12-year-old tased by police officer

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by justgo_withit

Sure it does. I said "I'm more inclined to think that the officer's actions were acceptable and we'll hear that there's more to the story in support of him". An example of this sort of growing story would be that the "unidentified female" who (according to the cop, of course) also charged him is actually a strong adult woman and he was aiming the taser at her. Because tasers aren't very accurate, he missed.

But that raises another issue -- is it okay to use a taser if there is a reasonable chance that someone other than the intended target will be tasered? If that someone else is 12 years old?

[justgo_withit]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

But that raises another issue -- is it okay to use a taser if there is a reasonable chance that someone other than the intended target will be tasered? If that someone else is 12 years old?

I have absolutely no experience with tasers and I have no idea. Tasers may actually be decently accurate and my hypothetical situation may be totally moot. Any taser aficionados in the house? Maybe there are degrees of scatter in tasers, like guns?

Going off of yours, if there is a reasonable chance that someone other than the intended target may be tasered, I would hope that tasers would be used as a last-resort weapon. This implies that the 12 year old is an innocent bystander though, which if course is to be determined here. (more perspective: I am absolutely awful at guessing ages, so I could see how someone would have no idea the girl was that young. Alternately, I'm not a cop and I would hope that they would be better than me at things like that.)

I really hope the truth isn't on either extreme of the scumbag cop/girl deserved it spectrum of possibilities, then this thread will have all been for naught

Originally Posted by MysticCat

No, it doesn't depend on intent. It goes to the police officer, using his training (including his training regarding the reliability of tasers accurately hitting their target) to determine whether the intended target can be safely hit without endangering others. It becomes a question of negligence, for which intent is irrelevant.

That's a great point, and I definitely see where you're coming from with this. I was looking at intent as an indication of okayness from more of a moral "is the cop a good or bad human being" perspective than a "is the cop a good or bad cop" one. Absolutely, if a cop is going around hitting innocent bystander children with his taser, regardless of his intent, he should not get to be a cop anymore.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

None of that range of positive and negative professional and personal experiences means that law enforcement practices are without question.

Of course not, nor did I imply that the population as a whole should blindly trust authority. My post said that because of my personal experiences, I am more inclined to believe that future developments will show that the officer made a good choice. Since this thread headed towards the hypothetical, it was an interesting connection that popped in my head.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by justgo_withit

I have absolutely no experience with tasers and I have no idea. Tasers may actually be decently accurate and my hypothetical situation may be totally moot. Any taser aficionados in the house? Maybe there are degrees of scatter in tasers, like guns?

Tasers 101 is that tasers are relatively accurate and painful. There is a greater likelihood of a taser hitting different parts of one person's body than the taser accidentally hitting the wrong person. The latter will only happen if the police officer had a bad aim or someone jumped in front of the person about to be tased. In the former instance, police officers should not use a taser if they cannot effectively reach the target. Police officers tend to be trained not to use tasers and pepper spray if they may accidentally get the wrong person.

Originally Posted by justgo_withit

Of course not, nor did I imply that the population as a whole should blindly trust authority. My post said that because of my personal experiences, I am more inclined to believe that future developments will show that the officer made a good choice.

I was talking about myself and not about you. But, you actually implied that your positive experiences with police officers explain your trust and therefore your tendency not to challenge them. I disagree with that implication and urge everyone to consider how the experiences of others can shape your experiences.

[justgo_withit]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Tasers 101 is that tasers are relatively accurate and painful. There is a greater likelihood of a taser hitting different parts of one person's body than the taser accidentally hitting the wrong person. The latter will only happen if the police officer had a bad aim or someone jumped in front of the person about to be tased. In the former instance, police officers should not use a taser if they can not effectively reach the target. Police officers tend to be trained not to use tasers and pepper spray if they may accidentally get the wrong person.

Alrighty, well that clears that up as always, I'm interested to see how this turns out.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I was talking about myself and not about you. But, you actually implied that your positive experiences with police officers explain your trust and therefore your tendency not to challenge them. I disagree with that implication and urge everyone to consider how the experiences of others can shape your experiences.

But see that's the thing: for me, the experiences of others in my life are mostly positive. I am an ROTC cadet so I'm actively seeking a position of authority that is distrusted by many, several of my friends are in the process of trying to become police officers/military, my best friend's mom is a police officer, etc. Because of this, the negative experiences I've heard about in history or on the news seem few and far between compared to all the positivity I know. I say this knowing that I could be totally delusional and ass backwards about police officers and in the big picture, it could be that positive experiences like the ones I know are what are in fact few and far between. This is where I'm coming from, as I grow up and try and see the big picture. Check back in a few years, there's always a possibility that I could be saying the complete opposite.

With the "talking about me and not you" part, I incorrectly assumed that your comment about not questioning authority was directed at me since I started the whole perspectives derailing. Sorry 'bout it!

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by justgo_withit

This is where I'm coming from, as I grow up and try and see the big picture.

Good.

You caught me mid-edit. Long story short, the negative experiences of other people are not a figment of their imagination and they do have an impact on you. Likewise, the positive experiences that you share are not a figment of your imagination and they have an impact on other people. It all works together. Police officers and law enforcement practices should never be trusted to the extreme and unchallenged. How we legally express our distrust and challenge is the issue. A 12 year old child may have done a horrible job at legally expressing distrust or challenge, but I cannot say that an angry yet unarmed 12 year old child needs to be tasered.

Originally Posted by justgo_withit

With the "talking about me and not you" part, I incorrectly assumed that your comment about not questioning authority was directed at me since I started the whole perspectives derailing. Sorry 'bout it!

LOL. I had to re-read my post. Your assumption was correct. While I was talking about myself, I would not have even made that post had it not been for your post. The point I was making is that personal experiences do not negate a broader understanding of issues.

[justgo_withit]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Good.

You caught me mid-edit. Long story short, the negative experiences of other people are not a figment of their imagination and they do have an impact on you. Likewise, the positive experiences that you share are not a figment of your imagination and they have an impact on other people. It all works together. Police officers and law enforcement practices should never be trusted to the extreme and unchallenged. How we legally express our distrust and challenge is the issue. A 12 year old child may have done a horrible job at legally expressing distrust or challenge, but I cannot say that an angry yet unarmed 12 year old child needs to be tasered.

Oh absolutely. I feel like I'm kind of coming off like "lololol those silly minorities are always making stuff up, I'm a white girl and I've never had a problem with cops!!!!" which is what I'm trying to avoid as I'd smack me for saying it. When we get more info and/or it comes out that the officer overreacted, I will absolutely agree with you.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by justgo_withit

Oh absolutely. I feel like I'm kind of coming off like "lololol those silly minorities are always making stuff up, I'm a white girl and I've never had a problem with cops!!!!" which is what I'm trying to avoid as I'd smack me for saying it.

While I could assume you are white, I did not know that you are white until you told me. There are white people who have had negative experiences with law enforcement. There are racial and ethnic minorities who have had positive experiences with law enforcement.

Originally Posted by justgo_withit

When we get more info and/or it comes out that the officer overreacted, I will absolutely agree with you.

I do not need more info to believe that an unarmed 12 year old child should not be tasered. The investigation could determine that the officer did not violate policies and technically did not overreact. I will still believe that an unarmed 12 year old child should not be tasered. I am talking about children being tasered and not just whether this little girl should have been tasered based on the details of what happened at Victoria Secrets.