Tasing a ten year old... Wow!

Remove all ads!

I don't think there's much reason to continue this thread. Every person with a sane viewpoint pretty much agrees that this was a bad thing.

 

well, the police department didnt

all i see are a bunch of over opinionated people trying to put forward an opinion on something they either have any experience with or knowledege about, they dont deal with violence or enforce the law, but for some reason writing their moral outrage on a website, which can change nothing makes them feel better - hooray for pointless discussions

 

Good point. Tal, shut down the Alleys (or any other forum where opinions are expressed). Even better, make it a Board rule that the the expressing of opinions is forbidden. After all, as Shoshino perceptively points out, this is just a website.

 

Well Shoshino, I spent two years in charge of a detachment guarding nuclear weapons -- we also guarded several armories as well and were required to have detailed response plans. We also were extensively trained in when force was authorized and when it was not. Granted, I never needed to handle a domestic disturbance involving children but this violates every use of force rule I was ever trained in.

The child was having a temper tantrum. If left alone, no one would have been injured in any way she would have eventually gotten tired or hungry. She wasn't drunk or high or any other criteria from your extensive training as a bouncer.

 

That is exactly right, T2. This is more about being an experienced parent with some common sense, more than it is a "law enforcement" issue.

 

I spent four years working with extremey mentally unstable people or to put it blunt; outright crazy nutjobs. I worked at a psychiatric ward that took all the violent cases in this region. I have seen plenty of violence during work hours and taken down plenty of people, not ten year olds but psycothic, frothing madmen who are convinced that you are a demon. We didn't use tasers, what we did use was plenty of people and drugs to tranquilize patients if they were unruly but that was after an outburst. No taser for the seconds you are alone.

Several of the guys who worked extra there also worked as bouncers, your kind of people Shoshino. Full of roids, dumb as bricks and really liked to land a few punches on a patient after they were taken down.

 

Im 5'9, 38 chest 15 and a half collar, just to put in perspective how big I am, in an outright fist fight I would have my arse handed to me, I pride myself on my ability to first organise a safe environment and second my ability to notice problems before they happen and diffuse the situation, most fights happen outside the club where we have absolutely nothing to do with it, but sometimes you do have to walk someone into the door or 'twist' their arm just to remind them who is in charge.

Ive worked with people like that too joacqin, and the club has handed over CCTV footage which has led to the prosecution of several roider doorstaff, but that kind of attitude doesnt work in this line of work, the most hot-headed guy I worked with had a good beating one night because he went after a guy who traded words with him, his mates were waiting outside, they knew he would follow him.

 

Unfortunately, we don't know that. Especially if "emotional problems" was code for "psychological problems", she may have a history of turning violent in those circumstances. Remember, not everyone is calm and rational like you and I. Without more knowledge of past history (i.e. had the police responded to this exact situation before and found the girl wielding a kitchen knife or something), we don't know.

 

NOG, one article does not give an accurate account, but there are other articles which combined will paint a pretty good picture of what happened. The girl was simply not wanting to take a bath (or shower) and would recoil and push her mother away every time her mother touched her. The girl (according to the numerous articles I read) did not have a weapon and was not the aggressor -- she simply fought when touched.

There was no prior incidents with the girl (as stated in many of the articles I read). I agree, looking at one article does not give enough information; however, not everyone only looked at the article linked -- some of us looked more in depth at the incident. You can claim that "we don't know what happened" when in reality it's mainly you who doesn't know -- research helps fill in blanks and there is no way anyone can know 100% of what happened (it is ridiculous to require such knowledge in any event). Reasonable doubt is all that's required in a court of law; I believe a reasonable interpretation of the events is quite adequate as well.

IMO the police officer had no right or responsibility to force the girl to take a bath. No crime was being committed and the mother's request was outside the scope of his job. He should have realized he was taking it too far -- because he shwed such poor judgement I would rather the police office find other, more suitable employment (perhaps as mall security).

 

Isn't the purpose of using a Taser to incapacitate the person, at which point, the person will fall over? Are the police required to catch the person as they fall to the ground?

As T2B pointed out, all reasonable interpretations of the article indicate that much more is known about the situation than you are acknowledging. Ask yourself this NOG - if it was your child that was tased in a situation like this (and yes, I know you don't have any kids - I'm talking hypothetically), would you be OK with it?

 

what we do know is that she struck the officer in the balls, doesnt matter how big your attacker a hit to the pills is dangerous

really, I looked and pretty much every article I read is either from a news source which is vague and missing information or from a parenting group which are massively bias or personal opinion.
most articles however mention quite clearly:

this was not a barbed taser it was a touch taser:

 

The unanswered question is why was she being taken into custody? For not bathing? What great news! Finally a law that will help clear the streets of our homeless and keep geeks locked in their houses forever!

I found several articles which gave differing information (including the brief I posted which was from an interview with her father). Most of the best information is from Arkansas (go figure).

Stupid ****. Allowing a ten year old to kick him in the groin. Yet another reason for him to be working in a mall somewhere.

You say that as if it is a valid excuse -- it is not.

 

She was being arrested for a criminal offence, disorderly conduct.

every article agrees that the child was "screaming and kicking" I think this goes far beyond "refusing to take a shower".

really? well, Ill bow my head to the master of dealing with violence who surely knows that its not possible for a flailing body landing strike after strike to hit her victim in the balls, must be the officers skill thats to blame.

an excuse for what? the only thing that the officer did wrong was failing to attach the camera before using his taser.

so.... lets go over this one more time...

girl arrested for criminal offence, arrested with no injuries to arresting officer or arrested party.

whats the problem?

 

Hitting the police officer was a criminal offense, but how could one be arrested for a disorderly in their own home? That's like the guy who got arrested for walking around naked in his own house.

 

Umm ... sorry, but "screaming and kicking" describes a temper tantrum of a child quite well. Which is why there is even a parental expression "kicking and screaming all the way."

Once again (I've heard three times is a charm) the police officer had no business there. Once he realized it was a tantrum by a ten year old who didn't want to take a bath he SHOULD HAVE LEFT -- if he never realized this, he's too ****in' dense to be a police officer. There was no valid reason for him to confront the child. If he felt the mother could not contain the child he should have called for child welfare services (in fact, when she gave him permission to tase her daughter it should have clued him into making the call). There was no criminal offense until the officer attacked her.

 

The owner of the house reported the offence, the 10 yearold is not the home owner, similarly to a tennant does not have legal right to the property.

yeah, its very over used, how do we know when its being used appropreatly?

the officer attacked her? wow, what article states that? are you just coming up with things to make your moral stance seem more serious?

the owner of the property asked police to intervene in a potentially dangerous situation, if the mother told the police that she wanted the kid out of her house the police would have had to remove her and place her in custody as a minor until social services became involved, then it would be up to the social to decide whether or not the mother faced charges and/or place the child into care - not for the officer to decide, the officer has to upold the law at the time of an incident, if he refused the mother could have pressed charges for dereliction of duty.

oh, and whoever gave the bad reputation, have the balls to say who you are, *****.

 

Of course I'm making **** up. This is a debate (of sorts) I have my view of things and you have yours. Putting this is a better frame of reference -- the girl's point of view -- she's just not wanting to take a bath, she fights with her mom and screams because she's upset and angry at being forced to do something she neither wants to do nor does she think it necessary. A police officer shows up and physically attacks her -- she fights back (and kicks the bastard in the nuts). In her mind (as it was in mine at that age) she was in her home. I don't know of a child that doesn't believe the home of their parents' is not also theirs.

The police officer was obviously not prepared for the encounter on many levels. Allowing a ten year old to kick you in the family jewels is bad enough, but then to tase the 65 pound girl is simply poor judgement and representative of an officer in over his head.

 

Maybe the officer could have handled it differently, maybe he couldnt, Ive always told anyone under my authority that if they can justify their actions I will back them, its often easy when you talk to someone face to face to tell if they truly felt their action was needed (to an extent, I dont consider causing serious bodily harm to someone who is already subdued justifiable), the officer and mother seem confident that the action was justifiable therefore no issue.

officers actions aside, alot of people have a problem with the whole taser on a 10 yearold issue, simply becuase it was a 10 year old, with that I have no problem, its alot safer then many other ways of taking them down.

 

Safer than what? A drop kick to the face? Pistol whipping? Sending in an attack dog?

I was never trained as a police officer, but I have studied Soo Bahk Do for years; one of the very first things you learn is how to restrain someone without causing them harm. Your stance is basically "Children are not as fragile as you guys make them out to be," correct? I agree, children are really not that fragile, they tend to be very flexible, to the point that restraint would cause less harm than drive stunning her in the back. But, as T2 said, the officer really had no reason to get involved from the information we have. The damage caused by being tased and arrested at 10 years old, is more than ever needed to happen. The officer could have said "Ma'am, I understand you're having a hard time, but it is not my job to get your child to take a bath."

Him justifying himself has nothing to do with this; liars justify their lies, rapists justify their crimes, and so on. Standing behind someone just because they justify themselves is foolish.

 

something which tells me that this isnt as simple as you people believe is that the girl was never released from custody instead placed in a youth shelter, this was clearly a problem child, the father has admitted that she has emotional problems and the mother clearly had no mode of control, at 10 you know the difference between right and wrong, she did not respect an officer and even assulted him, based on what Ive seen from alot of american police videos, she's lucky she can walk.

once again, non lethal device, left uninjured girl to be cuffed.