Police Tazer use now regulated
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 7,662
Likes: 1
From: Long Beach, CA
Police Tazer use now regulated
Direct quote taken from the NMA
"Excessive Force Ruling Could Limit Police Tasering
The U.S. Supreme Court established a three-part test to determine when excessive force by police is justified.
Is the officer being threatened?
Is the suspect attempting to flee?
Does the severity of the alleged offense support the use of significant force?
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled recently that the use of a taser by police in a traffic case did not meet those three criteria. As a result, the police officer who did the tasering was refused immunity by the court. Legal scholars have noted the significance of the appellate decision: It does not give deference to the use of force by the police and, in particular, it limits the use of a taser.
The case that triggered this ruling involved Carl Bryan, a California driver who was stopped twice by police --- for speeding one time and for not wearing his seat belt the other --- while attempting to track down a friend who earlier took Bryan’s car keys by mistake. The court records indicate after the second stop, Bryan became agitated. He yelled gibberish, pounded his thighs, and was dressed only in boxer shorts and shoes. After being tasered, Bryan fell and broke four of his teeth. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the case to go forward against the officer who shot Bryan with the taser, noting that “traffic violations generally will not support the use of a significant level of force.”
The 9th Circuit covers much of the western region of the U.S., but the precedent set by this ruling could impact judicial decisions across the country. It is estimated that over 17,000 law enforcement agencies in the U.S. use tasers or similar electricity-conducting devices. Some of those agencies have already outlined more stringent criteria for their use, but for those that haven’t, the Bryan decision could have a major impact."
"Excessive Force Ruling Could Limit Police Tasering
The U.S. Supreme Court established a three-part test to determine when excessive force by police is justified.
Is the officer being threatened?
Is the suspect attempting to flee?
Does the severity of the alleged offense support the use of significant force?
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled recently that the use of a taser by police in a traffic case did not meet those three criteria. As a result, the police officer who did the tasering was refused immunity by the court. Legal scholars have noted the significance of the appellate decision: It does not give deference to the use of force by the police and, in particular, it limits the use of a taser.
The case that triggered this ruling involved Carl Bryan, a California driver who was stopped twice by police --- for speeding one time and for not wearing his seat belt the other --- while attempting to track down a friend who earlier took Bryan’s car keys by mistake. The court records indicate after the second stop, Bryan became agitated. He yelled gibberish, pounded his thighs, and was dressed only in boxer shorts and shoes. After being tasered, Bryan fell and broke four of his teeth. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the case to go forward against the officer who shot Bryan with the taser, noting that “traffic violations generally will not support the use of a significant level of force.”
The 9th Circuit covers much of the western region of the U.S., but the precedent set by this ruling could impact judicial decisions across the country. It is estimated that over 17,000 law enforcement agencies in the U.S. use tasers or similar electricity-conducting devices. Some of those agencies have already outlined more stringent criteria for their use, but for those that haven’t, the Bryan decision could have a major impact."
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 7,662
Likes: 1
From: Long Beach, CA
Originally Posted by Wildncrazy,Jan 26 2010, 02:28 PM
Hallelujah! The show Cops has made for an increase in police brutality. They now think it's cool.
Well actually most of them already did.
Well actually most of them already did.
So true! and judge dredd. modern day pigs idol
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjGWuROfm54 [/media]&feature=related
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,531
Likes: 0
meh, if youre getting tazed by cops chances are you're acting like a ****in retard. I have no sympathy for them. Cops have enough shit to deal with, other than to think "is this guy going crazy, gonna flip out then pull a gun?" taze the bastard and hes down for the count.
If people kept giving cops less shit, generally cops would give people less shit too..except for the powerhungry assholes.....
If people kept giving cops less shit, generally cops would give people less shit too..except for the powerhungry assholes.....
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 7,662
Likes: 1
From: Long Beach, CA
Shit, cops think its a game to just taze anything that moves, why do you think congress is putting the LAW down on the cops asses finally? Cops are pussies as it is, they are threatened and intimidated by their own shadows and even try to taze falling objects.
Cops cant go around disrespecting and abusing people and expect them to just take it. I can think of many other professions that are MUCH more dangerous and hazardous than being a cop. The media and propaganda surrounding a cops life being hard is bullshit and koolaid. Id say that actual dangerous encounters are probably less than 5% of their deal. Domestic disputes and traffic stops are most definitely the majority of their field.
Respect is a two way street, it does not come free because youre some prick with a badge, respect must be earned no matter who or what you are. Cops have a bad reputation because they earned it. They rather **** with people doing 33 in a 30 than actual real police work like violent crime and GTA, and I know most cops are total pussies because they are toatlly nice and sweet to hardened criminals, but the cops are then bullies and total dicks to good people who do the right thing.
Cops cant go around disrespecting and abusing people and expect them to just take it. I can think of many other professions that are MUCH more dangerous and hazardous than being a cop. The media and propaganda surrounding a cops life being hard is bullshit and koolaid. Id say that actual dangerous encounters are probably less than 5% of their deal. Domestic disputes and traffic stops are most definitely the majority of their field.
Respect is a two way street, it does not come free because youre some prick with a badge, respect must be earned no matter who or what you are. Cops have a bad reputation because they earned it. They rather **** with people doing 33 in a 30 than actual real police work like violent crime and GTA, and I know most cops are total pussies because they are toatlly nice and sweet to hardened criminals, but the cops are then bullies and total dicks to good people who do the right thing.
Trending Topics
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,531
Likes: 0
^nah, I hear where youre coming from. Respect def is two ways...but if you dont give cops any respect, dont expect to get any back. Maybe its hawaii cops in general, but most of them are pretty chill. there are a few I have run into that were true powertripping assholes, but overall, they're cool. I've met lots of cops - from getting speeding tickets, to getting pulled over for random shit, to helping me out after an accident, to helping ME help others out, etc...?
Out of all of them, only 1 was an asshole. the others, even the ones who pulled me over for "racing" a friend was really nice/respectful. The one asshole was some old guy who got stuck on "speeding ticket" patrol, probably bitter at the world or something.
Out of all of them, only 1 was an asshole. the others, even the ones who pulled me over for "racing" a friend was really nice/respectful. The one asshole was some old guy who got stuck on "speeding ticket" patrol, probably bitter at the world or something.
