|
REPLY 1 - 10 of 13
|
|
9/8/2007 11:09 AM
|
#1
|
Aqua Pig
Join Date: June 2007
Posts: 39
|
RE: Civilians with Tasers
Any weapon deadly or not, used to IMMOBILIZE a LEO, should be considered a felony punishible with stiff and MANDATORY jail sentence. IMMOBILZATION of a LEO should be considered more serious than a F/A against the officer since the officer's duty weapon could be removed and used against him or her while they are incapable of defending themselves..
Last edited @ 9/8/2007 11:15 AM
|
|
|
9/8/2007 10:45 PM
|
#2
|
Steve Rothstein
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 264
|
RE: Civilians with Tasers
I think you are vastly underrating the average citizen if you are afraid of the average person having a Taser. 90% of the people out there are good citizens who would never use the Taser on a police officer. The other 10% are criminals who we are already in danger from.
Given that, I would ask you to consider when you are authorized to use deadly force. As a police officer, I am justified in using deadly force in conditions specified in the law. In Texas, one of those conditions is when my life is in danger. The other person does not even have to have a weapon at all, if my life is in danger. Is my life in danger if I am attacked by a criminal with a civilian model Taser? YES, because of the length of time it immobilizes someone for. This would give them time to come get my weapon from its holster and I would be unable to stop them because of the Taser. Thus, I am justified in using my firearm to stop a Taser attack on me.
This is the same logic used when someone tries to get your firearm. You have to ask why they are attacking you and what the results would be if the attack is successful. This is how you justify your use of whatever level of force you find necessary to implement.
|
|
|
9/10/2007 7:07 AM
|
#3
|
jgaffney
Join Date: July 2007
Posts: 2
|
Use of Force - Civilians with Tasers
When did I say the average citizen with a Taser is of concern? Any weapon or device which can neutralize an officer truly places an officer at risk. When does that most often happen? Police Officers are attacked or overcome by criminals, individuals under the influence of alcohol or drugs, an EDP (Emotionally Disturbed Person), individuals experiencing the fight or flight syndrom, and how about terrorists?
It is understood if an officer or member of the public life is at risk by the use or threathened use of deadly physical force against an officer or another a police officer may overcome the threat.
The problem is that TASER has established and has testified on the side of law enforcement being "tased" is not harmul. It is a lower level of force than deadly physical force. I am not saying the use of deadly physical force cannot be used to overcome this threat.
What I am saying is Taser's experts will be used to demonstrate and verify the use of a Taser is not harmful and does not permanently immobilize an individual. Thus, the use of deadly physical force by a police officer against a civilian in possession of his or her personal taser is an excessive use of force. That is the problem before law enforcement.
Lastly, statutes as written will be null and void if a judge rules in favor of the civilian and on appeal this decision is not overturned. Last edited @ 9/10/2007 7:11 AM
|
|
|
9/10/2007 7:20 PM
|
#4
|
Steve Rothstein
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 264
|
RE: Civilians with Tasers
OK, I may have misunderstood what your concern was. We are not concerned about Tasers because of the average citizen being a good person, just because of the possible conflict when the Taser is used by a criminal.
In that case, I go with my second statement. The use of deadly force is justified even when the criminal uses a lower level of force if the intent of the attack is to kill or seriously injure the officer. I do not have to keep myself restrained to just the same level of force as the criminal. I do not justify my use of force based on what the cirminal is doing, but I do it based on his intent.
The only reason a criminal would use a Taser on an officer is to kill him. The incapacitation is just a step along the way to getting the officer's or other more deadly weapon. This is what justifies my use of deadly force.
This way, I can recognize the Taser is not lethal, but the attack would still be a lethal attack that justifies deadly force in my response. And I do not have to wait for the Taser to actually be deployed any more than I would have to wait for the pocket knife to be used.
|
|
|
9/10/2007 9:13 PM
|
#5
|
wolfva
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 96
|
RE: Civilians with Tasers
What you're asking is for cops to second guess the intentions of the person attacking them. Does a criminal with a tazer intend to incapacitate an officer, or kill him? Who cares! You won't know until after the fact. If it's incapacitate then all's ok. But if it's kill? Well, to late for the officer to go to the lethal force option, isn't it? Remember, we have to be in reasonable fear for our lives to use lethal force. If a violent criminal is coming at us with a weapon then I think it'd be reasonable to be in fear of our lives.
It will be interesting to see how the courts decide though. I just hope I'm not the one involved...2 lawsuits in one lifetime are enough! <LOL>.
|
|
|
9/11/2007 8:44 PM
|
#6
|
Steve Rothstein
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 264
|
RE: Civilians with Tasers
Wolf,
You got what I am saying I think. I am not asking that we second guess the intentions, I am saying that if they come with a Taser they must have a reason, which is going to be to kill me. Otherwise they would not be attacking me at all.
I agree that I do not want to be the test case on my theory though.
|
|
|
9/12/2007 5:13 AM
|
#7
|
CTPoliceOfc
Join Date: September 2007
Posts: 12
|
RE: Civilians with Tasers
If a civilian has a taser and decides to use it on you, you have every right to fully defend yourself, if necessary, using deadly force.
|
|
|
9/12/2007 4:02 PM
|
#8
|
Aqua Pig
Join Date: June 2007
Posts: 39
|
RE: Civilians with Tasers
Steve and Wolf...excellent points. At night, you may just see the suspect point something at you. As with any use of deadly force encounter one may have no more than a couple of seconds to decide to shoot or not to shoot. Depending on the situation, I probably wont wait anyway to determine if it is a taser, handgun or kitchen knife. If the bad guy has something in his hand and moving toward me and wont drop it, it'll be a done deal. And in court it's all in how you articulate your encounter and final response to the threat.
|
|
|
9/17/2007 9:14 PM
|
#9
|
wolfva
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 96
|
RE: Civilians with Tasers
Something else, a civilian isn't going to be pointing a Taser at you, unless it's a case of mistaken identity; in which case identifying yourself will solve the problem. A criminal, on the other hand....
|
|
|
10/9/2007 3:15 PM
|
#10
|
DukeLaw
Join Date: September 2007
Posts: 11
|
RE: Civilians with Tasers
As pointed out a good citizen is not going to try to immobilize you with a TASER . If the persons action reasonably place me in fear of my life I am not only authorized but i feel duty bound to use Deadly Force. A citizen hitting popflies to his kid in the park with a bat is not a danger to me but let him turn and attack me with said bat different story. It is not the noninjury producing aspect of a TASER it the incapacitation effect. Anything that incapacitates me presents a danger of serious physical harm because in every encounter there is one gun present, MINE.
|
|