12-year-old tased by police officer

[Kevin]

Just to be clear, I suggested she had multiple drug-related felonies on her record. The most recent of those is 2009, so there's no evidence to suggest the Huffpost explanation of traffic citations is incorrect. I imagine an officer arresting a felon on outstanding warrants (even for a non-felony) is going to probably use an extra level of caution.

I'm still inclined to give the officer the benefit of the doubt.

There are cases where I haven't given the officers the benefit of the doubt.

This case, for example, is pretty obviously bad:

http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/06/24/28330.htm

[sigmadiva]

Should a 12 year old child get tased? No

Should a 12 year old child get tased by the police? Depends.

There are so many variables to this situation, some we know, some we don't know, that to try to simplify it to one question is absurd.

We don't know the actions or intent of the 12 yr old child in this situation: 1) Maybe she was an innocent by-stander, or 2) maybe in her effort to protect her mom she got in the way of the cop, and the cop maybe felt she was hindering his arrest, so he tased her.

We also don't know the thought process and past experiences of the cop. Maybe he should have waited for backup, or maybe he needed to act fast. Cops have to work in the moment. They don't have the luxury to sit back and debate the philosophical outcomes of their actions. I'm sure if they did, then we would have different outcomes on most situations.

Like someone said, cops want to live another day too. They should have the right to protect themselves if they feel threatened.

And just for the record, I'm not saying that all cops are good, or all cops are bad. But, I am willing to give them some latitude in handling a potentially violent situation since they are first responders.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Should a 12 year old child get tased? No

Should a 12 year old child get tased by the police? Depends.

Uh....

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Cops have to work in the moment.

That depends.

Law enforcement are trained to not only "work in the moment". You better hope and pray the majority of law enforcement officers are not trained to do WHATEVER they think works in the moment. We do not want a system in which law enforcement are only trained to give an afterthought rather than a before-and-during thought. That is how forms of profiling and police brutality occur.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Law enforcement are trained to not only "work in the moment". You better hope and pray the majority of law enforcement officers are not trained to do WHATEVER they think works in the moment. We do not want a system in which law enforcement are only trained to give an afterthought rather than a before-and-during thought. That is how forms of profiling and police brutality occur.

You are making assumptions on variables that don't apply for every situation.

Like I said, I know that not all cops are good, nor are they all bad. They are all trained to use deadly force, if necessary. Whether they are bad cops or not, they've been given that responsibility. If it is found that unnecessary force was used, then the cop will suffer the consequences.

If a cop has been called to a potentially dangerous situation the cop wants to neutralize the danger first. Its not always just about the cop and the perpetrator. There may be other innocent by-standers.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

You are making assumptions on variables that don't apply for every situation.

No, I am telling you that law enforcement training and procedures are about more than what (appears to) "works in the moment."

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Should a 12 year old child get tased? No

Should a 12 year old child get tased by the police? Depends.

I'm not sure I follow -- how can it depend for the police if a 12-year-old child shouldn't get tased to begin with?

There are so many variables to this situation, some we know, some we don't know, that to try to simplify it to one question is absurd.

Not absurd at all. Courts do it all the time, deciding when and under what circumstances certain offensive or defensive measures can be taken. Ditto police departments, which set forth policies providing officers with parameters as to when they can and can't do what.

Sure, there will always be the need to apply those parameters to specific situations and "in the moment." But the parameters are still there, and I think that's the question posed by this thread: Not was this specific officer in the right or in the wrong, but what should the parameters be?

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I'm not sure I follow -- how can it depend for the police if a 12-year-old child shouldn't get tased to begin with?

Depends on what the 12 year old was doing.

If it is a kid at the play ground, and this kid gets in a shoving match with another kid, then no, the aggressor of the shoving match should not get tased.

If this same kid escalates the incident and brings a gun to the park with the intent to use it, then the least the cop should do is tase the kid to stop him or her from trying to use deadly force.

That is what I mean by "depends", it just depends on the nature of the situation.

Not absurd at all. Courts do it all the time, deciding when and under what circumstances certain offensive or defensive measures can be taken. Ditto police departments, which set forth policies providing officers with parameters as to when they can and can't do what.

Absurd in the context to which this has been discussed in this thread. The initial comment presented is that a 12 year old kid should not get tased. But, apparently there were extenuating circumstances in this case.

Sure, there will always be the need to apply those parameters to specific situations and "in the moment." But the parameters are still there, and I think that's the question posed by this thread: Not was this specific officer in the right or in the wrong, but what should the parameters be?

Then if this is the actual point to this thread, then we are debating an issue that has as many answers as people you can ask. In other words, it can be "infinite".

(Of course, the actual sub-text is that we are to simply agree and support whatever assessment DrPhil has made of this situation, but not everyone will see it her way. )

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Depends on what the 12 year old was doing.

If it is a kid at the play ground, and this kid gets in a shoving match with another kid, then no, the aggressor of the shoving match should not get tased.

If this same kid escalates the incident and brings a gun to the park with the intent to use it, then the least the cop should do is tase the kid to stop him or her from trying to use deadly force.

That is what I mean by "depends", it just depends on the nature of the situation.

But if it depends, then why did you say "Should a 12 year old child get tased? No?" That's the part that confuses me?

Then if this is the actual point to this thread, then we are debating an issue that has as many answers as people you can ask. In other words, it can be "infinite".

Seems pretty simple to me: If your local police department was going to review its policies concerning tasing or adopt new policies, what do you think the official policies should be:

• There are no circumstances under which a 12-year-old should be tased;
• A 12-year-old should not be tased unless the police officer first determines [list criteria here] and gives a clear warning;
• It should be left to a police officer's discretion to determine whether, under the cirsumstances, a 12-year-old should be tased; or
• Some other option.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

So, first what confused you was when I said "depends", and I explained what I meant by that.

No, that's not what confused me. What confused me is that you first provided this question and answer:

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Should a 12 year old child get tased? No.

And then provided this question and answer:

Should a 12 year old child get tased by the police? Depends.

I'm just trying to see how the two answers fit together. If you've already said, without qualification, that a 12-year old should not get tased, then how do you even get to the second question about police officers?

Actually, here in Houston, we just went through a similar situation with car chases. When should a cop chase a suspect in the car.

The answer is: as long as innocent life / by standers will not get hurt. It is a judgment that is left up to the cop.

Yes, the mother of a friend of mine was killed when a police officer, following that standard, was pursuing a suspect.

You suggest below that I'm trying to predict the future, but that's exactly what the standard you provide here does. There's no way a police officer can know that no innocent bystanders will be killed or hurt, and that would be an unworkable standard. A workable standard is that the police officer reasonably believes that the chase can be undertaken without endangering others and does all that he can to insure that others aren't endangered. It might still happen, but if so, it shouldn't be because the officer wasn't at least trying to minimize the chances.

You are right, policies need to be reviewed and critically examined on a regular basis. But even the best policy review can not account for every possible situation that may, or may not, occur in a given situation.

The only way law enforcement can satisfy the parameters that you and DrPhil are proposing is if we can predict the future. If so, then we can work in absolutes. Since we can't predict the future, we are left with what we currently have - doing the best we can with the most current knowledge.

I think you misunderstand what I'm talking about. I'm not trying to predict the future at all, nor am I suggesting absolutes or policies so detailed that they cover every possible scenario. I'm saying that workable policies, for the protection of the police officer as much as the protection of the public, lay out the basic rules, such as the one I suggested way upthread: A police officer should not tase a 12-year-old unless (1) that officer reasonably believes that it is necessary to do so in order to prevent the 12-year-old from harming him- or herself, the officer or others; and (2) the officer gives a clear warning that he or she will use the taser.

It is then up to the officer to apply those criteria in specific circumstances, and it is up to reviewing entities, if necessary, to determine whether the officer applied those criteria correctly -- for example, to determine whether the officer's belief that the 12-year-old was about to harm him- or herself or others was a reasonable belief under the circumstances.

[sigmadiva]

Well, knowing that this can go on all day, and well into the night. And, I feel that I've explained my position "six ways from Sunday", then there is really nothing more that I can say.

Toodles!

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Well, knowing that this can go on all day, and well into the night. And, I feel that I've explained my position "six ways from Sunday", then there is really nothing more that I can say.

Toodles!

You did this flounce nonsense in the Chick-Fil-A thread. You can stop posting without announcing as such. This thread existed before you posted and will exist after you stop posting.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

This assumes that the subject can be positively ID'd as 12, doesn't it? Especially for females, and I'll bet cross-racial IDs are even worse, telling the difference between a 12 year old and a 15-16 year old is not something which can be easily done.

Valid point -- I think I probably got sucked into the title of the tread on that one by focusing on 12-year-olds, and I wasn't really meaning to do that. If a policy is going to start with a premise that absent certain circumstances, a child (or minor) shouldn't be tased, than a workable policy would certainly need to take into account in some way the officer's ability to tell or make reasonable judgments about a person's age. As DrPhil notes, this wouldn't be new.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Well, knowing that this can go on all day, and well into the night. And, I feel that I've explained my position "six ways from Sunday", then there is really nothing more that I can say.

Toodles!

Really?

[PiKA2001]

I don't really see the point of this discussion given the fact that policies are already in place stating that tasers shouldn't be used on minors. These child tasing incidents are rare and like I said upthread, "shouldn't be used" doesn't mean "absolutely no fuckin way, let the 12 year old kill an officer before even thinking of tasing her". This officer will have to justify why he did what he did, but he isn't automatically in the wrong for doing it. There is no such thing as a "standard" arrest because every situation has different variables and officers need to to adapt and adjust to every situation.

ETA- FLOUNCE!lol

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

I don't really see the point of this discussion given the fact that policies are already in place stating that tasers shouldn't be used on minors. These child tasing incidents are rare and like I said upthread, "shouldn't be used" doesn't mean "absolutely no fuckin way, let the 12 year old kill an officer before even thinking of tasing her". This officer will have to justify why he did what he did, but he isn't automatically in the wrong for doing it.

This is a general discussion, not just about that specific 12 year old, and what constitutes discretion is always up for discussion.

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

There is no such thing as a "standard" arrest because every situation has different variables and officers need to to adapt and adjust to every situation.

Police officers cannot adapt and adjust to the point where they violate policies and the law. There are some things that are considered "standard."

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Police officers cannot adapt and adjust to the point where they violate policies and the law. There are some things that are considered "standard."

I don't think anyone in this thread suggested that the police should do that at all. I know I didn't. Some things such as administrative policies (pay, vacation) and civil rights laws are "set in stone" but many policies involving actual field police work are not set in stone but act as more an official guideline to follow giving consideration to the officers discretion. No two situations are the same so to even suggest that a single "standard" policy can and should cover everything under the sun is ludicrous. Police need room to adjust and adapt.