Sheriff tasers 72 year old granny 34 replies

Please wait...

Warborg

Revenge was here.

50 XP

3rd August 2002

0 Uploads

1,833 Posts

0 Threads

#1 9 years ago

The first thing that caught my eye on this is it was a Travis county sheriff( where I live).

Second one is better

The Sheriff seemed a little pushy... the 72 year lady resisted his orders and even tired to get back in the truck.

Should he have tasered her?

Overall, I would have to say no, he should have been able to restrain her... however I don't think he should get any punishment as it's been said many times.... Don't fight with police




Nemmerle Forum Mod

Voice of joy and sunshine

298,353 XP

26th May 2003

0 Uploads

28,146 Posts

5 Threads

#2 9 years ago

The problem with restraining old people is that it's very easy to injure them or for them to injure themselves. Although it causes a lot of pain the taser is among the safest ways to disable someone. Should she have been tasered? That depends on whether she was complying with the officer's orders or not. If she was resisting I think tasering her was an appropriate use of force wheras attempting to fight with her would not have been.

Edit: After viewing the second video I believe it was appropriate, yes. I have a problem with him pushing her, he might have caused her serious injury and considering he had the option to taser I don't think that was justified, but I don't have a problem with him tasering her.




Von Mudra

Lo, I am Mudra, za emo soldat!

50 XP

25th September 2004

0 Uploads

7,064 Posts

0 Threads

#3 9 years ago

I think it was in his just ability. As Nemmerle said above, the officer can't exactly grab her and toss her against the car and grab her arms to handcuff her. A taser, while an unpleasent experience, would simply mean she'd be temporarily immobilized, long enough to cuff. IMO, a far much safer approach then being roughed up by a pissed off cop.

I think this "outrage against tasering" thing is just starting to get old. People need to realize that the taser doesn't leave lasting effect, doesn't maim, doesn't kill, or such. It just causes temporary pain, and you to think twice. This old lady probably thought she was immune to the cop's demands, because of her age. Well, like it or not, if you commit a crime at age 20 or age 72, you're nothing but a citizen in the eyes of the law, and you will be treated accordingly.




Warborg

Revenge was here.

50 XP

3rd August 2002

0 Uploads

1,833 Posts

0 Threads

#4 9 years ago

Nemmerle;4913378The problem with restraining old people is that it's very easy to injure them or for them to injure themselves.[/QUOTE]

I did hear this agruement before and at first was going to mention it.

Here's another thought... what if she had a pacemaker or heart condition. Could the taser have messed her up?

Edit:

[quote= Von Mudra]Well, like it or not, if you commit a crime at age 20 or age 72, you're nothing but a citizen in the eyes of the law, and you will be treated accordingly

Just as a note it wasn't "her" crime that got her tasered it was her resisting the officer




Primarch Vulkan VIP Member

For the Emperor! Knights of Caliban!

154,320 XP

16th March 2004

0 Uploads

13,497 Posts

0 Threads

#5 9 years ago

Could? ummm try it would mess her up it would stop the pacemaker...thus maybe killing her


[color=#000000][size=2][b][i]Heralds of the coming doom, Like the cry of the Raven, we are drawn, This oath of war and vengeance, On a blade of exalted iron sworn, With blood anointed swords



Nemmerle Forum Mod

Voice of joy and sunshine

298,353 XP

26th May 2003

0 Uploads

28,146 Posts

5 Threads

#6 9 years ago

Warborg;4913391Here's another thought... what if she had a pacemaker or heart condition. Could the taser have messed her up?[/QUOTE]

If she had a heart condition the strain of being tasered could have triggered an attack; however it's worth noting that any stressful confrontation could have messed her up if she had a heart condition. Given the greater risk of injury with restraining her more physically, and given that they both carry the risk of triggering something from a heart condition the use of the taser is to be prefered.

[QUOTE=Uwsar-Hat-Anupuw;4913393]Could? ummm try it would mess her up it would stop the pacemaker...thus maybe killing her

Any modern pacemaker is, by law I believe, required to withstand shocks many hundreds of times stronger than those of a taser so that the person doesn't die if they're defibrillated.




Captain Fist

DEUS LO VULT

113,265 XP

17th December 2005

0 Uploads

10,629 Posts

0 Threads

#7 9 years ago

I don't know the details, all I know is that this is a hilarious story.




Junk angel

Huh, sound?

166,880 XP

29th January 2007

0 Uploads

15,678 Posts

0 Threads

#8 9 years ago

Well seeing the second video. He did warn her multiple times. And to be honest, I'd say he was better of tazing her, than trying to hold her with force. They tend to be less likely to injure the arrestee then. And we know how the media always loves to jump the shark on police brutality, whether it's true or not.




Mr. Matt VIP Member

#BanRadioActiveLobster

356,405 XP

17th June 2002

7 Uploads

33,654 Posts

779 Threads

#9 9 years ago
Von Mudra;4913388People need to realize that the taser doesn't leave lasting effect, doesn't maim, doesn't kill, or such.

Erm, yes they do. This is where the 'outrage' comes from. There's even a risk with young and healthy people like ourselves, and the risk increases the older the victim is. That risk increases exponentially if the victim is hit with more than one burst, or with prolonged shocks. And contrary to popular opinion, they can interfere with pacemakers with varying degrees of severity, and people with weak hearts in general are at heightened risk of permanent damage or death. Chances are that if you or I were stunned by a taser there would be no permanent damage, but to say that they are completely harmless is just untrue. A taser is, at the end of the day, a powerful electric shock, and there's a very good reason why we're not really meant to do that to ourselves during the course of our day-to-day lives. To summarise, there's no such thing as a non-lethal weapon. There are just 'less risky' weapons. Anyway. If a police officer can't restrain - or better yet, talk down - an unarmed 72-year-old woman half his size without resorting to the use of a taser, you have to question his suitability for the job. Having seen that video, I can't really see anything which suggests his safety was in jeopardy or that the woman was a threat to anybody else nearby. He was just dealing with a typical, arrogant old woman who was pissed off with herself more than anybody else just for being caught. Any arguments about using the taser to try and avoid breaking her bones hold no water from the get-go; even without considering the impact with the ground she would have experienced upon being zapped, he gave her a few good shoves before he even drew the thing. She even agreed to sign the ticket as she got out of the car. Cheeky? Yes - she had tried to make his life difficult, possibly hoping that he just couldn't be bothered with the paperwork that would result from an arrest and that he might just let her off, but he called her bluff, so mysteriously she became compliant once the prospect of jail time became a reality. He obviously wasn't having any of it; either out of principle or respect for the law, or just because her attitude pissed him off and he took it personally, he was going to arrest her even if she was now willing to sign the ticket. Which is fair enough; her attitude was such that she deserved some schooling in the fine art of dealing with police officers. So instead of just sorting it all out on the roadside he starts shouting aggressively at her and shoving her around quite roughly, which in itself was possibly over-the-top, and one hell of a good way to disorientate and startle an elderly woman. But she wasn't exactly being violent with him even after that, nor did he seem at any risk of being overpowered by her. You or I could probably have restrained her effectively at this point with no difficulty or risk to either party, and I dare say none of us are trained police officers. But for some reason, he decided to zap her - given that tasers were supposedly introduced to American police as an alternative to firearms, I thought this in itself would be an illegal use of the device as he didn't need it to defend himself. The whole situation could have been dealt with a lot better than it was. Had this been a drugged-up young bloke making threats towards the officer, fair enough - zap the bastard until his balls start sparking. But it wasn't. I sometimes get the impression from these videos that some police officers over there deliberately try and provoke the situation just so they can get the chance to electrocute somebody.




Primarch Vulkan VIP Member

For the Emperor! Knights of Caliban!

154,320 XP

16th March 2004

0 Uploads

13,497 Posts

0 Threads

#10 9 years ago

Nemmerle;4913399

Any modern pacemaker is, by law I believe, required to withstand shocks many hundreds of times stronger than those of a taser so that the person doesn't die if they're defibrillated.

ah yes my bad....lurks back into shadows:uhoh:


[color=#000000][size=2][b][i]Heralds of the coming doom, Like the cry of the Raven, we are drawn, This oath of war and vengeance, On a blade of exalted iron sworn, With blood anointed swords