Police taser 10 year old girl

[Fifthfiend]

Like I don't know how much I even need to elaborate past that, it don't get a lot worse than that

BUT SINCE YOU ASKED, she apparently didn't want to take a shower (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/girl-10-tasered-by-police-with-mothers-permission-1823510.html).

The child was "violently kicking and verbally combative" when Mr Bradshaw tried to take her into custody and she kicked him in the groin. He delivered "a very brief drive stun to her back," the report said.

I mean like the fact that a person thought this was justified was amazing. It's a ten year old. You can literally pick one up in one hand.

[MasterOfMagic]

Mr Bradshaw's report said the girl screamed, kicked and resisted any time her mother tried to get her in the shower before bed. "Her mother told me to tase her if I needed to," he wrote.
I can only imagine the Mother's face when he actually did it.

[NonCon]

The child was "violently kicking and verbally combative" when Mr Bradshaw tried to take her into custodyWhat.

Tried to take her into custody? Cuz she wouldn't take a shower?

Then he fucking tazes a ten year old and people are wondering if it was the right decision instead of going "Fuck you you don't get to be a cop anymore." What the fucking hell.

[Masaki-kun]

To be fair, she kicked him in the jewels. If I had the power to electrocute people after a crotch kick I would friggin' THUNDAGA them.

[Bells]

"Her mother told me to tase her if I needed to,"

So...

1) If you NEED to tase a 10 year old, within ANY scenario, then you're not a very good cop.
2) It's ok to tase children as long as their relatives say it's ok? You don't think it's illegal or anything...? Really?!

Police Chief Jim Noggle said no disciplinary action was taken against Mr Bradshaw. He said Tasers are a safe way to subdue people who are a danger to themselves or others.

10 year old. Unless they have a huge Knife in their hands and their eyes glow with a devilish red light and their clothing is stained with Blood... they can't really be a "danger to themselves or others".

For fuck sakes, how can you call something you can knock over with a turn of a wrist a "Danger to others"?

"We didn't use the Taser to punish the child - just to bring the child under control so she wouldn't hurt herself or somebody else," he said.

So he Hurt her so she wouldn't hurt herself but he didn't punish her. I see.

If the girl really odes have SERIOUS mental problems that need treatment, a cop with a taser is not the right answer. If she is not, a cop with a taser STILL isn't the right answer.

I mean, really, what the flippin hell !?

[Fifthfiend]

And as usual the thing that keeps this from being any kind of 'isolated incident' or whatever is that the officer's department defends him and refuses to take any disciplinary action.

Police Chief Jim Noggle said no disciplinary action was taken against Mr Bradshaw. He said Tasers are a safe way to subdue people who are a danger to themselves or others.

"We didn't use the Taser to punish the child - just to bring the child under control so she wouldn't hurt herself or somebody else," he said.

The police chief said his department has never had to Taser a child before. But he said if the officer tried to forcefully put the girl in handcuffs, he could have accidentally broken her arm or leg.

It's striking to me that these are the same excuses used for any and every other Taser abuse. It's apparently just the mindset among our nation's law enforcement that you mouth the same dishonest words and carry on tasering whoever you want, whenever you want, no matter how unjustified it may be.

It seems like officers are just concluding, being told, and being institutionally supported in their belief that the first resort in any situation is assault via electrocution, because otherwise someone might "hurt themselves." The sheer shamelessness of the excuse-making just defies belief.

[MasterOfMagic]

Its statements like those that make me wonder if they realize Tasers actually...ya know, hurt. Pretty bad. In this case it not leaving a mark (I assume, I guess it depends on the taser) isn't really an issue.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

See, this is where I'd personally like to see the return of public humiliation as punishment. Who needs jail when you can slap this guy with an "I tasered a 10-year old girl" and have them stand out in public for two weeks while slapping the story all around the Internet and on his personal information? Every time he goes in for a job application, it'll be branded right there, "I tasered a 10-year old girl." Hell, get his superiors in on it; "I allowed him to taser a 10-year old girl." If that doesn't curb a few power trips I don't know what else will.

Its statements like those that make me wonder if they realize Tasers actually...ya know, hurt. Pretty bad. In this case it not leaving a mark (I assume, I guess it depends on the taser) isn't really an issue.

A lot of the models I heard about actually have the prongs that go at least a small way into the skin, so I'd be surprised if either that, the actual force/heat of the shock, or both combined doesn't leave some sort of lasting impression, especially on a child.

Note to self: Include daily taserings into the above regimine. Tape results and show it to police recruits every month to drive it in.

[Kyanbu The Legend]

Sad part is that this is business a usual for the cops when it comes to what they feel is a situation were force is needed. but really the mother is at just as much at fault as he is. Since she gave him permission to do it.

In a just world, there are no human police. Just drones. Cause humans are too faulty to do anything right when it comes to law enforcement half of the time.

But I not going to go to far into this. I have work that needs to get done and really don't want a distraction right now.

[BitVyper]

I can only imagine the Mother's face when he actually did it.

As I recall from when I read another article on the subject, the mother initially requested exactly this and the officer declined - until the child kicked him in the balls. I haven't actually read THIS article yet, so maybe it says the same thing. Anyway, if she was far enough out of control, a friend I know who used to work with situations like this suggested that it might have been the safest way to subdue without injuring her.

I have a pretty tough time believing that, buuuuut I've also heard of situations where it got bad to the point that bones were broken and the child was still uncontrollable. Personally though, I think getting kicked in the balls might have had a little bit to do with the officer's decision to taze.

Keep in mind that whatever was going on, it was bad enough that mom called the police in the first place, so I'm taking a guess that this was closer to psychotic episode than regular temper tantrum.

Anyway, I'm not really inclined to favour the officer here, but I can't get behind outright crucifying the guy as most people I've seen talking about this seem to want to do. Investigate the situation, hold a hearing with expert testimony etc etc etc

The only thing I can really add is that grappling with the sufficiently crazy is never a clean situation, regardless of size difference. It's like trying to grab onto a seizure victim - they can injure themselves pretty good.

It's striking to me that these are the same excuses used for any and every other Taser abuse. It's apparently just the mindset among our nation's law enforcement that you mouth the same dishonest words and carry on tasering whoever you want, whenever you want, no matter how unjustified it may be.

They aren't excuses if they're true. Hence investigation. In any case, their response is a lot more acceptable than the public deciding they want the officer nailed to a cross without actually making an effort to get all the facts and understand the situation.

[MasterOfMagic]

but really the mother is at just as much at fault as he is. Since she gave him permission to do it.
Not really. People spout all kinds of stupid ideas, its our individual responsibility to filter out the batshit insane ones. Doubly so when you're a police officer on duty.

[Bells]

Mother is divorced and kids annoys so much that the police shows up. Mother actually says to cop that it's ok to tase her child.

I'm going on a blind tangent here and suggest that the child's behavior is probably mom's fault here.

[Julford Hajime]

I'm gonna have to agree with BitVyper here. As somebody whose Grandmother worked in a special ed school, I can attest from the stories I know (And the incidents I've seen first-hand; I volunteered at the school on my days off), that when a child of ANY age starts going batshit, you don't try to stop them through normal physical means. I was taught to get the ever-loving hell out of there, and let the professionals handle it; in one case, a child of 15 was tased for throwing chairs at an officer. How a 15-year-old special ed student getting tased never made headlines I couldn't tell ya.

I think the officer is getting a rough time because people see "10-year-old is tased" and think, well...
It's a ten year old. You can literally pick one up in one hand.
he fucking tazes a ten year old and people are wondering if it was the right decision instead of going "Fuck you you don't get to be a cop anymore."
If you NEED to tase a 10 year old, within ANY scenario, then you're not a very good cop.
*Shyria Dracnoir's post*
Like, I get that you guys don't like the idea, but try and think about it instead of posting your gut reaction. He didn't just go "Okies, taser-time!" He tried to handle the situation, and the girl got so fucking violent that she kicked him in the junk. If she's gotten to the point where she is striking out, especially at others, and the cop feels he can't calm her down in any other method? Yes, the taser would be appropriate there. If she keeps flailing/swinging, she's liable to hit something harder than a nutsack (Like say, a wall, or a mirror), breaking bones and/or cutting her arm up. He was trying to prevent that situation from happening.

That said, my own gut response was something akin to 'burn him at the stake rah rah rah!", but thinking about it more... No. Leave this to the professionals to investigate. At this point all we have is our own bias against cops/the MAN and the knowledge that the tased person was a 10-year-old. We don't know much about her mental state and actions beyond the groinshot and her shower tantrums, but already some flags are going off about this girl that warrant a second look.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

I want you to conjure a situation for me where it is acceptable to tase a 10 year old child. Unless it's that child from the exorcist I cannot think of one where it is ok. Because they can be restrained easily. They have no strength. If a police officer can't restrain a 10 year old child, how is he going to restrain an actual criminal?
Also she was having a tantrum. That's what children do. It doesn't mean we shuold look them up or torture them.
In addition, who cares if she kicked him in the balls. Part of being an adult is acceptable responses. Children can't be held to the same level as adults. If I'm a parent and my child hits me and I hit them back that is child abuse. I am bigger, I am stronger, I am more responsible. And for a policeman to do it, is pretty much the ultimate breakdown of responsibility.

Again, I want you to conjure me a situation where it is ok to taser a 10 year old. Because I cannot think of one so nothign any investigation finds is going to prove anything.
If you don't believe me, go find a 10 year old- wait 5 minutes for them to have a tantrum (which I guess makes all 10 year olds criminals now), then see how easy it is to restrain t hem.

Edit: Holy fuck guys. Seriously.

[Fifthfiend]

I'm gonna have to agree with BitVyper here. As somebody whose Grandmother worked in a special ed school, I can attest from the stories I know (And the incidents I've seen first-hand; I volunteered at the school on my days off), that when a child of ANY age starts going batshit, you don't try to stop them through normal physical means. I was taught to get the ever-loving hell out of there, and let the professionals handle it; in one case, a child of 15 was tased for throwing chairs at an officer. How a 15-year-old special ed student getting tased never made headlines I couldn't tell ya.

I think the officer is getting a rough time because people see "10-year-old is tased" and think, well...




Like, I get that you guys don't like the idea, but try and think about it instead of posting your gut reaction. He didn't just go "Okies, taser-time!" He tried to handle the situation, and the girl got so fucking violent that she kicked him in the junk. If she's gotten to the point where she is striking out, especially at others, and the cop feels he can't calm her down in any other method? Yes, the taser would be appropriate there. If she keeps flailing/swinging, she's liable to hit something harder than a nutsack (Like say, a wall, or a mirror), breaking bones and/or cutting her arm up. He was trying to prevent that situation from happening.

That said, my own gut response was something akin to 'burn him at the stake rah rah rah!", but thinking about it more... No. Leave this to the professionals to investigate. At this point all we have is our own bias against cops/the MAN and the knowledge that the tased person was a 10-year-old. We don't know much about her mental state and actions beyond the groinshot and her shower tantrums, but already some flags are going off about this girl that warrant a second look.

Wow.

EDIT: If I may play Devil's Advocate for a moment,

[Osterbaum]

I want you to conjure a situation for me where it is acceptable to tase a 10 year old child. Unless it's that child from the exorcist I cannot think of one where it is ok. Because they can be restrained easily. They have no strength. If a police officer can't restrain a 10 year old child, how is he going to restrain an actual criminal?
As someone who has practised different subdueing and restraining methods, my personal experience is that they're easiest to do on someone about your own size. What I'm saying is, that using "traditional" restraining methods (as in ones that are taught to law enforcement etc. and that don't use any equipment, except for handcuffs possibly) on a 10-year-old could actually be rather hard.

That said,
Part of being an adult is acceptable responses.
And, as you stated, tasing in this case isn't one.

EDIT: As an addition to my comment on restraining methods: some of them might also be a bit too, should I say violent, to be used on a 10-year-old.

[Archbio]

Leave this to the professionals to investigate bury.

Because that's what happens. Every. Time.

[Krylo]

Guys, she's ten.

You know how you 'restrain' and 'transport' a ten year old without hurting them?

You grab them by the back of the shirt. Get a big old wad of shirt in your hand, so it's too tight to slip out of, and pick them up.

Done.

Back/top of the pants works real well too, actually.

No tazing or injuries required.

Or if they're wearing something that's too loose or nothing at all, wrap your arm around their waste and carry them away. They might kick and punch the shit outta you, but there's no feasible way they are hurting themselves unless they try really really hard to hurt themselves.

Seriously, ten year olds weigh like seventy pounds or some shit. There's no world in which restraining a ten year old should require anything more than picking them up by their central body mass and weathering a couple of ten year old powered kicks and punches. There is no reason to grab their arms or legs or attempt to handcuff them or restrain them past lifting them off the ground so they can't run away and you can transport them to wherever they need to go.

Being both an asshole and an older brother, I know exactly how easy it is to carry around ten year olds that are struggling biting and punching without injuring them. If I could do it in my low to mid-teens, a trained police officer damn well better be able to.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

As someone who has practised different subdueing and restraining methods, my personal experience is that they're easiest to do on someone about your own size. What I'm saying is, that using "traditional" restraining methods (as in ones that are taught to law enforcement etc. and that don't use any equipment, except for handcuffs possibly) on a 10-year-old could actually be rather hard.


WTF. They are 10. You pick them up. I have no training in martial matters and I am not very strong at all and I would have no trouble at all restraining a 10 year old without hurting them. I have cousins I look after. You pick them up. Or you stick your hand on their head and they flail wildly because they can't reach then get tired and collapse in a heap. Seriously.
And yeah they might hit you a few times but 10 year old punches are weak and no danger to anyone.

[Osterbaum]

WTF. They are 10. You pick them up. I have no training in martial matters and I am not very strong at all and I would have no trouble at all restraining a 10 year old without hurting them. I have cousins I look after. You pick them up. Or you stick your hand on their head and they flail wildly because they can't reach then get tired and collapse in a heap. Seriously.
And yeah they might hit you a few times but 10 year old punches are weak and no danger to anyone.
Yeah, I completely agree with you. I meant methods that are usually used by law enforcement to restrain people (most of the time these people are adults). I was only trying to point out, that using the physical restraining methods that the officer was propably trained in, wouldn't be a good idea either.

In such a case, you use common sense and, for example, just pick the kid up.

[Azisien]

Ohio police officer tases newborn babies!

According to reports, Officer Bradley only administered taser shocks set to drive stun mode when, "the babies were just shaking their rattles like crazy. Someone could have been hurt!" The Ohio State Police Department has thus far defended Mr. Bradley's actions.

Whether the Department is taking the case seriously is anyone's guess. "We believe Officer Bradley made the right choice under a high stress situation; most other people would have made the same choice. Regardless, our department is undergoing an internal investigation."

Mr. Bradley was not available for comment outside of official announcements.

[Marc v1.0]

When will children learn to exercise proper safe Rattle usage! Those are dangerous devices and could potentially put an eye out or something!

Shame on that 10 year old, too. Learned all too late that Bathtime is Serious Business

[Hawk]

Azisiens avatar just makes that post all the more humourus.


But yeah, seriously, tasering a 10 year old = really fucking stupid idea. Not really much more I can add, others have said all that can be said now.

[Nikose Tyris]

I noticed someone up there asked if Tasers hurt.

As someone who has been tased twice I can safely say YES THEY REALLY FUCKING HURT.

[MasterOfMagic]

Do they leave a mark? I've wondered.

[Nikose Tyris]

The one with the prongs leaves a small mark that fades. It's like getting hit with a dart for a dartboard- it's small enough to not really hurt TOO bad, but it's still leaving a small hole in your body.

[Krylo]

I noticed someone up there asked if Tasers hurt.

As someone who has been tased twice I can safely say YES THEY REALLY FUCKING HURT.

Could we get a second opinion?


It's just I seem to remember you using those same words to describe getting a shot, and saying that you, as a grown man, cry when being stung by a bee.

So, while I'm sure that tasers DO hurt, it's just kind of hard to get a proper respect for the pain level given the source.

[Nikose Tyris]

Could we get a second opinion?


It's just I seem to remember you using those same words to describe getting a shot, and saying that you, as a grown man, cry when being stung by a bee.

So, while I'm sure that tasers DO hurt, it's just kind of hard to get a proper respect for the pain level given the source.

Fair statement.

[Mr.Bookworm]

There are a bunch of different reports, but howabout the police chief who said "It hurt like hell" (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article548845.ece)?

[Krylo]

I was really kind of hoping for something like this. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schmidt_Sting_Pain_Index)

Would you describe it as 'blinding, fierce, shockingly electric', for instance, or more, 'light, ephemeral, almost fruity'?

[Mr.Bookworm]

I was really kind of hoping for something like this. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schmidt_Sting_Pain_Index)

Would you describe it as 'blinding, fierce, shockingly electric', for instance, or more, 'light, ephemeral, almost fruity'?

Well, go stick a fork in a electrical socket.

Now multiply the voltage by 400.

That's how much a taser hurts.

[Tev]

It's not the volts that cause the pain so much as the amps.

[Mr.Bookworm]

It's not the volts that cause the pain so much as the amps.

Really? Huh. Didn't know that.

However, every report I can (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/07/video-i-was-a-taser-guinea-pig/) find (http://www.seattlepi.com/local/201661_taserrail30.html) points (http://www.acep.org/pressroom.aspx?id=29862) to Tasers (http://www.montrealgazette.com/Tasered+immigrant+possibly+writhing+pain+resisting +expert/1516468/story.html) really fucking hurting. (http://www.magicvalley.com/news/local/article_ded3925a-47e6-551d-bf82-bad9d2f94ee9.html)

And this is besides the possible side effects, up to and including death.

[Tev]

Oh don't get me wrong, tasers hurt like hell. It's just that voltage isn't the number you look at to gauge how much it hurts.

[krogothwolf]

I thought it was Volts you feel and amps are generally what kill you

[Tev]

I'm pretty sure it's the other way around...

EDIT: And after asking Google for clarification I still don't know for sure now.

[krogothwolf]

No, 100mA is considered leathel and 1mA is the minimum current a human can feel. I thought tasers were only rated at something like 1.9mA PPS and its 17PPS. I've had 2mA shock before and it doesn't really hurt.

I'm not sure which part makes you feel pain, wether its high voltaage or higher amp, but the amp rating is what will kill you, voltage wont.

[Wigmund]

I mean like the fact that a person thought this was justified was amazing. It's a ten year old. You can literally pick one up in one hand.

You can also pick up house cats with one hand, but if they are combative and actively resisting your efforts, good luck with that. The bit about he was kicked in the crotch probably meant he was trying to restrain her, but she was flailing enough to possibly hurt herself or the cop. And as the Ozark police chief pointed out, if the officer had broken the girl's arm or injured her in any way while restraining her, the town's police dept and the officer would be in bigger trouble. Lose-lose for the police in this situation.

Considering all the news articles I've seen on this rarely go past the "OMG he done tasered a child!", I'd actually like to see the investigators' report of what happened leading up to the incident. So, for right now, I'm gonna hold off calling the cop a monster until the investigators conclude otherwise.

[Tev]

I wonder if we'd be causing this much fuss if he'd just pepper sprayed the kid and waited for her to collapse into a pool of tears and burning?

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

You can also pick up house cats with one hand, but if they are combative and actively resisting your efforts, good luck with that. The bit about he was kicked in the crotch probably meant he was trying to restrain her, but she was flailing enough to possibly hurt herself or the cop. And as the Ozark police chief pointed out, if the officer had broken the girl's arm or injured her in any way while restraining her, the town's police dept and the officer would be in bigger trouble. Lose-lose for the police in this situation.

Considering all the news articles I've seen on this rarely go past the "OMG he done tasered a child!", I'd actually like to see the investigators' report of what happened leading up to the incident. So, for right now, I'm gonna hold off calling the cop a monster until the investigators conclude otherwise.

Once again, you need experience with children. They are easy to restrain, regardless of how much they flail. And they pretty much have to be ready to break an arm to break an arm in your hold.
The investigator mentioned handcuffs which could damage a child but why on earth would you handcuff them.
Even in your crazy world the cop had two choices:
A) Try to restrain the child and possibly hurt them
or
B) Tase the child and defineatly hurt them.
It's still not a good option.

And if we are going to wait on the investigation I want you to provide me a best-case scenario- one in which the cop is entirely justified. Because I cannot concieve of any situation where the cop is justified so the investigation is meaningless to me.


As for the current/voltage thing, current is what kills you- voltage does effectively nothing. If you had a very high voltage and very low current that can hurt because electricity produces heat equal to power (which is current times voltage) so you will cook yourself but in the vast majority of cases the voltage is pretty irrelevant. This is because voltage is simply the potential to move charges. Current is actually the moving of charges and the moving of charges is what kills you. The case is complicated because generally to get high current you have to get high voltage due to Ohms law (Voltage= current/resistance). So while a higher voltage has a higher chance of killing you that is just because it is making more current. You can't really have high current and low voltage (except ins uper conductors).
You can have high voltage/low current which will not kill you like normal- it will kill you by cooking you which is much less lethal.
In summary: current is the killer

[Krylo]

Really, even in this crazy dream land of dreams you people live in where a ten year old could ever conceivably hurt an adult trained police officer with her bare hands beyond the humiliation of getting a crotch shot, the girl was having a tantrum in her own house over taking a shower.

Take anything sharp out of the room, and close the door until she gets bored and/or hungry.

Seriously, there's just no excuse.

It's not like she was holding a gun and knocking off a convenience store or anything. There was no reason for him to even NEED to restrain her.

Edit: On Taser pain; I was just making light of it, guys. I know it hurts. They are scientifically designed to hurt like a mother fucker.

[Fifthfiend]

You can also pick up house cats with one hand, but if they are combative and actively resisting your efforts, good luck with that. The bit about he was kicked in the crotch probably meant he was trying to restrain her, but she was flailing enough to possibly hurt herself or the cop. And as the Ozark police chief pointed out, if the officer had broken the girl's arm or injured her in any way while restraining her, the town's police dept and the officer would be in bigger trouble. Lose-lose for the police in this situation.

You see they had to taser the girl, or else she could have been hurt.

EDIT: It's a good thing this officer so wisely and cautiously prevented this girl from hurting herself, by shooting her with fifty thousand volts of electricity.

EDIT: Like honestly this goes to show what I find so fantastic about this story, is it demonstrates that there is absolutely no situation involving these weapons for which people will not make these same excuses. There is literally no one that a uniformed police officer can assault with this deadly weapon that someone won't try to excuse with "Well otherwise they could have hurt themselves!"

[Tev]

Yes see they had to taser the girl, or else she could have been hurt.Well, and this may just be the semantics talking here, but she was just hurt not injured.

He could have just tackled her to the ground and risked injuring her, or turned the pepper spray on her and risked her injuring herself in a blind and painful tantrum of flailing. Instead, against his previously better judgment, he tazed her for a few seconds, hurting her temporarily.

I mean, I’m still not for turning the stun gun on a kid, but of all the options I’m really having a hard time building up any cop rage over this.

[MasterOfMagic]

I wonder if we'd be causing this much fuss if he'd just pepper sprayed the kid and waited for her to collapse into a pool of tears and burning?
Yes. That is the point.

EDIT: I mean, I hope this was extreme sarcasm and I missed it?

[CelesJessa]

The police chief said his department has never had to Taser a child before.
There's a reason, I'm guessing!


Holy crap, I don't even have very much arm strength and I'm fairly certain I could restrain my ten year old nephew if I had to.

Actually, to add to that, I KNOW I could restrain a 10-something year old when kicking and screaming, I had to when I was pretty young myself.


He could have just tackled her to the ground and risked injuring her, or turned the pepper spray on her and risked her injuring herself in a blind and painful tantrum of flailing. Instead, against his previously better judgment, he tazed her for a few seconds, hurting her temporarily.

Or he could, I don't know, deal with a kicking screaming child the same way people have dealt with kicking screaming children every day. I dunno, it just doesn't sound like that crazy of an idea.

[Marc v1.0]

Here's a crazy thought, He could have just Not Been There because "my 10 year old won't bath" isn't a Police Matter.

Did he also kick their puppy because it barked at him and he feel threatened?

[Tev]

Here's a crazy thought, He could have just Not Been There because "my 10 year old won't bath" isn't a Police Matter.
Eh, it was a residential disturbance. At the very least though someone from child services should have been there too.

[Fifthfiend]

Here's a crazy thought, He could have just Not Been There because "my 10 year old won't bath" isn't a Police Matter.

Did he also kick their puppy because it barked at him and he feel threatened?

Look I'm just saying I had to tase that puppy, otherwise it could have murdered a family of three and then thrown itself off of a cliff.

YOU DON'T KNOW, IT COULD HAVE HAPPENED

[Fifthfiend]

Man I remember all those times I threw a tantrum over taking a shower and a police officer wasn't there to tase me, I TOTALLY managed to break all my arms and legs and then shatter the mirror and cut all my veins open. I mean that's just how those situations go down. Good thing this girl had the officer here to stop her from this totally plausible and likely outcome.

[Whomper]

I'm having difficulty finding a source, but I overheard on news radio that this 10-year-old was actually 246 lbs.

But yeah, it's a fucking shower. Lrn2Parent.

[Fifthfiend]

I mean yeah if we were talking that one 10 year old on the Boondocks from the Thugnificent episode then hell yes taser that motherfucker (if even that works!)

[Wigmund]

I'm having difficulty finding a source, but I overheard on news radio that this 10-year-old was actually 246 lbs.

But yeah, it's a fucking shower. Lrn2Parent.

It's Ozark, Arkansas - a 246 lb 10yr old is not out of the question.

[Tev]

Well to be fair, I never threw tantrum over things because if I did, my parents would beat me. I would have been hurt, but not injured.

I mean, I guess the cop could have just beat the girl like her mom should have, but then we’d be right back where we are now.

[Fifthfiend]

Or like that forty-pound baby who the insurance companies wouldn't cover, I mean yeah by the time that little monster is ten they're going to have to have a small military unit to handle his tantrums.

[Wigmund]

Nah, the cops will just set up tesla coils to zap the mega-baby whenever they have an urge for the evulz.

[Fifthfiend]

Nah, the cops will just set up tesla coils to zap the mega-baby whenever they have an urge for the evulz.

Nah, they'll just find another normal-sized ten-year-old to assault.

[POS Industries]

It's Ozark, Arkansas - a 246 lb 10yr old is not out of the question.
Frankly, that was what I was assuming before Whomper said anything.

But yeah, it's a fucking shower. Lrn2Parent.
This. Here's what you do: Go outside, get the hose (It's Arkansas, they have a hose), bring it into the house. Go into the kitchen, get the dish soap, pour it on the girl and then turn the hose on her. Bitch can dry herself off.

[Seil]

Tasered man's last words [after being beaten while being tasered] "I love my family." (http://news.globaltv.com/Dying+Tasered+called+family/2237426/story.html)

This guy "developed a fear of being tasered." That's not something that occurs normally, like a fear of heights, a fear of flying or a fear of clowns.

[Funka Genocide]

so when I was like 14 or 15 one of my little cousins (like maybe 3 years old) thought it would be funny to punch me in the groin.

and it hurt, yeah.

but you know what I didn't do? taser him.

I think this personal parable is very applicable to this particular situation.

Any police officer that feels it necessary to taser an unarmed 10 year old should be fired for pure incompetence, if anything.

This is just terrifying, its the kind of totalitarian mindset that leads children to become abusive people, just like their parents. The fact that an officer of the law is enforcing this (presumably with the approval of law) only pushes the message home for the poor girl.

Her mother, the officer and by extension society is telling her that physical violence is how we solve disputes. That is a terrible message to send a child.

oh and as for Volts/amps stuff, amperage is a measure of the current (generally speaking, the volume of moving electrons in a circuit) which, in an AC current situation is what kills you when it completes a circuit through your heart and interrupts your bio-electical rhythm through a myocardial infarction. Tasers apply their effect through massive Voltage, which is a measure of the work being done by the electrical current. The human body presents a relatively high resistance circuit, so a bit of current is necessary to overcome the insulating effect of human tissue, but the effect (the "zap") is a product of extreme voltage.

[stefan]

I like how you are all saying "DOHOHO JUST GRAB HER BY THE SCRUFF OF HER NECK, PROBLEM SOLVED," it really makes it abundantly clear that you have absolutely no fucking idea what you are talking about.

just to be clear, the cop should have never been called there in the first place. however, he was, and as such the kid, who was already flipping the fuck out, was now reacting to some stranger shes never met trying to restrain her.

I don't get where you all are getting the idea that 10 year olds are strengthless. back when I worked at a convenience store I saw a ten year old slam the door so hard it came off the fucking hinges. they may not be as strong as an adult in any way, but they're still strong enough to cause serious injury to anyone trying to restrain them, especially if they stopped caring about how much theyre going to hurt themselves.

I don't in any way support just letting cops taser the fuck out of anyone they please, but this whole thread stinks of armchair "concerned citizens" that are acting solely off of a misguided idea of how reality works.

And really, would you rather the kid got a shock that, while painful, has little to no chance of causing any permanent harm, or would you prefer they got some bones broken and ended up in the hospital with a 10k+ medical bill?

EDIT: I mean, seriously, all the shit you're spouting is on the same level as saying the police should "shoot to wound, 'cause bullets to the shoulder aren't that bad" which is a concept born from action movies that has absolutely no relation to reality, since a bullet to the limb is likely to sever an artery and kill someone in minutes, and that getting shot in the shoulder is going to rob you of the use of that arm for the rest of your fucking life. The people in this thread who have experience dealing with this sort of shit actually said that restraining a ten year old isn't all that easy, and yet you all are just ridiculing the possibility and going off on your fantasy tangent.

[Funka Genocide]

hey dude, people don't have scruffs of the neck.

just wanted to point that out.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

While you guys all make light of the horrible dangers involved in showering I would like to bring some cold hard STATISITICS to you:
According to this site: Approx 341 people die per year from slipping in the bathtub. (http://asknelly.org/?tag=number-of-deaths-from-slipping-in-bathtub) This is not even included other bathroom related fatalities!!!
And yet, between 2001 and 2008 only only 334 people have died from tasers. (http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/tasers-potentially-lethal-and-easy-abuse-20081216) This makes bathrooms at least 8 TIMES AS LETHAL as tasers.
Clearly the officer was simply playing the odds.

[Funka Genocide]

How about the fact that the girl wasn't actually attacking anyone, she was just sort of throwing a fit. Meaning, you could just let her do her thing so long as she wasn't injuring herself and wait until she tired out if you were that concerned about the inevitable bloody melee with an enraged 10 year old.

But basically, man up and take it if a 10 year old girl kicks you in the jimmy.

I also find it sort of ironic that you're basing your claims of mind-boggling child strength on your extensive experience working in a convenience store. Maybe you shouldn't be leveling claims of idiocy and ignorance at everyone else before analyzing your own platform?

[POS Industries]

And really, would you rather the kid got a shock that, while painful, has little to no chance of causing any permanent harm, or would you prefer they got some bones broken and ended up in the hospital with a 10k+ medical bill?
I would prefer that a police officer not try to arrest a 10-year-old girl that's having a temper tantrum in her own home just because her mother is a shitty parent that can't handle her kid, much less have a trained officer of the law electrocute a little girl because she kicked him.

[Funka Genocide]

I would prefer that a police officer not try to arrest a 10-year-old girl that's have a temper tantrum in her own home just because her mother is a shitty parent that can't handle her kid.


you see like I was trying to say this, but then he totally just said it.

That's why he makes the big bucks.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

I would prefer that a police officer not try to arrest a 10-year-old girl that's having a temper tantrum in her own home just because her mother is a shitty parent that can't handle her kid, much less have a trained officer of the law electrocute a little girl because she kicked him.

But if we don't arrest her now her tantrum will be rewarded and she will have no respect for authority and grow up to be a hardened criminal! Who will be tased multiple times!
So clearly 1 tase now is preventing multiple tases in the future.

[Marc v1.0]

Tase a few to prevent needing to tase the many

EDIT: I'm completely with the "restraining a 10 year old isn't as easy as you people think" because it's true, but tasing the brat wasn't the proper thing to do at all. It was retaliation for a nut shot.

[Mr.Bookworm]

Tase a few to prevent needing to tase the many

They should have done it in front of the rest of her elementary school class.

Scare them straight.

[Funka Genocide]

I'm currently developing a method for pin-point low-orbit to surface tasering that will allow us to deliver non-lethal shocks to people on a semi-random basis. I feel this will lead us to a bettter society and ultimately global peace.

I was wondering if you'd like to help me test it Barrelpants, of course right now it's only in it's rudimentary stages, but I figure tasing you a few times for shits might garner some sort of viable data.

whaddaya say?

[stefan]

hey dude, people don't have scruffs of the neck.

just wanted to point that out.

that was kind of the point.

also, I'd call kicking someone in the balls an attack, unless there are parts of america where causing physical trauma to ones reproductive organs is considered a polite greeting.

yeah, the moms a shitty parent, but do you really think the cop would have been scot free of liability if he showed up and then told the mom to go fuck herself?

[Marc v1.0]

that was kind of the point.

also, I'd call kicking someone in the balls an attack, unless there are parts of america where causing physical trauma to ones reproductive organs is considered a polite greeting.

yeah, the moms a shitty parent, but do you really think the cop would have been scot free of liability if he showed up and then told the mom to go fuck herself?

Yes.

Parenting someone elses kid is not his job.

[Funka Genocide]

When you say "grab her by the scruff of the neck" that is taking people's responses just enough out of context to make them appear ridiculous, which is misleading.

For example, if I misquote you by saying something like: "Dude 10 year olds are wrecking machines, I mean seriously their low center of gravity alone is an insurmountable combat advantage. This girl is lucky to get off with a tazing, were it me I'd have put a few rounds of buckshot in her to soften her up. You do not want to fuck with a pissed off 10 year old."

[stefan]

Yes.

Parenting someone elses kid is not his job.

which is why every time this situation happens and the cop decides to take the "fuck this" option, its inevitably and invariably held up by the media as an example of police incompetence, for how dare they abandon a citizen in their time of need, right?

seriously, this entire thread seems to be less about tasers and more about everyone taking an outlet to express their "man, fuck the cops" outlook without actually considering the issue.

When you say "grab her by the scruff of the neck" that is taking people's responses just enough out of context to make them appear ridiculous, which is misleading.

WTF. They are 10. You pick them up.

if this doesn't convey the exact same sentiment as "grab them by the scruff of their neck" to you, then you have no grasp of the english language.

[Mr.Bookworm]

has little to no chance of causing any permanent harm

You do know tasers have killed people, right? Like, quite a few, actually. I believe that three hundred or so thing 334 Barrelpants said is the generally accepted figure. They can also result in a variety of nasty symptoms that comes with a shitload of electricity being dumped into your body, as well as the various things that can be caused by a sudden fall and general thrashing (like bones being broken!).

And maybe it's just me, but it seems that using a weapon intended for an adult's body mass on a child would cause these problems to become even more likely.

[Funka Genocide]

technically you can not classify a weapon designed to incapacitate a human being as "non lethal"

At best you can call them "less lethal."

Which really if you think about it, is sort of oxymoronic.

Tasers were invented to use on bad guys. bad guys that want to hurt you.

A 10 year old girl absent a firearm or some serious cutlery is not a bad guy. If she's throwing a tantrum because she doesn't want to take a bath, that doesn't mean she want to hurt you.

So if a 10 year old girl is not a bad guy that wants to hurt you, why are you using a taser on her?

What we're seeing here is general ignorance at work. Police are treating tasers as a sort of magic wand to wave on any situation that gets out of control, not having to justify it as they would a gun or a night stick. In most circumstances I'm pretty unconcerned with this, if they want to tase drunk frat boys at a night club or suspects that try to book it from the scene of a crime, go for it. But this particular instance is so obviously ridiculous that you really do need to investigate and institute some more stringent policies for employing a taser. because if it's legally ambigiuous enough to be used as a method of ending a temper tantrum, then it's too ambiguous.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

I'm currently developing a method for pin-point low-orbit to surface tasering that will allow us to deliver non-lethal shocks to people on a semi-random basis. I feel this will lead us to a bettter society and ultimately global peace.

I was wondering if you'd like to help me test it Barrelpants, of course right now it's only in it's rudimentary stages, but I figure tasing you a few times for shits might garner some sort of viable data.

whaddaya say?

We should only target small children, the greatest criminals our society has ever known. They can't even be tried for murder! What is keeping our children in check?

which is why every time this situation happens and the cop decides to take the "fuck this" option, its inevitably and invariably held up by the media as an example of police incompetence, for how dare they abandon a citizen in their time of need, right?

seriously, this entire thread seems to be less about tasers and more about everyone taking an outlet to express their "man, fuck the cops" outlook without actually considering the issue.

No I think this thread is entirely about the fact that a policeman deided he could go around tasing little children.

[Marc v1.0]

which is why every time this situation happens

Stop. Police do not respond to calls about kids who won't take a fucking bath.

Come on.

EDIT: On the taser deaths, they're situational incidents for the most part, where a secondary condition that was irritated by the tasing. They're the still the safest less-lethal technology (Mace/Pepper Spray are considered NON-lethal, as I recall).

[stefan]

You do know tasers have killed people, right? Like, quite a few, actually. I believe that three hundred or so thing 334 Barrelpants said is the generally accepted figure. .

yes, 334 in 8 years. do you have any idea how many times tasers were used in those 8 years?

the answer is, enough times that 334 is a pretty fucking small number in comparison.

yes, tasers have killed people. so have pencils. obviously, tasers have a somewhat higher use-to-kill ratio than pencils, but the amount of accidental deaths from tasers isnt nearly large enough to even remotely justify denying their use.

[Funka Genocide]

yes, 334 in 8 years. do you have any idea how many times tasers were used in those 8 years?

the answer is, enough times that 334 is a pretty fucking small number in comparison.

yes, tasers have killed people. so have pencils. obviously, tasers have a somewhat higher use-to-kill ratio than pencils, but the amount of accidental deaths from tasers isnt nearly large enough to even remotely justify denying their use.

would you use a pencil on a 10 year old then?

[stefan]

would you use a pencil on a 10 year old then?

no, because pencils are not designed to incapacitate someone with minimal lasting harm. Tasers, on the other hand, are.

[CABAL49]

I generally agree with you guys most of the time, but I have to disagree here. A good friend of mine works in a hospital, his job is mainly to determine who is crazy and who isn't. But he had this one story about a young girl in the 10-year range who sent two orderlies to the hospital. I am not talking about a few scrapes, but serious injuries. The best they could do was confine her in a room until she chilled out. It was some time before her own self-inflicted injuries could be treated.

The point is that tasers are considered to be non-lethal use of force. Police generally use them because they are believed to be a safe way to subdue someone. What went through the cops head probably wasn't "hey I get to taser a kid" but more like "I need to resolve this fast."

[Mr.Bookworm]

yeah, the moms a shitty parent, but do you really think the cop would have been scot free of liability if he showed up and then told the mom to go fuck herself?

Seriously, why the hell did the cops show up in the first place? It's not a situation in any way shape or form that requires police attention.

I don't get where you all are getting the idea that 10 year olds are strengthless. back when I worked at a convenience store I saw a ten year old slam the door so hard it came off the fucking hinges. they may not be as strong as an adult in any way, but they're still strong enough to cause serious injury to anyone trying to restrain them, especially if they stopped caring about how much theyre going to hurt themselves.

Hey, stefan, I want you to try something for me. Get a child around the age of 10. If you don't have a brother or sister, go kidnap one from elementary school or something. Now, do two things. Tell them to hit you. Notice how their weak, childish flailing does not hurt that much? They might accidentally nail you in the groin, but that's okay, because you're a big boy and a responsible adult, so you can take it. Now, while their flailing at you, put them in a bear hug and lift them off the ground. Notice how the child's small form and fairly low weight, combined with their lack of strength and combat prowess, allows you to subdue them fairly easily? Now held them until they get tired of trying to fight, and put them down.

Now return the kidnapped child to school, if you did that.

EDIT: no, because pencils are not designed to incapacitate someone with minimal lasting harm. Tasers, on the other hand, are.

No, Tasers are designed to put a lot of fucking electricity through someone, which incidentally subdues them by way of massive pain and involuntary muscular response.

EDIT2: The point is that tasers are considered to be non-lethal use of force.

As Funka pointed out, Tasers are technically not non-lethal, because they carry with their use the possibility of killing the person they're being used on, while say, pepper spray does not.

[Funka Genocide]

no, because pencils are not designed to incapacitate someone with minimal lasting harm. Tasers, on the other hand, are.


so is pepper spray. and a punch to the face.

Taser's are designed to cause pain and incapacitate. They are a weapon. Designed for combat between humans. Weapons are not meant to be used on children. I think it's been explained enough.

You wouldn't advocate beating the shit out a little kid that throws a temper tantrum would you? Because that's basically what a taser does, only instantaneously. You seem to think that just because it's very short lived violence that it's acceptable. What if the officer had punched her in the face and knocked her out without any lasting physical damage? Is that ok?

Anyways, I think your assumption that this is just a thread "raging against the man and his pigs" is way out in left field. Seriously, how many people on this forum do you really think have it out for law enforcement? Because we're so fucking street.

LAWLZ

[Marc v1.0]

No, Tasers are designed to put a lot of fucking electricity through someone, which incidentally subdues them by way of massive pain and involuntary muscular response.

They do that for the express purpose of subduing someone, so Yes, his statement is still correct. It's the intended function of the device. It is what it was designed to do.

The taser wasn't designed to just pump out electricity for shits and giggles and then someone found out you could subdue people with it, it was designed to subdue people.

[CelesJessa]

I found another article about the incident, just for reference. It seems a little less vague than the first one. Thought some of you might be interested. Also the girl is only 65 pounds.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/728622--cop-tasers-girl-for-resisting-bedtime
Tasering aside, I find the fact that he threatened her with jailtime pretty horrible too. Yeah, lets tell an emotionally troubled child that her parents will send her to jail for not obeying.

Because we're so fucking street.
Hellz yeah. Nobody be messin' with NPF dawg.

[Tev]

Stop. Police do not respond to calls about kids who won't take a fucking bath.

Come on.No, but they do respond to calls about domestic disturbences. That's what this was until the cop showed up to find out what was causing the disturbence.

No I think this thread is entirely about the fact that a policeman decided he could go around tazing little children.That's really not fair. The guy started out will all intentions of -not- tazing a 10 year old. Then he got assaulted by her (assaulting cops is still wrong right?).

In my mind I can see it going down something like this:

Cop: So what's the problem here?
Mom: My kid's out of control! If she comes at you, taze the bitch!
Cop: Ma'am, that's a dumb idea, she's like ten. Let me talk to her.
Kid: I don't wanna take a bath!
Cop: Riiiiiight, soooooo....you know what, why don't you just do what your mom says. I've got criminals I could be catching right now.
Kid: No, that's dumb and you're dumb. I'm ten and this is a tantrum!
Mom: Taze the bitch!
Cop: Lady, shut it. I'm not going to taze...
Kid: Heya! *Groin Kick*
Cop:.........I'm going to have to taze her.....dammit.

But no, he wasn't right in tazing her. He was however responsible for handling the situation and the idea of just locking her in a closet or something until she tires herself out is silly. Cops can't just hang around for a kid to run out of steam.

[POS Industries]

The point is that tasers are considered to be non-lethal use of force. Police generally use them because they are believed to be a safe way to subdue someone. What went through the cops head probably wasn't "hey I get to taser a kid" but more like "I need to resolve this fast."
The problem is that "safe way to subdue someone" and "it's A-OK to use them for what-the-fuck-ever" are growing ever more indistinguishable as tasers have become standard issue on the majority of American police forces. When you have all these reports like a man being tased for stuttering while asking officers for further assistance after rescuing six people from a burning house (http://www.fox8.com/news/wjw-firehero-gets-arrested-txt,0,4730352.story), a 76-year-old man driving a tractor in a parade being tased five times after making a wrong turn (http://news.aol.com/article/officers-fired-after-tasering-76-year/682197), and a deaf, mentally-disabled man being tased for being on a toilet too long (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/28/national/main5193064.shtml), it starts to become clear that we need some stricter guidelines in place for the use of these tools.

A ten-year-old girl getting tased in her own home for throwing a hissyfit is just another sign of a disturbing trend that's been emerging over the past several years.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

Anyways, I think your assumption that this is just a thread "raging against the man and his pigs" is way out in left field. Seriously, how many people on this forum do you really think have it out for law enforcement? Because we're so fucking street.


Well in interests of discolure I do in generalised forms but even so, this is fucking stupid.

[Marc v1.0]

Ok, yeah, if he didn't know what he was getting into until he got there, he couldn't just up and leave without getting a complaint filed or accused of being a bad cop or whatever crazy bad parents will say to blame their child on everyone but themselves

[stefan]

Ok, yeah, if he didn't know what he was getting into until he got there, he couldn't just up and leave without getting a complaint filed or accused of being a bad cop or whatever crazy bad parents will say to blame their child on everyone but themselves

no shit. or did you really delude yourself into thinking that this guy got all excited about the chance to taser the fuck out of a little girl and sped over posthaste?

[CelesJessa]

Looked up some information on tasers. (It's wikipedia, I know. Not the most credible but...)


Tasers were introduced as less-lethal weapons to be used by police to subdue fleeing, belligerent, or potentially dangerous subjects, often when what they consider to be a more lethal weapon would have otherwise been used.

...

their intended purpose is to circumvent the use of lethal force such as guns,
So if this is true, that means that the taser should be reserved to situations where they would use say, a gun, otherwise.

OH and according to wikipedia, the mode that he used the taser in is "intended to cause pain without incapacitating the target" rather than the other function that supposedly "creates an immediate and unavoidable incapacitation that is not based on pain and cannot be overcome" which means he went for the more painful route?

EDIT: oh yeah here's the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taser

[Mr.Bookworm]

Ok, yeah, if he didn't know what he was getting into until he got there, he couldn't just up and leave without getting a complaint filed or accused of being a bad cop or whatever crazy bad parents will say to blame their child on everyone but themselves

What?

She files a complaint, he gives his testimony (calling her a fucktard in it is optional), and his superiors throw it away as bullshit because they're going to take the word of a cop over the word of a lady who clearly doesn't know how to take care of her child.

That they even dispatched someone is pretty fucking amazingly stupid.

[Tev]

OH and according to wikipedia, the mode that he used the taser in is "intended to cause pain without incapacitating the target" rather than the other function that supposedly "creates an immediate and unavoidable incapacitation that is not based on pain and cannot be overcome" which means he went for the more painful route?I guess my initial question would then be this: Why the hell does a taser have a "pain mode" in addition to an "immediate and unavoidable incapacitation mode."

Inflicting pain just for the sake of it is not their primary function.

[stefan]

OH and according to wikipedia, the mode that he used the taser in is "intended to cause pain without incapacitating the target" rather than the other function that supposedly "creates an immediate and unavoidable incapacitation that is not based on pain and cannot be overcome" which means he went for the more painful route?

a taser doesn't have a switch you flip to change from "incapacitate" mode to "palpatine" mode. Drive Stun refers to when a projectile taser is used by holding it against someones skin instead of shooting them with electrode darts. the reason the cop used Drive Stun was probably because it was safer to jab the girl with the taser instead of firing needle probes at her when shes probably flailing the fuck around, as the flying probes could have, say, set the carpet on fire in case of a miss, or hit her in the eyes.

[POS Industries]

no shit. or did you really delude yourself into thinking that this guy got all excited about the chance to taser the fuck out of a little girl and sped over posthaste?
And the award for inappropriately hostile response goes to...

[Fifthfiend]

Ace posting by stefan in this thread.

In my mind I can see it going down something like this:

Cop: So what's the problem here?
Mom: My kid's out of control! If she comes at you, taze the bitch!
Cop: Ma'am, that's a dumb idea, she's like ten. Let me talk to her.
Kid: I don't wanna take a bath!
Cop: Riiiiiight, soooooo....you know what, why don't you just do what your mom says. I've got criminals I could be catching right now.
Kid: No, that's dumb and you're dumb. I'm ten and this is a tantrum!
Mom: Taze the bitch!
Cop: Lady, shut it. I'm not going to taze...
Kid: Heya! *Groin Kick*
Cop:.........I'm going to have to taze her.....dammit.

Hahahaha, wow.

[Marc v1.0]

no shit. or did you really delude yourself into thinking that this guy got all excited about the chance to taser the fuck out of a little girl and sped over posthaste?

No, I didn't "delude" myself at any moment with the erroneous thought that this grown man raced as fast as he could over to the house to eagerly tase the ever-living out of a young girl, nor have I expressed that.

I did, however, wonder why he had responded to such a silly call in the first place, why he continued to engage the situation instead of just telling the lady to deal with the kid. I did wonder, but I didn't express, if maybe it was a reflex response to being painfully struck in the crotch and not an intended act to spite the child or be a dick. I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt that maybe, JUST MAYBE, police training took over in a moment of possible intense pain (you don't shrug off being struck in the crotch like it was nothing, I don't care how "weak" the kid is, a rough glance of that area can bring someone to tears for a moment) and he just reacted on that instinct that they use in other situations to stay alive.

Maybe direct your venom at someone else?

EDIT: On the "just walk away and file a report, so what if she complains" you know damn well this could have just as easily turned into a police neglect somehow if she got hold of the right people. The media has no fucking scruples

[Tev]

I did, however, wonder why he had responded to such a silly call in the first place, why he continued to engage the situation instead of just telling the lady to deal with the kid.Not that this may be as solid as a counter-point as it seems in my mind right now but....have you ever seen the crap police have to deal with when it comes to domestic disturbance calls on COPS? This is nothing compared to the crap that ends up on TV for three hours every day.

[Fifthfiend]

EDIT: On the "just walk away and file a report, so what if she complains" you know damn well this could have just as easily turned into a police neglect somehow if she got hold of the right people. The media has no fucking scruples


Yeah the police officer that has faced zero consequences for tasing a little girl, the media would have just buried him if he'd gone ahead and... not... tased... a little girl.

[stefan]

Yeah the police officer that has faced zero consequences for tasing a little girl, the media would have just buried him if he'd gone ahead and... not... tased... a little girl.

if he just left the media would have played the kid up as a violent self-harming psychopath on the brink of grabbing a kitchen knife and slaughtering her parents.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

a taser doesn't have a switch you flip to change from "incapacitate" mode to "palpatine" mode. Drive Stun refers to when a projectile taser is used by holding it against someones skin instead of shooting them with electrode darts. the reason the cop used Drive Stun was probably because it was safer to jab the girl with the taser instead of firing needle probes at her when shes probably flailing the fuck around, as the flying probes could have, say, set the carpet on fire in case of a miss, or hit her in the eyes.

Hahahaha, oh man, you should totally read this over a few times and realise that you are discussing the optimal way to incapacitate a 10 year old girl having a hissy fit with a dangerous weapn.

[stefan]

Hahahaha, oh man, you should totally read this over a few times and realise that you are discussing the optimal way to incapacitate a 10 year old girl having a hissy fit.

and?

[Marc v1.0]

Yeah the police officer that has faced zero consequences for tasing a little girl, the media would have just buried him if he'd gone ahead and... not... tased... a little girl.

You know exactly what I mean. This isn't between "Police taser 10 year old girl" and "Police don't taser 10 year old girl, shame on them"

It could have easily been "Local woman outraged as Police refuse to help resolve her domestic disturbance call! Community speaks out about Police neglect." She already can't control her damn kid and actually called the police on her own daughter over a bath. The officer could have easily been "rude and combative over my distress" or some shit. It doesn't take a logical leap. People lie and decieve for less all the time to get some TV coverage.

No, her lying and raising a huge stink over it isn't as likely as people being outraged over him tasing her, but I bet the odds on him tasing a 10 year old weren't that high when he first got there either.

[Mr.Bookworm]

if he just left the media would have played the kid up as a violent self-harming psychopath on the brink of grabbing a kitchen knife and slaughtering her parents.

Except it would have never made the media.

A parent calling the cops to deal with a kid having a tantrum is like seventh page, one paragraph at absolute best.

A cop Tasering a kid having a tantrum? That's news.

EDIT: I realized that Fifth said this in less words like five posts earlier.

I feel so inadequate.

[POS Industries]

Kid: No, that's dumb and you're dumb. I'm ten and this is a tantrum!
I've fallen in love with this quote.

[Tev]

if he just left the media would have played the kid up as a violent self-harming psychopath on the brink of grabbing a kitchen knife and slaughtering her parents.

Actually, if he'd have left then nobody would have known or cared about this on a national level.

[stefan]

Actually, if he'd have left then nobody would have known or cared about this on a national level.

you say this in the face of all evidence that news outlets would run with it like nobodys business if the mother called them on a slow news day.

seeing as, you know, whenever the cops decide something isnt worth their time it almost always makes the news, no matter how significant.

[Tev]

you say this in the face of all evidence that news outlets would run with it like nobodys business if the mother called them on a slow news day.
Yes, yes I do. A cop going to a domestic disturbance call and deeming it not a police issue isn't news on the slowest of news days.

[Fifthfiend]

if he just left the media would have played the kid up as a violent self-harming psychopath on the brink of grabbing a kitchen knife and slaughtering her parents.

http://i606.photobucket.com/albums/tt148/fifthfiend/reactions/fnzmn5.gif

[bluestarultor]

Has anyone actually read CJ's article but her and me?

Officer Dustin Bradshaw was called to the home by a woman complaining that her daughter was being unruly and refusing to go to sleep. Bradshaw wrote that when he arrived at the home, he found Kiara Medlock "balled up in (sic) the floor crying and screaming."

She was having a standard tantrum, and wasn't even moving. He also knew exactly what was going on by his own admission.

After watching her mother attempt to get Kiara into the bathtub with little success, Bradshaw took the girl into the living room and threatened her with jail. That didn't settle things down. At some point, Bradshaw claims Kiara's mother told him to "taser her if I needed to."

"Kids take well to being threatened with jail time, right? Let's just move her and take her away from her mother for a bit to do that."

Bradshaw then tried to handcuff Kiara. But he couldn't manage that either.

"Handcuffs! Everyone loves handcuffs!"

To hear Bradshaw tell it, he was now in the midst of a full-on brawl on the living-room floor with Kiara, a Grade 5 student. The 65-pounder was "verbally combative ... struck me with her legs and feet in the groin," Bradshaw wrote.

"Hmm, maybe that's just my wife. She's calling me bad words and panicking now. I guess I'll just..."

That's when he reached for his holster and delivered a "very very (sic) brief drive stun to her back with my taser."

Unsurprisingly, Kiara's struggling stopped immediately. Bradshaw then cuffed her and carried her to his squad car, since she could no longer walk.

"Hey, that worked pretty well! I think she might be paralyzed!"





Yeah, I was trying not to get in on this one, but it seems like people are too wrapped up in the first article to see a more detailed account.

[Fifthfiend]

Has anyone actually read CJ's article but her and me? -QUOTES AND WORDS-

TBH most of this was pretty clearly said in the first article unless you were really working to come up with an excuse for why it's okay for a cop to tase a little kid.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

you say this in the face of all evidence that news outlets would run with it like nobodys business if the mother called them on a slow news day.

seeing as, you know, whenever the cops decide something isnt worth their time it almost always makes the news, no matter how significant.

My country has 4 million people and we had a study shwing that cops ignored, assessed there was no risk, to at least 100 of these cases a week.
This is not even counting ones where they showed and turned straight back around.
US has approximately 100 times more people which makes 10,000 cases a week at absolute minimum- probably far more.
If the media wants a story on that, there is an absolute ton of them out there. They couldn't include even 1% of them without filling up their paper.
Your argument is flat out ridiculous.

[Marc v1.0]

Maybe he was just playing along at first, trying to give the kid a little fright (Your parents never threatened to call an authority figure if you didn't behave?) and after the tasing he paniced a bit and didn't really know what to do.

I could be giving him too much credit, but I have to believe that some people are just trying to do good but then screw up.

I still think his training took over after a bad shot to the nuts.


Your argument is flat out ridiculous.

And yet they'll still single out accounts of police neglect in a ridiculous manner on slow news weeks.

Funny, huh?

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

If his training is to respond immediatly with a taser then this is a much bigger problem than originally countenanced. Cause holy fuck when did the police become the brownshirts.

And there is no way you can go from "trying to do good" to tasing a small child unless you are Anakin fucking Skywalker.

[bluestarultor]

TBH most of this was pretty clearly said in the first article unless you were really working to come up with an excuse for why it's okay for a cop to tase a little kid.

Yeah, my Internet has been running at a snail's pace ever since an area-wide outage this week, so it took me a lot longer to post it than it made sense for. Started back a couple pages when people were still arguing about the response to the call.

[Yumil]

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/1118091taser1.html

[Fifthfiend]

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/1118091taser1.html

http://i.cdn.turner.com/trutv/thesmokinggun.com/graphics/art4/1118091inside3.jpg

The face of evil.

[Marc v1.0]

If his training is to respond immediatly with a taser then this is a much bigger problem than originally countenanced. Cause holy fuck when did the police become the brownshirts.

Would you rather his first instinct to be to pull out a gun and shoot her?

You are correct that going directly to "Tase first, ask questions later" is wrong...when it is unwarrented. Your dislike of law enforcement is showing way too much, though. You're now saying that their first instinct upon being physically attacked is defend themselves is dangerous. So, if a grown man punched them in the gut, it wouldn't be alright to whip out a taser and pop him one with it?

Yes, I know, 10 year old, no real threat, etc etc. Reflexive reactions don't take that shit into account, though.

I am in no way saying that tasing a 10 year old is ok and was the right thing to do. I am also contesting your idea that they don't have a right to defend themselves if attack because they're cops and cops are bad is wrong.

Can't believe I have to actually make it a huge visable point..

[Fifthfiend]

Marc, you already conceded that in your own, most charitable version of events, the cop was deliberately scaring the fuck out of this small child, on the grounds of her not wanting to take a shower.

Yeah, if you deliberately terrify the shit out of a child who doesn't know any better, to the point that they lash out at you, you as a grown man do not get to defend yourself with a weapon against said 70-pound child. Doing so pretty much makes you a flat-out terrible human being IMO.

[Marc v1.0]

Marc, you already conceded that in your own, most charitable version of events, the cop was deliberately scaring the fuck out of this small child, on the grounds of her not wanting to take a shower.

Yeah, if you deliberately terrify the shit out of a child who doesn't know any better, to the point that they lash out at you, you as a grown man do not get to defend yourself with a weapon against said 70-pound child. Doing this pretty much makes you a flat-out terrible human being.

I said that I agree this is wrong. I put it in nice bold letters, too. I said it plainly, and clearly, and anyone that can read english can see that. I really hate that I have to be so very very forward with the fact that I agree it's a bad thing.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

I'm saying his first response should always be "Talk the person down". Police where I am from don't have weapons and we have one of the lowest crime rates in the world because peple are treated like people and not criminals to be beat upon.
If his first response was to "talk" and his second response "shoot" then he would assess there is no real threat. Why are we treating the populace like a threat to be put down. The military teach you to shoot first, if the police do- well we are effectively making the police a subset of the military.
That is training designed to put peple down by force.
Getting a bit off topic though.

More importantly- why was he even taking a taser to a domestic disturbance caused by a 10 year old? Even if this was a reflex action at some point the policeman decided to take a taser to this call-out knowing full-well the participant. What was he thinking when he suited up?

And lastly, if this policeman is such a blind slave to his training that he is going to respond with force to provocation to any danger he should be locked up as he clearly is a danger to society. If you can't make rational decisions in the heat of the action, you should not be a police officer. It's as simple as that. This man cannot so at the very least we shouldn't be arming him and then sending him out to solve disputes.

[Fifthfiend]

I said that I agree this is wrong. I put it in nice bold letters, too. I said it plainly, and clearly, and anyone that can read english can see that. I really hate that I have to be so very very forward with the fact that I agree it's a bad thing.

And then you followed it with a sentence that completely contradicted that, which is what I was responded to.

[Marc v1.0]

In general, OUT OF THE CONTEXT OF 10 YEAR OLDS ATTACK US IN FORCE, when someone physically strikes me, they have become a threat.

I understand where you are coming from, but self defense is self defense. I wouldn't expect you to take a beating from someone while trying to talk calming to them.

I in no way contridicted my stance that tasing a 10 year old for any reason is bad. I contested his point that police shouldn't defend themselves at all as a first reaction to being attack. I mean, god damn.

[Fifthfiend]

In general, OUT OF THE CONTEXT OF 10 YEAR OLDS ATTACK US IN FORCE, when someone physically strikes me, they have become a threat.

Okay well see everyone else in this thread is talking in the context of 10 year olds, HTH.

I contested his point that police shouldn't defend themselves at all as a first reaction to being attack. I mean, god damn.

Is it non-sequitur friday and nobody told me?

[Tev]

More importantly- why was he even taking a taser to a domestic disturbance caused by a 10 year old? Even if this was a reflex action at some point the policeman decided to take a taser to this call-out knowing full-well the participant. What was he thinking when he suited up?Most likely scenario? He was in his car driving along and got the call to respond. The taser, like all the rest of his work equipment was holstered on his belt where it belonged because he's a cop and those are the tools for his job.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

Surely he should tailor his tools to each job. Walking in with weapons just causes more problems than it solves.
Like I do different things in my job. I don't take every tool I have to every job.
If I'm going to subdue a 10 year old and I'm carrying arund a taser, something is already wrong.

[Marc v1.0]

Okay well see everyone else in this thread is talking in the context of 10 year olds, HTH.

Ya see, I was talking to Smarty, who was expressing his general displeasure at cops using force to defend against attacks.


I'm having a hard time understanding why you think I'd say I don't think it was right and I think it was totally ok in the same breath when you know that doesn't sound right at all. You could have asked for clarification instead of just assuming I was contridicting myself and reacting based on that.

Surely he should tailor his tools to each job. Walking in with weapons just causes more problems than it solves.
Like I do different things in my job. I don't take every tool I have to every job.
If I'm going to subdue a 10 year old and I'm carrying arund a taser, something is already wrong.

As pointed out, He only knew he was responding to a Domestic Disturbance, which could be anything so he prepared for anything. They might also be required to keep full gear with them at all times, I don't know.

[Fifthfiend]

Okay well see everyone else in this thread is talking in the context of 10 year olds, HTH.


Is it non-sequitur friday and nobody told me?

Oh my bad I guess I did miss Barrelpants's more general argument.

WHOOPS LOL

[stefan]

Surely he should tailor his tools to each job. Walking in with weapons just causes more problems than it solves.
Like I do different things in my job. I don't take every tool I have to every job.
If I'm going to subdue a 10 year old and I'm carrying arund a taser, something is already wrong.

how is a cop going to know exactly what he needs?

"domestic disturbance" could mean anything from a disgruntled child to a psychopathic ex boyfriend with a SMG breaking into a thanksgiving dinner. cops arent prescient, they dont know what a situation requires until they assess it.

[Tev]

Surely he should tailor his tools to each job. Walking in with weapons just causes more problems than it solves.
Like I do different things in my job. I don't take every tool I have to every job.

Nope, here in America cops use the utility belt approach.

Possible scenarios for this call include but are not limited to:
-Disturbance of mother and child/mother is being overly abusive and may get out of hand.
-Mother's boyfriend may be there and may get abusive. May also be part of the issue.
-Child got into mother/father's rad-killing unicorn motorcycle stash. May need to restrain rad-killing unicorn motorcycleged people.
-Child is waaaaaaaaay out of control and may need brought in to child services but first needs restrained.
-Child's disturbance is a product of mother/father domestic disturbance and will need investigated and dealt with.
-Hell, there may be a boyfriend with a rad-killing unicorn motorcycle problem in the basement who tries to run when he finds out his baby-momma called the cops to deal with her whiny brat.

These are all possibilities that I've seen on COPS. They actually happened so I'm not going to say a policeman isn't justified in taking whatever tools he needs to a situation.

EDIT: When did we world filter d.r.u.g.s. to "rad-killing unicorn motorcycle"?

[Wigmund]

More importantly- why was he even taking a taser to a domestic disturbance caused by a 10 year old? Even if this was a reflex action at some point the policeman decided to take a taser to this call-out knowing full-well the participant. What was he thinking when he suited up?

Tasers are standard patrol gear, this officer was certainly out on patrol near the girl's residence when he got the call to go over there. It's not like he was thinking when he armed himself up "I'ma gonna go beat up some kids today!", he most likely got ready wondering if some methed-up pigfucker was gonna try to ventilate him when he pulls over their pickup.

[NonCon]

"domestic disturbance" could mean anything from a disgruntled child to a psychopathic ex boyfriend with a SMG breaking into a thanksgiving dinner. cops arent prescient, they dont know what a situation requires until they assess it.

Dude knew straight up that he was going cuz a little girl wouldn't take a shower. This has been confirmed. He chose to get himself involved, he chose to threaten a ten year old girl with jail time for not taking a fucking shower, and then he tazed her when she freaked out when she had very good reason for freaking out, especially given her age. You are defending this. That you think this is even remotely justifiable, and go with "Oh noes what if the evil media talked about how terrible the police force is... What if people's feelings got hurt by the article!" as why it's justifiable shows just how borderline insane your argument truly is.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

Yeah I still think he could have left it in the car though. It's easier to calm down children if you are not packing. I will say that conceivably he didn't get much information on the disturbance before he went in in which case I'm ok with it (well I'm not but I'm not as not ok with it).

It doesn't matter anyway cause the problem is that he still just firing it like a mofo.

One thing I want to get back to: In report it said he tried to handcuff her. As far as I'm aware you should never use handcuffs on children because they can easily break their wrists which aren't strong enough to hold handcuffs. So did he have some special kiddie cuffs or what?
And why the fuck is he trying to handcuff her?
I should put out this happened before he got hit in the balls so even if we using the involuntary response argument he was still ridiculously over the line far before that even happened by trying to arrest this child.

[Yumil]

Dude knew straight up that he was going cuz a little girl wouldn't take a shower. This has been confirmed. He chose to get himself involved, he chose to threaten a ten year old girl with jail time for not taking a fucking shower, and then he tazed her when she freaked out when she had very good reason for freaking out, especially given her age. You are defending this. That you think this is even remotely justifiable, and go with "Oh noes what if the evil media talked about how terrible the police force is... What if people's feelings got hurt by the article!" as why it's justifiable shows just how borderline insane your argument truly is.
The report I linked, which has his self written report, says he was dispatched for a domestic disturbance, he didn't know about the child till he got there.

[Fifthfiend]

Gon' say I'm not actually upset by the cop carrying his taser and gun and shit with him, I mean w/ev it's not really an issue as long as he's not dumb about what he does with them.

[NonCon]

The report I linked, which has his self written report, says he was dispatched for a domestic disturbance, he didn't know about the child till he got there.

Officer Dustin Bradshaw was called to the home by a woman complaining that her daughter was being unruly and refusing to go to sleep. Bradshaw wrote that when he arrived at the home, he found Kiara Medlock "balled up in (sic) the floor crying and screaming."

Don't know which one's true, but I think it can be agreed that once he got there he actively made the situation worse in pretty much every way possible.

[Smarty McBarrelpants]

I'm concerned about it as a bigger issue but it kind of ridiculously minor compared to the fact that he actually used it.

[Nikose Tyris]

To respond to another statement about tailoring tools to the job:

A police officer must be ready for any situation no matter how minor the situation is, in case of escalation. It's a rare situation for a police officer to be encountered without his service pistol. Patrol duty requires the service pistol.

However, a traffic officer would not be carrying his pistol, nor should a meter maid.

I hope that clears up any questions you might have, Barrel. This is Canadian standard but American standards should be the same.

[stefan]

One thing I want to get back to: In report it said he tried to handcuff her. As far as I'm aware you should never use handcuffs on children because they can easily break their wrists which aren't strong enough to hold handcuffs. So did he have some special kiddie cuffs or what?
And why the fuck is he trying to handcuff her?

you say this after pretty much THIS ENTIRE FUCKING THREAD has been full of people saying that the cop should have "nonviolently restrained" her and cuffed her, while I've been trying to point out why this concept is stupid.

I'm not even sure if this is a positional 180 or if everyone here involved is just so heated were all saying shit for the sake of saying shit now without regard for prior statements. I mean, my argument when I got involved was that 10 year olds arent nearly as helpless as everyone was saying and I can't even figure out what fucking side Im on now.

[MasterOfMagic]

I'm certain they carry them at all times without regard to where they're going, just in case. I've no issue with that personally, I don't see where the problem is.

Using it though... yeah.

[NonCon]

while I've been trying to point out why this concept is stupid.

While defending tazing her. Honestly, I don't think he should have restrained her. He should have given the mother the middle finger, put on sunglasses, and moonwalked his ass back to the patrol car. But he didn't.

[Fifthfiend]

you say this after pretty much THIS ENTIRE FUCKING THREAD has been full of people saying that the cop should have "nonviolently restrained" her and cuffed her, while I've been trying to point out why this concept is stupid.

I'm not even sure if this is a positional 180 or if everyone here involved is just so heated were all saying shit for the sake of saying shit now without regard for prior statements. I mean, my argument when I got involved was that 10 year olds arent nearly as helpless as everyone was saying and I can't even figure out what fucking side Im on now.

Yes it is clearly a positional 180, as the "Barrelpants" node of the NPF Monomind is expressing a viewpoint which contradicts other views expressed by this single-minded, many-throated beast.

EDIT Looking back at the thread pretty much every other person who referred to handcuffs was indicating that you shouldn't be slapping them on a kid.

[Yumil]

Don't know which one's true, but I think it can be agreed that once he got there he actively made the situation worse in pretty much every way possible.
I agree. But you know people could not be entirely truthful when calling the police. The woman could of just said, "My daughter is being very violent and uncontrollable" without clarifying age or about what. Don't know what they told him over the radio, etc...so I'll just go with his report that he was responding to a domestic call.

But, it's pretty clear from his report he overreacted. He decided to agitate the situation by both trying to force the child in the bath and telling her she could go to jail.

[stefan]

While defending tazing her. Honestly, I don't think he should have restrained her. He should have given the mother the middle finger, put on sunglasses, and moonwalked his ass back to the patrol car. But he didn't.

I said tazing her is a better option because if a 10 year old is honestly in preteen rage mode, they will cause significant harm to themselves and others, plus property damage, and trying to use restraining actions designed for adults on a child is a very easy way of causing significant physical harm, not to mention theyre capable of hurting you fairly badly. I was never particularly talking about this specific incident so much as uncontrollable children in general, and when I started posting in this thread there was no indication as to just how wildly the girl was acting.

since I started posting in this thread, its been revealed that the kid wasn't being excessively pissy and the officer was being rather a douche. fine, he was in the wrong. this is not the type of situation I am defending.

[Fifthfiend]

this is not the type of situation I am defending.

This is however the type of situation described by the first linked article and every subsequent article on the subject.

[Wigmund]

However, a traffic officer would not be carrying his pistol, nor should a meter maid.

I hope that clears up any questions you might have, Barrel. This is Canadian standard but American standards should be the same.

In most Arkansas towns patrol officers are the traffic cops, and most traffic cops I've encountered here pack a service pistol, even on foot/bike patrol.

EDIT: Why hasn't the mother been interviewed by the press? The only articles I've seen have all been talking to the father.

[stefan]

This is however the type of situation described by the first linked article and every subsequent article on the subject.

and yet the thread was full of people claiming how all ten-year-olds universally are absolutely no threat whatsoever and can be feasibly restrained by a blind parapalegic with little to no difficulty, which is a ridiculous fallacy that I was pointing out the flaws of, with additional sidenotes of the police situation in question.

EDIT: also the first article is worded in such a way that it seems that the kid was being passively uncontrollable until the cop got there, at which point she started going crazy. this implies the situation I was talking about if not what actually ahppened.

[Fifthfiend]

and yet the thread was full of people claiming how all ten-year-olds universally are absolutely no threat whatsoever and can be feasibly restrained by a blind parapalegic with little to no difficulty, which is a ridiculous fallacy that I was pointing out the flaws of, with additional sidenotes of the police situation in question.

...These being the same people who were saying the officer should have slapped cuffs on the kid straightaway?

EDIT You know hwat no, I'm done here, PEACE

[Nikose Tyris]

@Stefan

Let's assume he's the standard for a cop in size. So, let's go with 5'9" and 180 lbs. (That's playing pretend I know.) {I'm quite a bit bigger then this.}

Now, let's ask if you either a) have any nephews or brothers, or b) Have you ever babysat someone. {I have a 10 year old sister right now so this is pretty easy!}

This is a tiny, tiny child having a tantrum. She is itty-fuckin-bitty. Like, the definition of 'small for her age'. {My 10 year old sister is larger and probably quite a bit stronger.}

Imagine this child you are temporarily in charge of is throwing a tantrum. You are attempting to calm the child down via whatever means you have. If you're a babysitter you probably have a number of little knacks you've picked up over the years. If you're an older brother you probably know a few cues the sibling will give off. If you're a cop, you probably have enough experience dealing with childish human beings or teenagers to have a good expectation as to how to deal with an issue.

The child has none of it, and bagshots you. [This is assuming the child actually bagshotted him, we're just assuming that, since that's the biggest piss-off move I could think of.]

Is your response as an authority figure to:

A) Reach over physically discipline the child using either a cuff upside the head or a spanking. (Which I often used. Arguments of spanking children can be another time or place, but I like to believe in a situation such as "I don't want to have a bath" that requires police attention, I think you could tan her ass with your bare hand and most people would be like "brat had it coming.")

B) Use a nonlethal weapon (Let's say you have a leather belt in your hand as an example.)

C) Inform the child that while it lashes at you and wants to cause you harm, it isn't capable of it, and continue attempting to calm the child.

D) throw the child over your shoulder, walk to the parent and hand it over, saying, "I can't deal with the little shit. It's your problem, deal with it."

I can safely say I've done A, C, and D. I have had a means to batter a child before but I have never felt the need to use any sort of weapon.

If you see that B is a viable option here in any of your own experience, let me know so I can safely know I need never allow you to supervise my future children.

Edit: I see your arguements are really clear that you're not like "Oh yeah totally blast the fuckin' kid" but really, is there any doubt in your mind at all that you would be unable to restrain a child on your own merit?

[bluestarultor]

In most Arkansas towns patrol officers are the traffic cops, and most traffic cops I've encountered here pack a service pistol, even on foot/bike patrol.

Yeah, I was pretty much under the impression all cops carried guns at all times while on duty. My school police liaison officers all carried guns with them from the time I moved into the area and got one in third grade up until the present. In fact, in high school, one of them even whipped it during a lunch period over a popped bag. Which is to say they hand the damn things out like candy to people way too jumpy to deserve one.

Tasers go to these same people and are billed as a safe and effective solution to all life's problems, so like candy, only more like LSD. And similar to LSD, the idea that they don't kill quite as much as bullets do sends them trippin'. Why deal with a problem, when you have a magic item that makes it all go away?



See, my belief is that as a gun replacement, tasers should have the training that guns have now, which is to say I don't think they put as much emphasis on the last resort aspect as they could, which leads to situations like this. Yeah, he tried other things first, but they guy totally manhandled the situation from the word go and the stuff that came before only served to get him to the point where things ended. I can totally imagine this girl freaking out because a stranger is trucking her around, and by golly, if she didn't scream something about not wanting to go to jail in her struggles, she deserves a medal for pure balls, because when I was in fifth grade, I sure as heck would have shat my pants over that and resisted with every last ounce of adrenaline in my body.



The point being this situation should never have gotten to that point. You have a kid who's already worked up being manhandled by a stranger, which is scary enough, and a cop, which is even scarier no matter what you teach your kids, because every kid from toddler on up knows cops take away bad people, and if you're being bad, they're not your friend, and to make matters worse, he's TELLING the kid he's going to cart her off, and yeah.

I sincerely hope the FBI DOES get in on this, because it's not just a problem with the individual, although there is that, and very much so. Cops just need to learn how to handle kids, which, judging by some of our earlier news stories, where they're shooting teens, they just don't. Frankly, with tasers on the rise, cops should only be shooting if someone else is shooting first, and then only if they can't tase them, and they should only be tasing people if they have a weapon or pose a deadly threat of another sort. A schoolgirl doesn't qualify unless she's got a weapon, and even then, if it's nothing bigger than a kitchen knife, I'd hazard a guess to say she wouldn't know how to use it anyway and she could be safely disarmed without playing Zeus and Salmoneus.

[Krylo]

Stefan, I have a little sister.

She is six years younger than me.

At sixteen I was capable of restraining her without hurting her. She was, at ten, larger than the girl in the article. I, also, at one point, picked up one of her ten to eleven year old friend, put her under my arm, and carried her through a bowling alley while she punched, kicked, and bit.

I was, amazingly, completely uninjured by this.

I have actually, in real life, physically dealt with/restrained children who were having MUCH WORSE temper tantrums than being curled up in a ball crying because they didn't want to take a shower.

It doesn't matter how much you're like, "OH MAN IT IS SO HARD TO RESTRAIN TEN YEAR OLDS YOU GUYS ARE STUPID!" when MANY OF US HAVE ACTUALLY RESTRAINED SHIT FREAKING TEN YEAR OLDS WITHOUT TASERS OR INJURY TO OURSELVES OR OTHERS.

I will probably get in trouble for this--but goddamn dude, you are a dipshit if you seriously believe a single thing you have said in this thread about what ten year olds are capable of.

[stefan]

Edit: I see your arguements are really clear that you're not like "Oh yeah totally blast the fuckin' kid" but really, is there any doubt in your mind at all that you would be unable to restrain a child on your own merit?

there's a difference between restraining a kid who is having a tantrum and restraining a kid who is totally flipping the fuck out. the difference is that a kid having a tantrum will stop with concerted effort, and are less concerned with causing damage so much as expressing emotion. a latter case, on the other hand, is when a child is so absolutely out of it that they'll throw themselves against a glass cabinet because theyre so angry they stopped considering their surroundings. option D, as you put it, is probably the stupidest thing you could do to such a kid because putting them over your shoulder puts them in a position to break your nose and gouge your eyes which they will do.

if I was a cop dealing with a kid who looked like they might break their head open on a kitchen counter because they're so busy they're attacking anyone in sight, I'd taser them because the shock, while painful, is preferable to them throwing themselves face-first through a pane of glass.

from what I took of the first article upon initial reading was that the kid was a case 2, not just some kid having a tantrum. since this isn't the case, Im not defending the cop on such grounds, but rather trying to explain why a taser is a reasonable avenue in such a situation.

[Nikose Tyris]

Stefan you are never allowed to watch my kids.

I have worked with Developmental issues kids. When a kid with downs flips the fuck out, he FLIPS THE FUCK OUT and pardon my choice of words but you know they all got that crazy retarded strength thing going on.

And yes an 18 year old man pinned and held a troubled child with Downs until he calmed down which took the better part of a half hour.

I did that. Me. That was me. Right here. I have pictures of me and this kid when he's happy too.

The cop could have done that. He did not. He chose otherwise.

Really, all you have to do is lay down on top of em, being careful not to stop their breathing, and wait it out.

A Taser is only just barely above a pistol as a reasonable response. I'm still nervous around my stepfather when he has his gear on because of being hit with one of those, and when questioned by police I usually talk with my hands safely behind my head so I never appear a threat.

That shit has a lasting fucking impression. It stays with you a long, long time. It is not a reasonable solution to a kid flipping the fuck out no matter what kind of chemical bender his brain is on, when the non-violent solution is to lie down on the kid.

Edit to the gun conversation:

Yeah, I'm only able to go by what I know from my region. It's cool to know that each area probably has their own rules and regulations on when to carry the pistol and when not to. That actually really interests me. Maybe we could make another thread to discuss it and whether it seems legit or not in General discussion, because I dunno, I don't think a meter maid needs to carry a service pistol but it is possible (although unlikely) to see danger in that situation, I guess.

[Kyanbu The Legend]

I mean yeah if we were talking that one 10 year old on the Boondocks from the Thugnificent episode then hell yes taser that motherfucker (if even that works!)

Would that even be enough to take it down!?

[stefan]

And yes an 18 year old man pinned and held a troubled child with Downs until he calmed down which took the better part of a half hour.

I did that. Me. That was me. Right here. I have pictures of me and this kid when he's happy too.

The cop could have done that. He did not. He chose otherwise.

It seems like you and the kid in question have at least some familliarity and friendship, which is probably why he calmed down at all. I mean, I stopped taking classes about psychology and development years ago, but if someone youve never met in your life tries to pin you while youre having an episode, it seems like itd be a lot more complicated to deal with.

[bluestarultor]

It seems like you and the kid in question have at least some familliarity and friendship, which is probably why he calmed down at all. I mean, I stopped taking classes about psychology and development years ago, but if someone youve never met in your life tries to pin you while youre having an episode, it seems like itd be a lot more complicated to deal with.

Stefan?

200 pound man > 65 pound little girl

This is pretty basic here.



Edit: Aside from that, he shouldn't have had to pin her at all. SHE WAS CURLED UP IN FUCKING FETAL POSITION! It was only when he started pulling her out of it that she fought by pulling her arms away, and then when he persisted, kicking him in the junk in self defense.

[Nikose Tyris]

It seems like you and the kid in question have at least some familliarity and friendship, which is probably why he calmed down at all. I mean, I stopped taking classes about psychology and development years ago, but if someone youve never met in your life tries to pin you while youre having an episode, it seems like itd be a lot more complicated to deal with.

While that is true, No, he still thrashed for over a half hour until he wore himself out. It's about patience and being committed to doing no harm, more then family and relationship.

These are kids that will do severe physical harm to their own family at times. Relationship doesn't stand. (I have a recent bite mark as evidence actually.)

Edit: Blues I think he can concede the point that even with Super Retarded Strength going on that a 65 lb girl isn't going to be much harm to anything beyond ears, eyes and testicles.

[stefan]

Edit: Blues I think he can concede the point that even with Super Retarded Strength going on that a 65 lb girl isn't going to be much harm to anything beyond ears, eyes and testicles.

yeah, my point was more that if the kid is flipping out theyll cause serious harm to themselves more than anything, re: throwing themselves into a glass-fronted cabinet after trying to bull-charge at someone.

as for pinning the kid, now that I think about it I don't think a cop is going to be willing to do that, since their first thought is going to be that if the kid gets free enough they might go for their pistol or something. not that that's full-freedom justification, but probably why they wouldn't consider it.

[Nikose Tyris]

At this point I'm going to step back from the discussion as I feel I've made valid points that can't be fully contested here, and I think that the situation is no longer as anger-fueled as when I came in.

[Mr.Bookworm]

yeah, my point was more that if the kid is flipping out theyll cause serious harm to themselves more than anything, re: throwing themselves into a glass-fronted cabinet after trying to bull-charge at someone.

as for pinning the kid, now that I think about it I don't think a cop is going to be willing to do that, since their first thought is going to be that if the kid gets free enough they might go for their pistol or something. not that that's full-freedom justification, but probably why they wouldn't consider it.

Hey, stefan. If a kid bull-charges you, you grab them. It's really easy, as we've established.

And also, the "kid going for his pistol"? You're kidding me, right? Even for this hypothetical homicidal little psychopath we're talking here, there's a reason for those straps on their holsters.

[stefan]

Hey, stefan. If a kid bull-charges you, you grab them. It's really easy, as we've established.

And also, the "kid going for his pistol"? You're kidding me, right? Even for this hypothetical homicidal little psychopath we're talking here, there's a reason for those straps on their holsters.

the straps are there to keep the gun falling out. if they were so secure as to slow down or inhibit unholstering a gun, then they would be useless as a holster, so I don't see where you're coming from.

[bluestarultor]

the straps are there to keep the gun falling out. if they were so secure as to slow down or inhibit unholstering a gun, then they would be useless as a holster, so I don't see where you're coming from.

Yeah, I don't know where things are like around you, Book, but around here, they're held shut by a simple snap. If the kid could snap her own pants, she could undo that.

On the other hand, a kid probably WOULDN'T know how to turn off a safety, even if one being pinned by a much larger adult COULD get the gun without the adult noticing, taking it away, and shoving it out of reach. Also, a pinned flailing kid is not likely to have grabbing the gun as his/her first thought, or at least not a ten-year-old. Maybe a really rotten kid of 13 or so who's too into video games they really have no business playing, but from my experience, that doesn't stop parents from buying them the things. The games, that is.


Edit: I should qualify that. It's not some easy snap that gives way just by pulling on the gun. I've had the opportunity to feel first hand how strong they are, and you definitely have to pull up on the tab to get it open. Basically, if a pinned person is going for the gun, they have to be thinking pretty clearly about it, and it's not something that will happen just by accident from flailing.


Edit for below: Yeah, a grade school kid is not going to go for the gun. They don't have the clarity to do that and are frankly to innocent for it to even occur to them. Arguing that is like arguing a toddler is liable to go homicidal on you. Just not happening.

[MasterOfMagic]

Its kind-of moot anyway. I mean, we're up to "she might grab his gun!" now? Really?

This is pure fantastical bullshit. Its possible yes, I guess, but the chance is minute and not really plausible.

[stefan]

Its kind-of moot anyway. I mean, we're up to "she might grab his gun!" now? Really?

This is pure fantastical bullshit. Its possible yes, I guess, but the chance is minute and not really plausible.

if you reread my post you'll see the point I was making was not "she might go for his gun!" but rather "A police officer more used to dealing with criminals is not likely to let someone within grabbing distance of his holster because his first instinct is to not let anyone get the chance to go for it." I wasn't saying to tase a kid because shes going to try and pull his gun, Im saying a cop isnt going to let a kid get to a position where they might feasibly get at it because that goes against all the rules theyre put through in training.

EDIT: although I dont want to go any farther along this particular tangent, Ill just add that as far as I've always been told, cops dont keep their guns safetied because having to undo the safety on your firearm will cost you precious seconds if shit hits the fan.

[Funka Genocide]

you know this is silly.

go have a kid, and taser it when it throws a tantrum. Enjoy your jail time for child abuse.

any further argument is invalid. Refer to above statement and don't be dumb.

[MasterOfMagic]

if you reread my post you'll see the point I was making was not "she might go for his gun!" but rather "A police officer more used to dealing with criminals is not likely to let someone within grabbing distance of his holster because his first instinct is to not let anyone get the chance to go for it." I wasn't saying to tase a kid because shes going to try and pull his gun, Im saying a cop isnt going to let a kid get to a position where they might feasibly get at it because that goes against all the rules theyre put through in training.
Okay? And so police officers now cannot get within arms reach of suspects to prevent them from grabbing their gun. This sounds true.

Or, its entirely possible that he could have restrained her and not let her grab his gun at the same time.

[FenrisWolf]

you know this is silly.

go have a kid, and taser it when it throws a tantrum. Enjoy your jail time for child abuse.

any further argument is invalid. Refer to above statement and don't be dumb.

http://www.guitarsandaudio.com/extras/shite/red_herring3.jpg

[Fifthfiend]

Gon' close.

Anyone who wants to continue coming up with hypotheticals of whatever level of plausibility in hopes of locating circumstances where it is cool to taser a kid, start a new thread for that.

Anyone who feels basically okay with saying it is generally not cool to taser kids, and has anything to say about the actual story that was initially this thread's topic, go on ahead and start a new, separate thread for that.