You Have the Right To Remain Tasered?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think someone is getting a big settlement from the Utah police and a police officer is being fired. Or at least I hope so.
 
You also have the right to argue with the officer about the ticket, insist he show you the speed limit sign you just passed, exhibit selective deafness when told the ticket is for speeding by continuing to ask what the ticket is for, refuse to read ticket to determine what speed you are being charged with going, repeatedly disobey the officer's orders, and generally act like a belligerent jerk.

In such a case your right to be tasered shall not be infringed.
 
I really cannot stand youtube and the idiots that post on there. That and the fact that the video poster is screening all the comments so that only the ones against the cop show up. I'm not argueing that the officer was right, but the man was obviously noncompliant from the beginning. Then I ready comments like "He wanted the registration RIGHT NOW, that's not cool", oh so he has all day to wait for you to get your information on your time. I really loved the one where some guy was like "I feel less safe with the police around", ah so you gonna call the Ghost Busters next time someone decides to break into your house and hold you at gunpoint.

Sheeple are pathetic.

The cop is going to give you a ticket no matter what, and the side of the road is no place to argue it. Your complaint with the department will go much better if you acted respectfully then if you were in non-compiance.
 
I hate tasers. It's a compliance device, but it's too often used as a punishment device.

There's no way that situation had yet escalated to the point of a compliance device being necessary. That trooper should have tried to detain him physically first before using it.

The police shouldn't be allowed to use them except in extreme circumstances.
 
I was waiting for the wife to get it next!

When given the choice of a small fine for a civil infraction or a dose of electroshock therapy, accept the ticket with a smile, and thank the nice man.
 
Mr Weebles said:
There's no way that situation had yet escalated to the point of a compliance device being necessary. That trooper should have tried to detain him physically first before using it.
Click to expand...
Being that you are not a sworn law enforcement officer in the state of Utah, and a Utah Highway Patrol trooper is, I will defer to his judgement of the suspect's behavior against his PD's use of force policy to determine when tasing is warranted and when it is not.
Mr Weebles said:
The police shouldn't be allowed to use them except in extreme circumstances.
Click to expand...
Extreme circumstances are usually defined as life-or-death. In such cases a firearm is indicated. Maybe you should go armed with a taser against a gun wielding or firing suspect and report back how you make out.

And as NWanner says, it is highly likely that this video has been edited to show the police in the worst light, so using it to indict the use of tasers is probably premature.

[thinking] [rolleyes]
 
Jose said:
Being that you are not a sworn law enforcement officer in the state of Utah, and a Utah Highway Patrol trooper is, I will defer to his judgement of the suspect's behavior against his PD's use of force policy to determine when tasing is warranted and when it is not.
Click to expand...

Don't I have a right to an opinion? Or does one need to be a UHP trooper to have one?

Please, enlighten us. At what point in that video did that guy's behavior cross the line in violation of the UHP use of force doctrine?

Quite frankly, I don't give a rat's ass what the UHP says about taser use. They are being overused these days against the citizenry. If he tried to physically detain that guy and then had to use the taser then I could accept it. I wouldn't like it, but I'd accept it.

Jose said:
Extreme circumstances are usually defined as life-or-death. In such cases a firearm is indicated. Maybe you should go armed with a taser against a gun wielding or firing suspect and report back how you make out.

And as NWanner says, it is highly likely that this video has been edited to show the police in the worst light, so using it to indict the use of tasers is probably premature.
Click to expand...

Was a gun evident in that video? Was it? I'd love to know.
 
What I found interesting was that the officer (a) Made no attempt to inform the driver that refusal to sign would result in arrest, and give the driver a second chance to sign and (b) Made no attempt to inform the driver that the signature was not an agreement that he committed the offense, just his acknowledgment that he had been given the citation.

It would appear that a bit of calm professionalism would have quite possibly resulted in getting the signature and, if it didn't, would put the officer on much more solid footing with respect to the investigation and almost inevitable suit.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
What I found interesting was that the officer (a) Made no attempt to inform the driver that refusal to sign would result in arrest, and give the driver a second chance to sign and (b) Made no attempt to inform the driver that the signature was not an agreement that he committed the offense, just his acknowledgment that he had been given the citation.

It would appear that a bit of calm professionalism would have quite possibly resulted in getting the signature and, if it didn't, would put the officer on much more solid footing with respect to the investigation and almost inevitable suit.
Click to expand...

That is exactly the way I saw it. It was quite obvious he was not aware of the risk of arrest for not signing.

What is the point of signing, in MA you simply get the ticket, that’s it. It seems like an unnecessary step that has caused lots of petty arrest.
 
Mr Weebles said:
Don't I have a right to an opinion? Or does one need to be a UHP trooper to have one?
Click to expand...

According to the UHP trooper you do not have a right to an opinion. Listen to him as he talks the the young fellow beside the car out of camera view. He is basically telling the kid that he calls the shots and he will determine what happens.

I do not see how the kid was remotely dangerous. The kid disagreed with the officer, so the officer felt threatened. I half suspect that the officer never had anyone question him, previously.
Bill
 
If he tried to physically detain that guy and then had to use the taser then I could accept it. I wouldn't like it, but I'd accept it.
Click to expand...

At that point it's too late to use most anything.
 
Mr Weebles said:
Don't I have a right to an opinion? Or does one need to be a UHP trooper to have one?
Click to expand...
Yes, you have the right to an opinon. I also have one.
Mr Weebles said:
Please, enlighten us. At what point in that video did that guy's behavior cross the line in violation of the UHP use of force doctrine?
Click to expand...
Thanks for making my point. Since neither of us knows what the UHP's use of force doctrine is, I tend to give the trooper the benefit of the doubt while you accuse him of being a thug.
Mr Weebles said:
If he tried to physically detain that guy and then had to use the taser then I could accept it. I wouldn't like it, but I'd accept it.
Click to expand...
Rick Scalzo, who IS a police officer, has already told you how wrong this statement is.
Mr Weebles said:
Was a gun evident in that video? Was it? I'd love to know.
Click to expand...
There wasn't a gun on this video. You know it and everyone knows it, so stop throwing red herrings. You stated that tasers should only to be used in "extreme" circumstances. I defined "extreme" for you as a situation where death or severe bodily injury is reasonably expected. I then asked you to go face such a situation (man with a gun) armed with a taser and report back. I guess this means you won't?

The kid who got tasered is a punk with a serious attitude problem. The moment he started walking away after he was told he was under arrest he became a resister. At that point the trooper had to options: physically restrain him or use some other form of pain compliance. To get in a physical scuffle with an aggressive and defiant suspect by the side of a road is stupid. Taser him was a much better alternative.

You don't have to be told, as an adult, that signing a citation is not an admission of guilt. One SHOULD know that already. The moment you declare you will NOT sign the citation, you have become subject to arrest. Life is tough and it is tougher if you are stupid.

His GF is bitch, screaming about their rights and about how the trooper shouldn't do this or do that. To me they are both disrespectful a**h***s who apparently are used to getting their way whenever they please and will challenge anyone back. Well, apparently they chose the wrong guy to f*** with that day.

Maybe more people should watch Chris Rock's skit about "How Not To Get Your Ass Kicked By The Police".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fooped said:
Is the "Not signing the citation" offense a Federal crime, or state-to-state?
Click to expand...
It is a state law in every state I have ever been given a citation. That would be Florida, Maryland, Pennsylvannia, New York, Virginia, Kansas, California, and Ohio.

Refusing to sign means you are refusing to pay the fine and are refusing to appear in court. In essence you have skipped bail and are now subject to arrest. It is entirely to each officer's discretion how many chances they will give you to reconsider your refusal to sign. In reality, they don't have to tell you a thing if you refuse and can go right to slapping the cuffs on you as the Utah trooper did.
 
No signature is required in MA and officers who request a signature are far and few between.
 
Is the "Not signing the citation" offense a Federal crime, or state-to-state?
Click to expand...

NJ has no requirement to sign nor does our summoners have a place for the operator to sign but from what I've seen it only is a statement that you agree to appear in court or something to that effect. That would be a state regulation only. It saves to trouble of the mv operator having to post bail.
 
The last time I was stopped was the morning that Mrs. M1911 and I were going on vacation. We had a ferry reservation later that afternoon and I was rushing around doing last minute shopping at the butcher, the vet (special food for the sick cat), etc. I had the Thule box on the roof, along with my Thule fishing rod holder with 3 surf rods in it.

I was doing 42 in a 25 zone. In my defense, the 25 zone is complete BS. It is 35 in the other direction for about a mile.

For those interested, I had my Kimber Compact on my hip and a PM9 in my pocket and I was wearing a photographer's vest as a cover garment.

He waved me over. I was polite. He asked for my license and registration and I immediately gave them to him. He told me I was going a bit fast, 42 to be specific. I apologized and told him that I was getting ready to go on vacation and wasn't paying enough attention to my speed. He went back to his car for a few minutes, came back, looked at my truck and said it sure does look like I'm going on vacation, and told me he was giving me a warning. I apologized again and said I would slow down. Thanks, Officer dude. A ticket would have been a bad way to start my vacation.

I guess I'm just a wimp. I'll do a little bootlicking to avoid a ticket. And I certainly won't argue with an officer.
 
This isn't the best one to armchair, for starters, it's
very hard to hear what kind of dialog was going on between this
guy and the officer, etc. The sound is terrible.

I can see tasing the guy if the LEO announced that he was
arresting him for (whatever) and he wasn't complying.

There are often cases of LEOs going overboard but the impression
that I get is that this probably isn't one of them. If the guy
had signed the ticket the whole thing would have been over that much
faster, and then he can hash out his assertion in court later
about the traffic sign or whatever. I mean seriously, even if
you know you're in the right, being adamant with a hardass
LEO (on the side of the road) about it is not going to pay dividends.

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
I can see tasing the guy if the LEO announced that he was
arresting him for (whatever) and he wasn't complying.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what happened around 2:30 into the recording

Trooper: Turn around and put your hands behind your back.

A-H 20 something: What the hell is wrong with you? (as he walks away).

Turn around and put the hands behind your back = you are under arrest.

What the hell is wrong with you? (as you walk away) = resisting arrest.

Can't get more clear than that.
 
I'm not in a position to scream good or bad taze, but am I the only one that gets a kick out tazer videos, even if it was uncalled for?
 
The only thing I'm gonna say about this video is that when a cop gives me bad news, I thank him for it, and I've never been tazed.
 
All F*CKING tasers should be BANNED.

If you have to pull a taser, you should be pulling your gun. I am sick and tired on seeing these videos. This is not a non-lethal alternative and IMHO, if you have to resort to these methods, lethal or not, pull your service [revolver].

Maybe this is hitting home to me because my wife is pregnant, and there was a crying child in the car, but, F*CK me... That just turns my stomach.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Guess the kids running the WSJ have gone to the dark side.
Replies
6
Views
493
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Pennsylvania Court Upholds Right of Young People to Carry Guns in Public
Replies
6
Views
216
Coyote33
Coyote33
Does anyone have
2
Replies
30
Views
879
appraiser
appraiser
Maine Gov. Mills Pushes to Make it Easier to Have Firearms Confiscated
Replies
3
Views
284
Uzi2
U
ATF Redefines All Private Sales & Who Has To Have A FFL
2
Replies
45
Views
1K
Mountain
Mountain
Back
Top Bottom