent . I guess what I am saying is I would rather have they
err on the side of their own safety because they are not the ones breaking the law. :shakehand To know if someone is violent, you have to know that they have committed a violent act. In this case she was sitting in her car. I would call that non-violent. If she had just killed someone while sitting in her car, she would then be concidered violent.

So I guess the next time you get stopped for speeding or maybe an accidental illegal lane change, you'd have no problem with being concidered a violent criminal when you got pulled over. Guns blaizing asking you to step out of your car, etc.. as you say the cops don't know if you're violent or not.

If a cop exerts unneccesary force against someone it can be concidered assault.. so technically the cop could be breaking the law.

[cadetevon]

But the use of force needs to be justified.. you could say the EXACT same thing if the cop had shot her with a gun. It still doesn't mean it is justified. :rolleyes:


She was offered several choices, to which she responded poorly.

Suspended drivers liscense...drove anyway.

Broken tail light...didn't know about, maybe.

Broken wind shield...didn't fix.

Pulled over, asked to get off the phone...didn't do it.

Offered the choice of hanging up or getting tazered...didn't hang up.

And it goes on and on right up the last of the vid where she puts up a fuss about getting in the darn car.

Ya'll can play the 'what if' game all day long.

End result is that he didn't shoot her with a bullet. He didn't beat her with a club. He didn't punch her. He opted for the tazer.

So, for as far as I'm concerned, you can keep the 'what if' cr@p out of he discussion. We don't live in a 'what if' world. We live in the world that we saw on tape.

BTW, thanks to whomever posted the full on vid and the commentary.

[nickel]

But the use of force needs to be justified.. you could say the EXACT same thing if the cop had shot her with a gun. It still doesn't mean it is justified. :rolleyes:

To know if someone is violent, you have to know that they have committed a violent act. In this case she was sitting in her car. I would call that non-violent. If she had just killed someone while sitting in her car, she would then be concidered violent.

So I guess the next time you get stopped for speeding or maybe an accidental illegal lane change, you'd have no problem with being concidered a violent criminal when you got pulled over. Guns blaizing asking you to step out of your car, etc.. as you say the cops don't know if you're violent or not.

If a cop exerts unneccesary force against someone it can be concidered assault.. so technically the cop could be breaking the law.
why did you go back to your gun theory? as i said the first time you threw that out, a gun wasn't warranted in this situation, and a gun was not even brought into the picture.

and if i adamantly refuse to do what the cops say and they warn me that i will be tazed if i don't do it, hells yes, i expect to be tazed.

i tend to put more merit into what gug has said about this situation. he has been there, done that.

your father is a police officier? show him this video. ask him what he would have done. ask him if these cops were "breaking the law".

[bbrian]

'what if' game.. where? It isn't much of a discussion if you don't want an opposing view. :shrug:

I don't care how many choices she was offered or how she responded to them as long as the responses were non-violent and whatever offense she had committed was non-violent, I don't think her responses/actions warrant the use of a taser.

[Cheetarah]

I guess I'd rather see cops be taser happy than gun happy..

yeah, me too. Wish they used a taser on my friend... http://www.sdcitybeat.com/article.php?id=3147

[Houdini]

I actually haven't seen any solid evidence that Tasers have caused death. The only way I could see it would be if the shock triggered an arrhythmia. The few cases I've heard reported in this model also mention confounding factors such as the suspect's recent cocaine use, etc. So if a person is tased and dies later that day of an arrhythmia, did the Taser cause it? Did the Taser make the person more likely to die? Did his drug use only cause the death? My understanding is that the jury is out on the amount of blame the taser deserves.

It's interesting that people mention the pain component. That's not the only way the latest generation Tasers work. The latest models, instead of using "pain compliance" use a different pulse type that actually overrides the neuromuscular junction, causing your muscles to tense and your body to go stiff and fall for a 5 second "ride." You don't have a choice and it doesn't matter how pain tolerant you are or what drugs you've been taking. After the shock is over, you can stand up almost immediately without any lasting effects. I think that's a great idea.

Tasers do have their weak points, though. If one of the barbs is pulled out when a suspect falls or turns, the connection is instantly broken and the person regains use of his/her muscles almost instantly. If the Taser shoots and misses, you can reload and try again, but that takes time. In a violent situation (where the officer has a gun available and is being threatened with a similar lethal weapon/pipe/whatever), the logical choice is then to shoot and fear being sued.

In any case, this woman was overly dramatic. Her mother or whoever she was talking to on the phone should have instructed her to get the hell off the phone and do what the hell the cop orders. I think it's very likely she was trying to milk this for all it's (not) worth.

[bbrian]

why did you go back to your gun theory? as i said the first time you threw that out, a gun wasn't warranted in this situation, and a gun was not even brought into the picture.

and if i adamantly refuse to do what the cops say and they warn me that i will be tazed if i don't do it, hells yes, i expect to be tazed.

i tend to put more merit into what gug has said about this situation. he has been there, done that.

your father is a police officier? show him this video. ask him what he would have done. ask him if these cops were "breaking the law".
My point is just because the cop warned her that he was going to use a taser, doesn't justify the use of it. Using the 'gun theory' was just a way of explaining that. Replace taser with anything.. shoe, stick, bazooka.. whatever. Warning someone that you're going to use it, doesn't justify the use.

Glad you put more merit into gug.. :shrug:

I didn't say the cops were 'breaking the law'.. I even stated that I don't think they need to be punished in any way.. especially if they were following their departments guidelines.
I can tell you now that my dad would not have used a taser. He has carried one for about a year now and hasn't used it except in training. He has arrested several violent criminals that resisted and has yet to shoot anyone or use the taser. I know for a fact that he has wrestled several people out of cars too.. we also have some of the countries worst problems with meth labs and meth users. The jail is ful of them and hardly a week goes by that they don't bust a meth lab. Still, they will do their best to use non-violent methods to subdue someone before resorting to night sticks, tasers, or guns.


I actually haven't seen any solid evidence that Tasers have caused death. The only way I could see it would be if the shock triggered an arrhythmia. The few cases I've heard reported in this model also mention confounding factors such as the suspect's recent cocaine use, etc. So if a person is tased and dies later that day of an arrhythmia, did the Taser cause it? Did the Taser make the person more likely to die? Did his drug use only cause the death? My understanding is that the jury is out on the amount of blame the taser deserves. Agreed.. the jury is out, but I like to err on the side of life. ;)

I don't think a taser can cause death realisticly.. it would trigger something else that would cause death. Unless it malfunctioned and actually electrocuted someone, which I don't think is possible.

[nickel]

yeah, me too. Wish they used a taser on my friend... http://www.sdcitybeat.com/article.php?id=3147
how sad :( sorry for the loss of your friend. it sounds like horrible circumstances. i mean having that gun in the back of his van, and having it be for some play so they painted it black and made it look more real... horrible circumstances.

[nickel]

My point is just because the cop warned her that he was going to use a taser, doesn't justify the use of it. Using the 'gun theory' was just a way of explaining that. Replace taser with anything.. shoe, stick, bazooka.. whatever. Warning someone that you're going to use it, doesn't justify the use.

Glad you put more merit into gug.. :shrug:

I didn't say the cops were 'breaking the law'.. I even stated that I don't think they need to be punished in any way.. especially if they were following their departments guidelines.
I can tell you now that my dad would not have used a taser. He has carried one for about a year now and hasn't used it except in training. He has arrested several violent criminals that resisted and has yet to shoot anyone or use the taser. I know for a fact that he has wrestled several people out of cars too.. we also have some of the countries worst problems with meth labs and meth users. The jail is ful of them and hardly a week goes by that they don't bust a meth lab. Still, they will do their best to use non-violent methods to subdue someone before resorting to night sticks, tasers, or guns.
at some point of a debate you just agree to disagree especially after the same things have been repeated 10 times :P

show your dad the video. show him the fuller versions that Grafalgar linked.
i'll bet if those cops manhandled her like you'd rather it would have turned out worse than it did.

and no offense to you, i put more merit into what gug said because he is a cop. it's a logical thing to say. he has first hand experience of these situations. you do not.

[bbrian]

yeah, me too. Wish they used a taser on my friend... http://www.sdcitybeat.com/article.php?id=3147
That really sucks.. sorry about your friend.

[Cheetarah]

That lady should be glad they only tasered her, is all I really wanted to say. His family has something to *really* sue about, not just some "unpleasant" tasering.

But thanks, bbrain, for the condolences.

[billxp]

After reading this article I have to wonder if the Police down there need to review their policy.
Palm Beach Post Taser News (http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/special_reports/tasers/index.html)

[bbrian]

at some point of a debate you just agree to disagree especially after the same things have been repeated 10 times :P
ok.. it just seemed like you weren't getting the point that shouting 'I'm gonna taze you' doesn't justify the use of the taser.. you kept retorting with stuff like:

a gun wasn't warranted in this situation, and a gun was not even brought into the picture. It just seemed clear to me that you weren't understanding my explanation. I got not problem with agreeing to disagree.


show your dad the video. show him the fuller versions that Grafalgar linked.
i'll bet if those cops manhandled her like you'd rather it would have turned out worse than it did.maybe.. I'd rather be manhandled.. been there done that, as you put it. It only hurts if you continue to resist, and at that point you are literally hurting yourself.


and no offense to you, i put more merit into what gug said because he is a cop. it's a logical thing to say. he has first hand experience of these situations. you do not. do you know me? If not, don't presume to know what experience I have or do not have.. please.

[nickel]

ok.. it just seemed like you weren't getting the point that shouting 'I'm gonna taze you' doesn't justify the use of the taser.. you kept retorting with stuff like:
It just seemed clear to me that you weren't understanding my explanation. I got not problem with agreeing to disagree.

maybe.. I'd rather be manhandled.. been there done that, as you put it. It only hurts if you continue to resist, and at that point you are literally hurting yourself.
do you know me? If not, don't presume to know what experience I have or do not have.. please.
yeh, i know what you are saying, and i disagree. the use of the tazer was justified. that's my opinion.

are you a saying you have personally been in a situation such as these law enforcement officiers have? you seem to keep saying, "my dad this" and "my dad that" so i thought you had no personal experience such as gug does.

[cadetevon]

the use of the tazer was justified. that's my opinion.
:stupid: And mine as well.

[BrewMaster]

do you know me? If not, don't presume to know what experience I have or do not have.. please.
dude, how can you come back with something like that after she's explained herself pretty clearly? Gug is a cop. you're not. that's the experience she's refering to.

[tupacboy]

yeh, i know what you are saying, and i disagree. the use of the tazer was justified. that's my opinion.

are you a saying you have personally been in a situation such as these law enforcement officiers have? you seem to keep saying, "my dad this" and "my dad that" so i thought you had no personal experience such as gug does.


:stupid:

[bbrian]

yeh, i know what you are saying, and i disagree. the use of the tazer was justified. that's my opinion. no problem. My opinion is that it wasn't. I don't like the idea of living in a police state where the police can use violence against a non-violent person. If you do, that's fine.

are you a saying you have personally been in a situation such as these law enforcement officiers have? you seem to keep saying, "my dad this" and "my dad that" so i thought you had no personal experience such as gug does. You don't have to be in law enforcement to have your life threatened. Nor do you have to be in law enforcement to be in dangerous situations. Have I been in this exact situation, no. Have I been in life threatening situations where someone has pointed a gun at me or shot at me.. yes, and that isn't even from the many nights I spent with my dad while he was on duty. Regardless, I don't think you need this experience to determine when to use potentially lethal force against someone.

You can put more merit in gug's comments.. that's fine. Stating it brought nothing to the discussion and the way you put it was very condecending, so I politely asked you to not presume to know my personal experiences unless you know me. thanks.

[RIVERWIDOW]

:stupid: And mine as well.

And mine also. :stupid:

[nickel]

no problem. My opinion is that it wasn't. I don't like the idea of living in a police state where the police can use violence against a non-violent person. If you do, that's fine.
You don't have to be in law enforcement to have your life threatened. Nor do you have to be in law enforcement to be in dangerous situations. Have I been in this exact situation, no. Have I been in life threatening situations where someone has pointed a gun at me or shot at me.. yes, and that isn't even from the many nights I spent with my dad while he was on duty. Regardless, I don't think you need this experience to determine when to use potentially lethal force against someone.

You can put more merit in gug's comments.. that's fine. Stating it brought nothing to the discussion and the way you put it was very condecending, so I politely asked you to not presume to know my personal experiences unless you know me. thanks.
eh, i'm still going with asking the doctor for medical advice,
the dentist for the best answers to dental questions
and a lawyer to guide me in legal situations...
in other words those that do the job are the best judge of how the job should be done, not bystanders.

as far as knowing your personal situation, you plainly told all of us that you were speaking of your dad's experiences not your own.

[cadetevon]

I don't like the idea of living in a police state where the police can use violence against a non-violent person. If you do, that's fine.

Pull out the drama much?


Main Entry: police state
Function: noun
Date: 1865
: a political unit characterized by repressive governmental control of political, economic, and social life usually by an arbitrary exercise of power by police and especially secret police in place of regular operation of administrative and judicial organs of the government according to publicly known legal procedures

Pronunciation Key

© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated
Merriam-Webster Privacy Policy

[bbrian]

eh, i'm still going with asking the doctor for medical advice,
the dentist for the best answers to dental questions
and a lawyer to guide me in legal situations...
in other words those that do the job are the best judge of how the job should be done, not bystanders.
no problem.. I'll remember that the next time the discussion of tort reform comes up in the political forum. I wonder what lawyers think about it. ;)


as far as knowing your personal situation, you plainly told all of us that you were speaking of your dad's experiences not your own.You didn't need to try to belittle my opinion because gug is a cop. It was unneccsary.. you could have simply left off the 'you do not' or better yet not mentioned that you 'tend to put more merit into what gug has said' in the first place. You have no clue about me and don't need to presume you do. Do you think I've given my whole life story in this thread? no.. Is everyone else's opinion less important because they are not a cop, no. I asked you nicely, so please drop it.

snip yeah.. I love drama. :rolleyes: I consider use of violence against a non-violent person a 'arbitrary exercise of power by police'. I'm not sure how else you would get to a police state.

[BrewMaster]

bbrian, you seem to be getting worked up over nothing here man. no one is belittling you and putting you down. come on man, relax.

[cadetevon]

Ok, fun as it's been, I'm all done here. :wavey:


__
Yvonne

Advice from my big sister: Never argue with drunks or idiots.

[bbrian]

bbrian, you seem to be getting worked up over nothing here man. no one is belittling you and putting you down. come on man, relax. Maybe I took something the wrong way, but Nickels posts seem to be trying to take subtle jabs. I got no problem with anyone else's posts. ;)

[raimin]

Maybe I took something the wrong way, but Nickels posts seem to be trying to take subtle jabs. I got no problem with anyone else's posts. ;)

just wondering, but you think the cop should of used force to pull the women out of the car, correct?

that is only other decision i can think the officer had. he was patient enough to begin with?

[MikeD]

It's pretty simple: a law enforcement official asked her to do something, and she didn't comply. For that she was tased. Pretty black and white (no pun intended :) ) issue here...

They should have got her a third time for that fake crying.

Looks like race was an issue...that lady is pretty racist. :rolleyes:

[Thesifer]

I can see them finding out from pulling her over for something else.. It was just posted that she was pulled over for having a suspended License.. Thats not a reason someone gets pulled over.. thats a thing that sucks when You get pulled over and caught with a suspended license :)

Hey bbrian .. what are the rules for using Mace?

[eSDee]

Well I agree with bbrian. I think that it was "in the law" to do what they did but it could have been handled differently. She should have not failed to comply that is a given. But being tazed twice is pretty jacked up. If that was your sister getting tazed twice I hope that you all would feel the same way as you do now.

I don't think she was fake crying either. Cops that are tazed usually are pretty muscular. She was skinny, and so if she took the leads in the chest (where she has little muscle), that voltage is going to hurt like a mother ****er. Plus the fact that she was scared, had to have made those tears real.

I'll agree to disagree.

[RIVERWIDOW]

I don't think she was fake crying either. Cops that are tazed usually are pretty muscular. She was skinny, and so if she took the leads in the chest (where she has little muscle), that voltage is going to hurt like a mother ****er. Plus the fact that she was scared, had to have made those tears real.

Ever see Tammi Faye Baker. Some people can turn them off and on like a faucet. :cry:

[eSDee]

How about a Got|Apex tazerfest meeting? :D

[raimin]

i thought they first pulled her over for speeding, then they discovered the suspended license

[bbrian]

just wondering, but you think the cop should of used force to pull the women out of the car, correct?

that is only other decision i can think the officer had. he was patient enough to begin with? Yup.. Obviously it is more risky to the officers to yank her out of the car.

Thesifer, you usually have to be a danger to yourself or a danger to the officers before you are going to get hit with mace.. atleast around here. I'd have a lot less of a problem with this if the officer had maced her then taken her out of the car. However, that still seems excessive considering she was non-threatening.

:idea: Maybe we can get USB tazers attached to pro-taser gotapexers and GAM can shock them anytime they are getting out of line. :P

[DarkFury]

It's pretty simple: a law enforcement official asked her to do something, and she didn't comply. For that she was tased. Pretty black and white (no pun intended :) ) issue here...

They should have got her a third time for that fake crying.

Looks like race was an issue...that lady is pretty racist. :rolleyes:
Honestly... would you cry if you had 50K volts of electricity shot through your body? Twice?

Maybe her cries sounded fake... but that pain was real. Nobody was making this a racial issue... so why even go there. :shrug:

[Houdini]

Honestly... would you cry if you had 50K volts of electricity shot through your body? Twice?

Maybe her cries sounded fake... but that pain was real. Nobody was making this a racial issue... so why even go there. :shrug:

I think it was because the woman called the cops racists.

[Jane83]

that dumb girl deserved that...you do not disrespect police.
and she had to be a ghetto hoodrat...
smelled that one a mile away...and who the hell still talks on the phone when they get pulled over?
she had major attitude and wouldnt shut up...annoying

[bachviet]

Where is the "PWN3D" pic?

[DarkFury]

I think it was because the woman called the cops racists.
I guess... but while I agree that she shoulda complied with the initial request to step out of the vehicle, once the taser was used.... hell all bets are off then.

After the fact.. if I were ever tased... some very colorful language might follow (unless the immediate thread of another shot was present...)

Like Chris Rock says... "Shut the F#@& up" when the cops are around.

[ski]

If that was your sister getting tazed twice I hope that you all would feel the same way as you do now.
My sister has been arrested. She complied with the law. Had she refused arrest and gotten tazered the first time, she would have deserved it. Why does family make it okay to disobey an officer?

IMO, I would have to know more about the tazer's technology to know whether she could have physically put her hands behind her back. From what gug said, there was a good chance the tazer didn't restrict her from doing so.

[MikeD]

I guess... but while I agree that she shoulda complied with the initial request to step out of the vehicle, once the taser was used.... hell all bets are off then.

After the fact.. if I were ever tased... some very colorful language might follow (unless the immediate thread of another shot was present...)

Like Chris Rock says... "Shut the F#@& up" when the cops are around.

Was tasing her twice over the top? Sure...I'll give you that. I guess my point is that she wouldn't have been tased if she had complied.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but her initial wrong caused the officer's wrong. Would they have tased her if she had hung up the phone? Probably not...

[bachviet]

How do we know a person is non-threatening?

It happened here in SoCal before when a rookie Sherriff (or CHP) pulled a guy over for a traffic violation. He walked up to the car and saw some cashier checks in the backseat. As he bent over and inspected the checks, the guy got out and popped him in the head. That dude did not appeared threatening at all. :shrug:

[bbrian]

That is a risk every officer takes, but there are steps they can take to mitigate that risk. If there was a video of the officer you describe my guess he is made some other mistake that made himself vulnerable, like taking his eyes off the suspect to search something else. If he had suspicions, he should have been calling for backup and keeping his eyes on the guy.

In the case of this lady, there was one lady in the SUV and the officer had backup on the other side of the SUV. The likelyhood of this lady being able to pull a weapon with neither cop seeing it is slim to none, especially when you consider one hand was busy holding a cell phone. :shrug:

[oblongmelon]

That is a risk every officer takes, but there are steps they can take to mitigate that risk. If there was a video of the officer you describe my guess he is made some other mistake that made himself vulnerable, like taking his eyes off the suspect to search something else. If he had suspicions, he should have been calling for backup and keeping his eyes on the guy.

In the case of this lady, there was one lady in the SUV and the officer had backup on the other side of the SUV. The likelyhood of this lady being able to pull a weapon with neither cop seeing it is slim to none, especially when you consider one hand was busy holding a cell phone. :shrug:

well how do they know it was a cell phone? because she was talking (screaming) into it? for all they knew it was a gun in her hand that she was pretending to use as a cell phone till they got close enough for her to plug them. You yourself said that officers take risks-any time they approach a car, the occupant is a potential assassin...cell phone or gun, not the point-the point is that he asked her to get out of the car-she didn't so she got zapped...she's an idiot, and he's still alive from taking no chances.

[tupacboy]

well how do they know it was a cell phone? because she was talking (screaming) into it? for all they knew it was a gun in her hand that she was pretending to use as a cell phone till they got close enough for her to plug them. You yourself said that officers take risks-any time they approach a car, the occupant is a potential assassin...cell phone or gun, not the point-the point is that he asked her to get out of the car-she didn't so she got zapped...she's an idiot, and he's still alive from taking no chances.
:stupid:

[Merlin]

well how do they know it was a cell phone? because she was talking (screaming) into it? for all they knew it was a gun in her hand that she was pretending to use as a cell phone till they got close enough for her to plug them. You yourself said that officers take risks-any time they approach a car, the occupant is a potential assassin...cell phone or gun, not the point-the point is that he asked her to get out of the car-she didn't so she got zapped...she's an idiot, and he's still alive from taking no chances.
Be careful. That could easily be misread as advocating a "shoot first and ask questions" later additude toward police behavior. Yes, they need to protect their own safety but they also need to have good judgement as to when that is. And here it was fairly obvious that there was no threat to anyone's safety.

[bbrian]

well how do they know it was a cell phone? because she was talking (screaming) into it? for all they knew it was a gun in her hand that she was pretending to use as a cell phone till they got close enough for her to plug them. You yourself said that officers take risks-any time they approach a car, the occupant is a potential assassin...cell phone or gun, not the point-the point is that he asked her to get out of the car-she didn't so she got zapped...she's an idiot, and he's still alive from taking no chances. :rolleyes: Did you watch it? The officer is a foot away from her. It wasn't like she was swinging the phone around and making it hard to see what it was. The officer even acknowledged it was a phone while he was commanding her to get off of it. :shrug:

The cop is still alive because she was no risk. Had it been someone with a gun he might have put himself at risk. The cop was the first to escalate the situation, not the lady in the car.

snip:stupid: exactly..

[Markel]

Be careful. That could easily be misread as advocating a "shoot first and ask questions" later additude toward police behavior. Yes, they need to protect their own safety but they also need to have good judgement as to when that is. And here it was fairly obvious that there was no threat to anyone's safety.
And people need to realize the mindset that an officer that wants to continue to be alive HAS TO HAVE as he approaches you, and not give him reason to have heightend suspicions about you (such as disreagarding his orders) like the idiot in the video did.

[bbrian]

I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

[Merlin]

I love this. We've got a 4 page thread where pretty much everyone agrees on the main points. The only real discussion is on the subjective grey area of how much is too much. I think maybe a little too much and others think it is right in line. In the grand scheme of things we're only talking about a couple degrees of separation.

[ski]

Here's a refreshed point:

You guys watched the whole video, so you know what happened. They didn't.

What people are saying is that when you go up there to a suspect who has a major violation, you just don't know what to expect, so when the suspect is hesitant to follow orders, you have GOT to take precautions. A routine traffic stop does not warrant threatening a tazer, but what this woman had on herself raises more suspicion.

[MikeD]

:rolleyes: The cop was the first to escalate the situation, not the lady in the car.
:stupid: exactly..

I don't see how you deduce this. She was the first to escalate the situation by not complying with the directives from a law enforcement official. If she complies, he doesn't escalate...

[bbrian]

Definition of Escalate: increase in extent or intensity
She continued doing what she was already doing, so how can that be considered escalating? He increased the intensity by pulling the taser (which she thought was a gun at first).

[gwilks98]

Did you watch it? The officer is a foot away from her. It wasn't like she was swinging the phone around and making it hard to see what it was. The officer even acknowledged it was a phone while he was commanding her to get off of it.

The cop is still alive because she was no risk.


I felt the violence was a bit much...but honestly, the cop doesn't know who's on the other end of the phone or if someone's coming with a gun to help the driver out.

Don't assume he wasn't in any danger. She should have put the phone down.

[MikeD]

Definition of Escalate: increase in extent or intensity
She continued doing what she was already doing, so how can that be considered escalating? He increased the intensity by pulling the taser (which she thought was a gun at first).

Based on your definition:

She increased the intensity of the situation by not complying.

I'll say it again: she puts the phone down, she doesn't get tased. It's pretty simple. I'm probably not in the majority with this, but that makes it 100% her fault in my book.

[billxp]

Well I guess from what I'm reading the officer should have tased her again when she didn't get up off the floor the first time. He did tell her more than once.

Oh and I'm sorry but this is just plain funny "the cop doesn't know who's on the other end of the phone or if someone's coming with a gun to help the driver out"

Could have been her lawyer for all he knew or the media.

[Markel]

Definition of Escalate: increase in extent or intensity
She continued doing what she was already doing, so how can that be considered escalating? He increased the intensity by pulling the taser (which she thought was a gun at first).
ANY time you refuse to obey the order of an officer (without offering an explanation such as "I've got a sprained ankle - please bear with me while I find my crutches") that has stopped you for cause, you are by definition escalating the intensity of the situation.

[Houdini]

ANY time you refuse to obey the order of an officer (without offering an explanation such as "I've got a sprained ankle - please bear with me while I find my crutches") that has stopped you for cause, you are by definition escalating the intensity of the situation.

:stupid:

She didn't need to threaten him directly to escalate the situation.

[xsiled2]

interesting video,

not that hard to drop your phone and shut up.
once she said "no im calling somebody", its anything goes.

also, i dont think thats the start of him pulling her over, he probly asked for lisence/reg and went back to the car after he got them.

[Thesifer]

ANY time you refuse to obey the order of an officer (without offering an explanation such as "I've got a sprained ankle - please bear with me while I find my crutches") that has stopped you for cause, you are by definition escalating the intensity of the situation.

Ive seen many problems with your Logic here.. My mom was In a car .. that got pulled over.. and they had each person step out.. The person driving.. (whom she was just getting a ride from) ended up having priors.. and something in the car ( still not sure what ) .. The cops were forceful to start out with.. (my mom who is 50 was thrown into a cop car for not walking "fast enough" ) and she was also shoved in the car and then Maced.. for not sitting down fast enough.. My mother has Degenerative Disc Disease and Fybromyalgia and a Few other problems.. She told the officer she was moving as fast as she could. In my Personal Opinion.. Cops have too much power. Granted if they FEEL threatened.. then use whatever force is necessary.. But .. Threatened by a 50 year old woman who had no weapons.. and had already been searched.. Come on.

As for this woman.. Whatever happened to her happened. And the cops will either get away with what they did because a judge will declare it justified.. or he won't. Being on tape.. this will go to trial and it will be decided on. I think until then.. and until they get their exact rulebook out and read through everything.. Its hard to judge who was "right" or "wrong" in this case.. I will agree though that it looks like excessive force.. Considering she wasn't reaching for anything.. and a Cellphone isnt "threatening" .. The Likeliness and Defense of the "Cellphone could have been a gun/bomb" or whatever.. is rather slim.. considering this was a routine traffic stop.. And they were arresting her for Drivers License Suspension.. not Terrorist Activity or Drug Trafficking.. Etc..

[bbrian]

Exactly - non-compliance != threat
The officer has to use INTELLIGENCE and GOOD JUDGEMENT to determine if the woman is a threat. In the case Thesifer describes, the officer obviously used bad judgement. In the case of this woman, I still think it was bad judgement, although the woman made poor descisions too.

And if 'doing more of the same' is somehow equivalent to escalating the situation, then a lot of police tactics books need to be rewritten. For example, got some dude not pulling over, but he is maintaining a safe speed and not putting anyone else in danger? You've repeatedly asked him to pull over, you've even hinted at using your gun to shoot him if he doesn't stop? Time to start shooting at him cause tasers won't work. I mean you never know, even though it would seem he isn't showing signs of being a threat, just not stopping is very threatening and escalating the situation (according to others), maybe he will start using the car as a weapon!? Cars have been considered dangerous weapons in the past.. or who knows, maybe the guy isn't pulling over cause he is taking his pregnant wife to the hospital and is just too frazzled to make rational decisions.

I don't like the shoot first, asses the situation later concept. The cops had no idea why the lady wouldn't get off the phone.. maybe she had been beaten by a bad cop in the past and felt safer if someone was listening to what was going on. :shrug:

[nickel]

Exactly - non-compliance != threat
The officer has to use INTELLIGENCE and GOOD JUDGEMENT to determine if the woman is a threat. In the case Thesifer describes, the officer obviously used bad judgement. In the case of this woman, I still think it was bad judgement, although the woman made poor descisions too.

And if 'doing more of the same' is somehow equivalent to escalating the situation, then a lot of police tactics books need to be rewritten. For example, got some dude not pulling over, but he is maintaining a safe speed and not putting anyone else in danger? You've repeatedly asked him to pull over, you've even hinted at using your gun to shoot him if he doesn't stop? Time to start shooting at him cause tasers won't work. I mean you never know, even though it would seem he isn't showing signs of being a threat, just not stopping is very threatening and escalating the situation (according to others), maybe he will start using the car as a weapon!? Cars have been considered dangerous weapons in the past.. or who knows, maybe the guy isn't pulling over cause he is taking his pregnant wife to the hospital and is just too frazzled to make rational decisions.

I don't like the shoot first, asses the situation later concept. The cops had no idea why the lady wouldn't get off the phone.. maybe she had been beaten by a bad cop in the past and felt safer if someone was listening to what was going on. :shrug:
you weren't there. so you have no idea what that officer was thinking or what the situation was really like. this lady was obviously not rational. irrational people are more likely to pull out a gun and shoot. keep justifying this lady until you are blue in the face but the lady was speeding, then refused to obey simple police commands, plus was not even susposed to be driving in the first place. that to me is already saying this could be someone that may pull a fast one.
she was not shot with anything that mortally wounded her. she was fine. the situation that was brought upon her by her own actions was discontinued with the correct police actions because she had more than enough warnings to stop being noncompliant.

it seems to me that you have a vendetta against cops for some reason. i mean when a cop tells you to get off the phone in a situation such as this womans - you get off the phone. there are no excuses.

and show me where a guy has been shot/or tazed because he was speeding driving his pregnant wife to the hospital, :rolleyes: and even then those people are unlike this woman and still have much more rational behavior.

[MikeD]

keep justifying this lady until you are blue in the face but the lady was speeding, then refused to obey simple police commands, plus was not even susposed to be driving in the first place. that to me is already saying this could be someone that may pull a fast one.

:thumb:

Right on! You hit the nail on the head...

[bbrian]

Where have I justified any 1 action of this lady? I'm questioning the cops actions, but keep spinning it all you want. 2 cops 1 lady.. they already had the upper hand. She was no threat. period.

Again, with the story you missed the point. It doesn't matter.

[ArkiStan]

The lady is the most annoying b*tch in the world and was completely uncooperative. If I were the cop, I would have tasered the lady multiple times right in the face......

But then again, I'm not a cop. I'm an impulsive person and I'm biased against female drivers.

Just look at the tape again and see how the two cops fluster after realizing what just happened. This was difinitely not a situation that warranted the use of a taser and both cops clearly realize that.

[SnowSurfer]

i really didnt feel like reading through all four pages but the police officers would have had a big lawsuit if they wrestled her out of the car and she fell just right and broke her arm or something.

Ive been tasered before, it doesnt hurt that bad.

What a drama queen

[g222leav]

she was on the phone and showed no respect, she deserved it...she even told the cop "i'm on the FU<KING phone!" what is up with that?

i swear now-a-days, people are so engrossed in their conversation, the don't give respect other people, even just a little...

like in the pharmacy for example, when people come in for their prescriptions and they're yacking on the phone, i just wanna say "do you want your herpes medicine now? or later?"....but seriously, it is a serious privacy issue in the pharmacy when people are yacking on the phone (even more so when they come up through the drive through)...so i just let them sit there and finish their conversation...it may take up to 20 minutes, but hey, at least i didn't break any laws...

[ArkiStan]

i really didnt feel like reading through all four pages but the police officers would have had a big lawsuit if they wrestled her out of the car and she fell just right and broke her arm or something.


Well, would it have been OK if she broke her arm while falling out of the car because she was tasered???? Cause she did fall pretty hard in the clip.....

[SnowSurfer]

Well, would it have been OK if she broke her arm while falling out of the car because she was tasered???? Cause she did fall pretty hard in the clip.....

yes, yes then it would have been perfectly fine :). she deserved what she got.

[nickel]

this woman will be on "A Current Affair" tonight if anyone is interested.
Fox 5 NY at 6:30pm

[MikeD]

this woman will be on "A Current Affair" tonight if anyone is interested.
Fox 5 NY at 6:30pm

Guess her 15 minutes of fame isn't over yet...damn.

Hopefully she'll hang up the phone long enough to do the interview.

[Kevster]

Ok I just started reading this thread (I have been gone out of town for a little bit - I'll explain that whole situation in another thread).

I have watched all the videos. I have had officers point their weapons at me and yes, I was VERY compliant. I also happened to have a shotgun in my hand at the time shooting sporting clays, so they had every right to have the guns drawn. My brother and I handled the situation quite differently. My brother was angry at why they were there and kept questioning every request they made (a neighbor over a mile away complained about gunfire beign heard on the property we were shooting on), and I was trying to get him to shut the hell up so we could sort this thing out afterward. Merlin knows my brother and he can probably hear me now (with my hands up) yelling at my brother to shut the hell up and do what they say. I even yelled to the officers if I could move my hand to the shotgun and open the chamber so they wouldn't accidentally go off (they of course said no, they'll take care of that). After everything got taken care of and they ran our IDs and gun serial numbers, they let us go. They didn't like the fact that my 20-gauge pump-action shotgun didn't have a serial number because it is a Sears & Roebuck model from early 1900's and they didn't serialize back then (they had a good laugh after I explained that and broke down the gun to show them).

All it takes is the right attitude to make a situation a lot less dangerous. In my case the sherriff's deputies were at their highest alert when they had to walk up on a couple of guys shooting shotguns at sporting clays. I know that Chris Rock's video about how to not get your ass kicked by the police is supposed to be funny, but it is 100% correct! If you want to be a dumbass by being a jerk and be resistant and not do what the officer tells you, expect to get the taser. It's better than a club, and way the hell better than a bullet.

[ShawnLee]

I just saw the video again. Actually, let me correct that, I saw it all for the first time just now. Every time before, I'd stop right after the tasings because the fake crying was so annoying.

And, so... She still brought it on herself, and I still see the officers as being justified in tazing her twice. Not that they simply followed procedure correctly, but that the procedure is correct too. Not that she specifically turned out to be a threat, but she well may have been. I'm glad they tazed her instead of wrestling her out of the car.

[eSDee]

Since it's been bumped I'll go ahead and comment again. The cops were within the law by tazing her. That is without question. Could it have been handled better? Absolutely. If you hear one other thing that the girl says is that she doesn't trust cops. Lots of minorities don't trust cops. And seeing videos like this are gonna make them continue to not trust cops. Why? Because the cop did the bare minimum that he had to. But at least he didn't put a bullet in her head.

[DarkFury]

Guess her 15 minutes of fame isn't over yet...damn.

Hopefully she'll hang up the phone long enough to do the interview.
Actually... I wouldn't call gettin' "tasered on a police camera" 15 minutes of fame...

15 minutes of infamy maybe... but not fame... :2far:

[dmc68]

Here is a link to the full videos including a training officers overview of why they did what they did.

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

[DarkFury]

Here is a link to the full videos including a training officers overview of why they did what they did.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/video/taser_video3a.html
Thanks.. but that was already posted on page 2 of this thread by Grafalgar

http://www.gotapex.com/forums/showpost.php?p=868497&postcount=36

But thanks anyways... :D

[Chinpoko_Mon]

Well.. from the video.. the only time when she could have and taken a swing at the partner was when he was leaning into the vehicle after opening the passenger side door.

I do not think he fired simply because he could. I'm guessing that the other officer attempted to take away her phone and she resisted, which then prompted Office McNevin to taze her.

In any case, the second taze was probably not necessary. The officer will probably argue that it was pre-cautionary.

-L

[Grimm]

I've been thinking on this incident a while and I have decided that the tazering was entirely appropriate, for none of the reasons mentioned though.

She should have been tasered for talking on the phone while operating a motor vehical. Just think how much safer our streets and freeways would be if the cops could pull someone over and taser them for talking on a cell phone while driving!