5'2", 110lbs. Can you handle him?

[Sweet Willy]

i didn't mean to imply that you said that; i only asked the question.

i saw nothing in the link that said anything specific enough about the circumstances to question the cops' decision to use a taser on the kid, and so i think it's a little early to second guess them for how they handled it.

I will concede that there is a possibility that there is something else to this. Maybe he had a knife. But from what we have, it was a 110lb kid that ran. That's it. I would think a weapon or other justification would have been made clear by the cops right away.

"Police said the teen was resisting arrest after bolting from his cousin's car during a traffic stop, and the use of the Taser was justified."

resisting arrest is justification for using non-lethal force, IMO.
a taser is non-lethal force.

Only problem is that the force turned out to be lethal. ooops. Sorry you're dead.

 

[KittenKoder]

I will concede that there is a possibility that there is something else to this. Maybe he had a knife. But from what we have, it was a 110lb kid that ran. That's it. I would think a weapon or other justification would have been made clear by the cops right away.

"Police said the teen was resisting arrest after bolting from his cousin's car during a traffic stop, and the use of the Taser was justified."

resisting arrest is justification for using non-lethal force, IMO.
a taser is non-lethal force.

TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. They could have grabbed him and cuffed him without the use of a taser.

Again, you go be a cop for a year, then return and say that.

 

[jgbkab]

If the kid had a weapon, it changes things.

Not necessarily. Check out what the dude was accused of and ff to the takedown.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRN-m8sppls]YouTube - Excellent Police Chase and Suspect Take Down[/ame]

 

[Zoom-boing]

Um ... no ... not really. You are just avoiding reality. The reality is, your town does not come close to the total number of people on the planet, thus a few hundred stories might prove a small percentage of the total incidents. One death caused because of an injury in which murder was not the intended result does not make an actual threat.

COPS are suing kitten. For being tased for one second.

But again, you and the couple others here are just weiners. Any cop worthy of the badge can handle a 110lb kid without a taser, without cracking his head, without a stick. If he isn't armed, two cops should be able to handle him, no problem. If they can't, they can't even get a nurses job at the mental hospital.

how long have you been a cop?

Del, I posted this earlier in the thread. My son is autistic, is 16, is 5'2" and weighs 110. I'm 5'2", 48 and have zero training of any kind in apprehending someone. I can and have brought my son down and have held him there, if necessary, by myself. Bull that two trained cops were unable to do this. The taser was not necessary.

ETA: Unless there is information not mentioned in the article. If the kid had a weapon for instance. But the article stated he had no criminal record, was learning disabled and was petrified.

 

[Article 15]

i didn't mean to imply that you said that; i only asked the question.

i saw nothing in the link that said anything specific enough about the circumstances to question the cops' decision to use a taser on the kid, and so i think it's a little early to second guess them for how they handled it.

I will concede that there is a possibility that there is something else to this. Maybe he had a knife. But from what we have, it was a 110lb kid that ran. That's it. I would think a weapon or other justification would have been made clear by the cops right away.

"Police said the teen was resisting arrest after bolting from his cousin's car during a traffic stop, and the use of the Taser was justified."

resisting arrest is justification for using non-lethal force, IMO.
a taser is non-lethal force.

I see a very small minor that could have been handled without the taser.

I don't think they should be punished or charged with anything but I certainly think they should have handled this one the old fashioned way.

 

[del]

I will concede that there is a possibility that there is something else to this. Maybe he had a knife. But from what we have, it was a 110lb kid that ran. That's it. I would think a weapon or other justification would have been made clear by the cops right away.

"Police said the teen was resisting arrest after bolting from his cousin's car during a traffic stop, and the use of the Taser was justified."

resisting arrest is justification for using non-lethal force, IMO.
a taser is non-lethal force.

TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. They could have grabbed him and cuffed him without the use of a taser.

you have absolutely no basis for that assumption.
sorry.

 

[Article 15]

"Police said the teen was resisting arrest after bolting from his cousin's car during a traffic stop, and the use of the Taser was justified."

resisting arrest is justification for using non-lethal force, IMO.
a taser is non-lethal force.

TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. They could have grabbed him and cuffed him without the use of a taser.

you have absolutely no basis for that assumption.
sorry.

Gotta disagree with ya on that one, del. She's stated over and over in the thread that she has an autistic teenage son about the same size that she has to restrain regularly.

 

[del]

So what? The taser was not necessary in this instance. If two cops couldn't bring this kid down they need more training.

Really, what part of "hurt him anyway" does that not account for? Again, no matter what, taking him down would have caused injury, they used what was considered the safest means of subduction. Either way, something can go wrong, no matter how you do it.

The taser was not necessary in this instance. TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. As I've posted several times so far, I've done it myself with my son.

A broken arm vs. being shocked with a device that has killed. Broken arm (or whatever) and physically taking him down should have been their first choice. They should have been capable of this.

and if this kid was one of the cops' son, that would be relevant.

 

[KittenKoder]

COPS are suing kitten. For being tased for one second.

But again, you and the couple others here are just weiners. Any cop worthy of the badge can handle a 110lb kid without a taser, without cracking his head, without a stick. If he isn't armed, two cops should be able to handle him, no problem. If they can't, they can't even get a nurses job at the mental hospital.

how long have you been a cop?

Del, I posted this earlier in the thread. My son is autistic, is 16, is 5'2" and weighs 110. I'm 5'2", 48 and have zero training of any kind in apprenhending someone. I can and have brought my son down and have held him there, if necessary, by myself. Bull that two trained cops were unable to do this. The taser was not necessary.

ETA: Unless there is information not mentioned in the article. If the kid had a weapon for instance. But the article stated he had no criminal record, was learning disabled and was petrified.

You also know what your son is and how he behaves. Police have their lives on the line 24/7, even when not in uniform. Your life isn't in danger either. So, to put it in clearer terms: The police are stopping someone they don't know, have no idea what they have on them, and have no clue if the person may be on drugs or drunk. They have to subdue them, period, no choice, that's their job and they have to do it. So ... again, be a cop for a year, then come back and say they did something wrong.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Kitten, we have yet to hear your opinion on the cops who have sued for taser injuries. Are they bad cops?

 

[Zoom-boing]

"Police said the teen was resisting arrest after bolting from his cousin's car during a traffic stop, and the use of the Taser was justified."

resisting arrest is justification for using non-lethal force, IMO.
a taser is non-lethal force.

TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. They could have grabbed him and cuffed him without the use of a taser.

you have absolutely no basis for that assumption.
sorry.

Yes, I DO. I have done this with my son, who is autistic and the exact age and size of this kid, by myself. Sorry.

 

[Zoom-boing]

TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. They could have grabbed him and cuffed him without the use of a taser.

you have absolutely no basis for that assumption.
sorry.

Gotta disagree with ya on that one, del. She's stated over and over in the thread that she has an autistic teenage son about the same size that she has to restrain regularly.

No, not 'regularly'. Used to be 'regularly'; now it's an exception. So, I'm even out of practice. And I had to restrain him about two weeks ago. And I did, by myself.

 

[KittenKoder]

TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. They could have grabbed him and cuffed him without the use of a taser.

you have absolutely no basis for that assumption.
sorry.

Yes, I DO. I have done this with my son, who is autistic and the exact age and size of this kid, by myself. Sorry.

But you know your son, they didn't know the perp.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Really, what part of "hurt him anyway" does that not account for? Again, no matter what, taking him down would have caused injury, they used what was considered the safest means of subduction. Either way, something can go wrong, no matter how you do it.

The taser was not necessary in this instance. TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. As I've posted several times so far, I've done it myself with my son.

A broken arm vs. being shocked with a device that has killed. Broken arm (or whatever) and physically taking him down should have been their first choice. They should have been capable of this.

and if this kid was one of the cops' son, that would be relevant.

Del, you're missing the point. It isn't that he's 'my son', it that it's TWO COPS, ONE 110 lb. kid. If I can restrain my son - who is the exact age and size of this kid - you mean to tell me two trained city cops couldn't with this kid? Bullshit. Again, unless there is more information than is being reported.

 

[brewerboy]

And I think a scared 16 yo boy's first instinct might be to run, call me crazy.

Bad parent either way you look at it ... if the kid was taught right he wouldn't have run, if innocent you know the cops are there to help, so you go to them.

Bad parenting? WTF?

I had excellent parents but I ran from the cops dozens of times when I was a teenager.

It was part of being a kid.

Only dozens though? Sally

 

[del]

TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. They could have grabbed him and cuffed him without the use of a taser.

you have absolutely no basis for that assumption.
sorry.

Yes, I DO. I have done this with my son, who is autistic and the exact age and size of this kid, by myself. Sorry.

he's your son.

hello?

 

[Zoom-boing]

how long have you been a cop?

Del, I posted this earlier in the thread. My son is autistic, is 16, is 5'2" and weighs 110. I'm 5'2", 48 and have zero training of any kind in apprenhending someone. I can and have brought my son down and have held him there, if necessary, by myself. Bull that two trained cops were unable to do this. The taser was not necessary.

ETA: Unless there is information not mentioned in the article. If the kid had a weapon for instance. But the article stated he had no criminal record, was learning disabled and was petrified.

You also know what your son is and how he behaves. Police have their lives on the line 24/7, even when not in uniform. Your life isn't in danger either. So, to put it in clearer terms: The police are stopping someone they don't know, have no idea what they have on them, and have no clue if the person may be on drugs or drunk. They have to subdue them, period, no choice, that's their job and they have to do it. So ... again, be a cop for a year, then come back and say they did something wrong.

Yes I do know my son. He's strong and he bites and he kicks. Soon I won't be able to restrain him if I need too. But I can now and he's the same size as that kid.

And you insist on ignoring the fact that TWO TRAINED COPS could have taken ONE 110 LB. kid down and cuffed him without the use of the taser. Had they done this, that boy would be alive today. (Yes, you will respond with 'but he could have hit his head and died').

 

[Zoom-boing]

you have absolutely no basis for that assumption.
sorry.

Yes, I DO. I have done this with my son, who is autistic and the exact age and size of this kid, by myself. Sorry.

he's your son.

hello?

Two trained cops, one 110 lb. kid. Hello?

 

[Sweet Willy]

This report comes at the same time that police officers in five states have filed lawsuits against Taser International claiming they suffered serious injuries after being shocked with the device during training classes.

One officer, a Missouri police chief, alleges that he suffered heart damage and two strokes after he volunteered to be shocked with a Taser in April 2004, while hooked up to a cardiac monitor that was supposed to show the Taser was safe. The officer also claims he suffered hearing and vision loss as well as neurological damage.

Other injuries claimed by the officers involved include spinal fractures, burns, a dislocated shoulder, and soft-tissue damage. A previous lawsuit file in February 2004 alleged a sheriff’s deputy suffered a fractured back in 2002.

The lawsuits challenge Taser International’s central marketing claim that its device is safe and charge the manufacturer of misleading its customers concerning the potential risks posed by the stun guns. Taser is also accused of minimizing and misrepresenting the 2002 fractured back case even after its own doctor found a one-second shock from a Taser caused the injury.

The lawsuits also allege Taser International withheld reports of injuries to at least 12 other police officers and that the company has ignored credible research suggesting the device can be extremely dangerous, if not fatal.

Police Officers From Five States Sue Taser International for Serious Injuries Suffered During Stun G

 

[Article 15]

you have absolutely no basis for that assumption.
sorry.

Gotta disagree with ya on that one, del. She's stated over and over in the thread that she has an autistic teenage son about the same size that she has to restrain regularly.

No, not 'regularly'. Used to be 'regularly'; now it's an exception. So, I'm even out of practice. And I had to restrain him about two weeks ago. And I did, by myself.

My bad. I misread your posts.