12-year-old tased by police officer

[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."

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

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

True. Their training does give them a guide for follow for different situations. But, they actually don't know how the situation will "go down" until they arrive at the scene and assess what is happening. That is what I mean by they have to do what "works in the moment".

Last week here, a bunch of cops showed up to a house because the report came in that a man and a woman had been shot in the house. People heard the shots, called the cops, and the cops arrived with the assumption that a murder / robbery had taken place. Once the situation calmed down, it turned out the man who was shot suffered an accidental self-inflicted gun shot and his daughter-in-law, who has standing behind him apparently, was shot too.

Now, given that the cops have been trained to deal with break ins and shootings, and that is what they thought they were dealing with, that is how they initially approached this incident. Since the parameters of the incident changed, the cops changed their approach. They dealt with the situation based on that moment.

So, yes, cops have been given training and procedures to follow. And, they are also given the ability to use their judgment to assess how best to proceed.

Don't we all like it when we get stopped by a cop for a traffic violation, and he or she lets us off with a warning instead of getting a ticket?

By what you are saying, based on the training of the cop, he /she has every right to give us a ticket. Its the law, its his / her job. But, after talking to us, and realizing that we meant no "harm", he / she lets us go. The cop made a judgment in that moment.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

True. Their training does give them a guide for follow for different situations. But, they actually don't know how the situation will "go down" until they arrive at the scene and assess what is happening. That is what I mean by they have to do what "works in the moment".

The bolded is obvious. Law enforcement training and procedures are a foundation and not all foundations operate with 100% certainty. Law enforcement officers are not trained in how to deal with every potential circumstance. For instance, there are jurisdictions that still do not provide training for dealing with people who are suicidal and people who have mental health conditions and learning disabilities.

The point is that law enforcement officers cannot overlook training, procedure, and do whatever their mind tells them to do solely based on what might work in the moment.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Don't we all like it when we get stopped by a cop for a traffic violation, and he or she lets us off with a warning instead of getting a ticket?

By what you are saying, based on the training of the cop, he /she has every right to give us a ticket. Its the law, its his / her job. But, after talking to us, and realizing that we meant no "harm", he / she lets us go. The cop made a judgment in that moment.

You are all over the place but here goes....

Police officers in many jurisdictions are given discretion to determine whether to pull someone over for a traffic violation and whether to administer a ticket or simply a warning. Their training and procedures in many jurisdictions tell the officers about this discretion and also when such discretion can be overriden by legal factors (i.e., warrants, reckless driving, drug possession, etc.) and extralegal factors (i.e., physical or mental disparities that can make driving harmful).

In contrast, many Highway Patrol officers state "we give tickets, not warnings" which means in some jurisdictions they were trained (and their policies and procedures dictate) to give traffic tickets 100% of the time that they pull someone over, particularly because many Highway Patrol officers only pull people over for reckless driving (i.e., 10+ above speed limit, being on the phone when driving, etc.). Therefore the discretion would come in whether to pull the person over in the first place rather than whether the person will get a ticket.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

You are all over the place but here goes....

Maybe, but the way I see it, you are trying to force extreme absolutes on situations that can vary greatly.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

In other words, it can be "infinite".

No, it cannot be "infinite".

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

(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. )

What are you ranting about now?

You either have not read this thread or do not understand what you read.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Maybe, but the way I see it, you are trying to force extreme absolutes on situations that can vary greatly.

No, law enforcement cannot act solely based on variation and what may work in any given moment.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

What are you ranting about now?

You know me, just bitchmoaningandgroanin'.

No, law enforcement cannot act solely based on what may work in any given moment.

Like I said, they also have the ability to use their judgment.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Like I said, they also have the ability to use their judgment.

Their judgment and discretion are not "infinite". If you acknowlege that then we can stop going around in circles.

Now, I'm still perplexed by:

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.