Police Taser 14 Yr Old...

[FridgeMagnet]

Maybe she thought - since she hadn't actually done anything wrong - she had no reason to be scared and intimidated by the police.

Yes, she probably didn't think that she should treat the situation as being equivalent to some random psychopath threatening her for no reason.

 

[likesfish]

US police not exactly unknown for using tasers
so if he gave her a warning he was going to tase her not exactly sure why he thought a taser was the appropiate response for stroppy teenager running away
probably thought she can outrun me but she can't outrun a taser

 

[Azrael]

Your tone implies victim blaming quite heavily. Either that or you were making a completely pointless statment of obvious fact.

I was making a general point that victims are often (not always) responsible for these confrontations by ignoring warnings, or resisting arrest. This isn't blaming them for any subsequent assault by the police, or giveing officers a free pass.

Well yeah, but that's because the ACLU is largely made up of naive liberals with an absurd level of faith in the courts.

What's naive about advising people that fighting heavily-armed police officers will end badly? That's the opposite of naive.

The word is spelled "d-e-f-e-n-c-e", unless you're an American, you feeble-minded oaf.

If you want to go round Urban waging war on typos, adopting the language of a 1930s eugenicist is a strange tactic.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I was making a general point that victims are often (not always) responsible for these confrontations by ignoring warnings, or resisting arrest. This isn't blaming them for any subsequent assault by the police, or giveing officers a free pass.

You can be responsible for something but not to blame for the consequences? Perhaps I am missing something here but that seems like an odd definition of responsibility.

also an entirely irrelevant point to bring up on this thread

 

[Azrael]

You can be responsible for something but not to blame for the consequences? Perhaps I am missing something here but that seems like an odd definition of responsibility.

Not if the consequences are grossly disproportionate to the action, like electrocution is in this case.

also an entirely irrelevant point to bring up on this thread

I think it's highly relevant. It's fear of violent confrontation that's driven the police to tool up with a small arsenal of weapons, both here and in the states. Criminals, reasonably enough, take their cue from casual and blanket anti-authoritarianism. If people refuse to co-operate it compels the police to rely on force, and escalation follows. Tasers are a direct consequence of some of the attitudes displayed in this thread.

End result: the police see overwhelming force as the default option when it comes to confrontation, and you end up with madness like electrocuting a 14-year-old girl.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Obedience to lawful authority isn't the be all and end all of good citizenship but it's a good place to start.

it absolutely is not it's the job of every citizen to question all orders.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Not if the consequences are grossly disproportionate to the action, like electrocution is in this case.

I think it's highly relevant. It's fear of violent confrontation that's driven the police to tool up with a small arsenal of weapons, both here and in the states. Criminals, reasonably enough, take their cue from casual and blanket anti-authoritarianism. If people refuse to co-operate it compels the police to rely on force, and escalation follows. Tasers are a direct consequence of some of the attitudes displayed in this thread.

End result: the police see overwhelming force as the default option when it comes to confrontation, and you end up with madness like electrocuting a 14-year-old girl.

Er, wait. "I am responsible for not stopping when a police officer tells me to stop" is a truism; unless I was possessed by demons or programmed by the Illuminati mind control lasers, that would be the case. If it's just a question of being responsible for the action it's therefore true but irrelevant to the ethical status of the following actions, just like if I say "no" if a mugger tells me to give him my phone.

But you're not really stopping at that are you? This idea that the police are electrocuting people who pose no threat in the slightest to them because of some escalation of attitudes regarding violent confrontation... that's just nonsense, I'm sorry. There's absolutely no indication of that at all. "If people refuse to co-operate it compels the police to rely on force" - no, absolutely not, even under the set regulations that's untrue.

 

[In Bloom]

I was making a general point that victims are often (not always) responsible for these confrontations by ignoring warnings, or resisting arrest. This isn't blaming them for any subsequent assault by the police, or giveing officers a free pass.

So she's responsible for what happened, but she's not to blame?

What's naive about advising people that fighting heavily-armed police officers will end badly? That's the opposite of naive.

What's naive is assuming that the courts are a neutral agency that are designed to serve "the people".

 

[Azrael]

If it's just a question of being responsible for the action it's therefore true but irrelevant to the ethical status of the following actions, just like if I say "no" if a mugger tells me to give him my phone.

I agree, which is why I said the officer appears to be guilty of a serious assault.

But you're not really stopping at that are you? This idea that the police are electrocuting people who pose no threat in the slightest to them because of some escalation of attitudes regarding violent confrontation... that's just nonsense, I'm sorry. There's absolutely no indication of that at all. "If people refuse to co-operate it compels the police to rely on force" - no, absolutely not, even under the set regulations that's untrue.

If people refuse to co-operate, the police have no option but to rely on force. How is this nonsense? How else can the police make unco-operative people submit to coercive actions like arrest?

English police now waddle around under the weight of weapons and armour, including tasers, where before they had a bit of wood. Why is this? It's not just adopting new technology: they could have tooled up with nightsticks, guns and mace decades ago if they'd wished. It's a change in culture.

Check out US police blogs. They talk about establishing dominance over a situation. That's the attitude that leads to cops going taser-happy. If you don't like it, you must support policing by consent, which relies on people co-operating.

So she's responsible for what happened, but she's not to blame?

I'm not saying that Ms Martinez in particular is responsible for anything, since I don't know the full facts. If she did ignore the police without good excuse, she's responsible for the confrontation: but not the excessive force, since they're distinct actions.

What's naive is assuming that the courts are a neutral agency that are designed to serve "the people".

But that's beside the point: which is that fighting in court is preferable to brawling in the street with heavily armed cops. Not perfect, preferable. Do you agree or disagree with this?

And given that the ACLU has spent decades establishing due process protections like Miranda warnings and the right to have a lawyer sit-in on interrogations, I think they're well aware of the system's flaws.

Those due process guarantees gives suspects an alternative means of fighting false accusations. I support them precisely because I hate blind obedience. But the trade-off for having them is submitting to lawful authority.

In what circumstances do you think people should obey the police?

 

[invisibleplanet]

The correct response to the flight of this girl from a policeman who had been called to give her a talking to by a desparate mum would have been to LET HER RUN and then link the mother to some social support for teens who are being groomed by an older man via cellphone.

This isn't the only case of cops tasering a 14-year old. Google '14 year old tasered' and see there are many incidences of this happening in north America.

 

[likesfish]

OH course thew appropiate response is not to use force then but the cop was obviously an idiot they are not just an american thouigh.
did sentry duty once on an army camp that did'nt have a fence round it and a public footpath often used by dog walkers round it.
spent most of the day running around in full kit with a loaded rifle asking politely if dog walkers would'nt walk this away again because of the security alert.
We had a yellow card that said after 3 clear warnings if somebody did'nt stop you could shoot obviously nobody you would think would shoot.
one cretin did get as far as the 2nd warning before the other pair of sentry's found said mong
he was taken back to the guardroom for some kinitic instruction