User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:35:21 PM EDT
[#1]
Another classic example of the difference between Law Enforcement and the peace officer.
The LEO live in condition red and believe the whole world is out to kill them, so they are always flustered and in a state of hysteria. The peace officer on the other hand would have empathy with the victim, taking into consideration the age and the likely feelings of anxiety of nearing the end of ones life, with the reality of it being more so with a sick friend in a hospital. The female cop should have had a cup of coffee and a donut with the victim, could of tried befriending instead of going condition red and attacking as if it was all and elaborate plan to trap and kill another JBT. Is it that hard to discriminate between a crack head criminal in an ally and a distressed person in a hospital? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:35:59 PM EDT
[#2]
She's SEVENTY FIVE YEARS OLD. Can you make a judgement call? Can you actually think for yourself? Holy shit, you're like a fuckin' gastapo robot. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:36:54 PM EDT
[#3]
I have never been tased so I dont know what its like but I do know that elderly people can be as dangerous as anyone and I can see the old Lady getting really hurt if you tried to wrestle her into submission. I see it as a no win situation for the cops.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:37:12 PM EDT
[#4]
Well said! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:40:38 PM EDT
[#5]
and forgetting completely about the victim. Because you feel sorry for the suspect, you completely ignore the victims wishes of having the suspect immediately removed from their building or arrested. If someone trespasses in your home to you want the cops to sit down and have a cup of coffee with the trespasser at your kitchen table? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:42:43 PM EDT
[#6]
Good point! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:43:46 PM EDT
[#7]
No arguement here in my view. It would be appropriate for "Hattie" to call a back up and have them both grab her by the arms and escort her out. It may have taken a little patience to get her moving along, but she is 75, maybe a little out of it. Being discreet is part of being a cop, or at least a good one, and I for one would feel like a complete DICK, if I couldn't get that lady on her way without a taser. Not to mention what you're going to get from your fellow officers once you get to the PD locker room after shift. As a supervisor I would question the judgement of my officer that used the taser in that situation. Thats the kind of crap that makes people hate cops.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:44:24 PM EDT
[#8]
Maybe you should stop comparing an accident in shop class to a taser. You must think that all 75 year olds are gentle creatures that will willingly comply with all verbal orders without a fuss. I am not worried about my judgement, just your apparent lack of any knowledge on the subject matter you are so quickly criticizing. The Taser has more in common with a stun gun than a shop accident. I have been zapped plenty of times with a stun gun and have no scars to show for it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:46:51 PM EDT
[#9]
BUT did her dog come through it okay???
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:47:01 PM EDT
[#10]
Good point. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:59:29 PM EDT
[#11]
I guess I missed this... as I read the article, it says that the "friend's" relative wanted this "perp" out. Does this relative live in the room that the "perp" was trespassing in? Who was the victim? The owner of the nursing home as far as I can figure. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 12:59:34 PM EDT
[#12]
Same voltage in a Taser +/- 5Kv as my 'shop' accident. Probably the same amperage, as well. Anything over a tenth of an amp can kill a person. Second, I know many 70+ y/o persons. Quite a few of them have arthritis. None of them have any great strength left, and aren't too spry. If a 35 y/o cop can't handle them, they have no business being in uniform. And if you see nothing wrong with Tasering an unarmed, emotional elderly woman, then you have no business being in uniform either. I can see why some here consider you to be the premier JBT. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:01:43 PM EDT
[#13]
Please explain what you mean by "handle." |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:08:16 PM EDT
[#14]
Stop the forward progress of the womans arthritic arm, turn her around, and gently guide her to the exit while talking to her in a calm manner. The officer had no control over the situation, which was her bad. Moving faster than an elderly woman isn't hard, and keeping her off balance is even easier. What would have been so hard about asking the old woman to sit down for a sec while the officer inquired about her friend? That way the woman would have had word about this friend, and could go away happy. The staff would be rid of the 'trespasser', and no one would have been injured or arrested. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:10:38 PM EDT
[#15]
Kimbrell went to EdenGardens of Rock Hill, a retirement home on Constitution Boulevard, Friday evening to visit a friend who was scheduled to have colon surgery this week, she said. Soon after she arrived, a staff member called police to have her removed for trespassing. A relative of the friend told an EdenGardens administrator she did not want Kimbrell there, said Larry Boesen, the home's executive director. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) Relatives of the patient didn't want the suspect to visit. 2) If the patient is incompetent, they are well within thier Right's to make such a request. 3) The retirement home can also decide who is allowed on their property. 4) The "soon after she arrived" part makes me think that Kimbrell was recognized by staff, perhaps due to prior incidents at the home. 5) I'm guessing, but it would also seem likely that the staff asked her to leave, w/o success.
Most of the "holds" police put on people are "compliance holds". That means the wrench on a limb, until it causes pain. The person "complies" rather than have that continued pain. If you are suggesting that approach, elderly people's bones, muscles, tendons, etc, aren't the same as a younger person's. Using the "kung-fu-grip" on an elederly person can very easily result in broken bones, torn muscles, and ripped tendons. Not to mention extensive bruising, just from grabbing on to an elderly person. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:12:41 PM EDT
[#16]
Do you taze the dog before or after granny?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:13:13 PM EDT
[#17]
According to the police report, Kimbrell was sitting in a chair in a waiting area when Macon, 35, ordered her to leave several times. Kimbrell refused, jerking her arms away when Macon tried to lead her toward the door. Police say Kimbrell eventually got up but walked toward the cafeteria after spotting someone she knew. At that point, the officer blocked Kimbrell and told her she was under arrest. Kimbrell then swung her arm at the officer, according to the police report. What would be so hard about reading and understanding the article, before making comments? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:15:31 PM EDT
[#18]
That is more force than the TASER, and a violation of use of force policy. Making you at risk of loosing you job, and assuming the civil liability of any injuries she sustains. When you follow policy the liability is on your employer. When you violate policy the liability is on you. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:15:58 PM EDT
[#19]
 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:16:20 PM EDT
[#20]
Dogs are for shooting, Grannies are for Tazing. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:17:58 PM EDT
[#21]
A loost job is no joking matter!  Again, would you consider it child abuse to taze children instead of spanking them or forcing them to go to "time-out?" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:18:10 PM EDT
[#22]
The usual suspects and the usual assinine outlooks. Especially from the resident militia guru.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:18:34 PM EDT
[#23]
It's a deadly incident when the skull of a 75 year old woman hits the floor after being tasered. Injury could be severe despite the po-po's assurance that it is only one level more than a verbal command.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:20:41 PM EDT
[#24]
Hospitals are not private, there are a few but they are rare, most hospitals recieve public funding besides there is a very big difference between a private dwelling and business which a hospital is. The fact remains you are dealing with people here, the individual right always trumps codes. Citizens manage to live and work every day in the same city cops do and the citizens manage to make it through without a heavy combat load of weapons comm gear and scores of back-up, the attitude of "I am the law fear me" is creating the very problem the peace officer is to prevent. Friendly persuasion and reason does work. Leave the MP attitude for the marines. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:20:43 PM EDT
[#25]
Elderly persons get ornery when some young whippersnapper tries to give them orders. Do you have comprehension problems yourself? Did the article mention the officer asking about her friend? No. So it seems the officer started barking out orders to the old woman. hence, my comment about asking about the friend would have bearing, yes? The officer was not mentioned even trying to defuse the situation, but straight off ordering the woman out. The old woman was wrong, sure, but that cop is an idiot. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:20:45 PM EDT
[#26]
Possibly, but as long as it doesnt violate state law or department policy the cop is covered. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:27:55 PM EDT
[#27]
So Tasering someone who will then fall to the floor (remember, she had 6 recently broken ribs) is less force than putting your hand up to stop her arm?!!!! Bullcrap! That would fall under 'keeping from getting hit' rather than use of force. And I don't see someone with arthritis and six busted ribs swinging at anybody. Broken ribs hurt just a tad, yes? Makes breathing a little difficult, yes? And 75 y/o women do NOT heal all that fast. So I think that police officer is lying her ass off to keep from getting a reprimand. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:28:26 PM EDT
[#28]
Is there something completely obvious that I'm missing? Or is the tazing children question just being dodged?
I think legalese made an interesting point and the 4 or 5 LEOs who've posted in this thread skipped it 3 times. Just wondering if it's moot or unanswerable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:30:08 PM EDT
[#29]
Jesus H. Christ on a popsicle stick!!!! Doesn't matter if the old woman dies of a cracked skull, so long as department policy was followed? What country is this again? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:30:53 PM EDT
[#30]
Yeah, because the "liberal media" always give a complete un-biased acoount........................... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:30:57 PM EDT
[#31]
We grow em tough down here!
Our Grannies will kick your Grannies ass any day! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:31:39 PM EDT
[#32]
It is an interesting question to consider, but one that would merely highlight differences already known between police and nonpolice. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:32:42 PM EDT
[#33]
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:35:19 PM EDT
[#34]
Yeah, because policy is generally formulated based on the principle of use of force laws, the arrest tactics mandated in each State, and reviewed by lawyer types prior to implementation. If an officer follows policy while doing the job, the employer has the liability for the actions of that employee. Or the officer can diregard law, policy, and training and do whatever they want to. Since they decided to go their own way, they get to be personally liable for their actions, and the employer doesn't neccesarily have any responsibility. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:36:02 PM EDT
[#35]
All potentially true but still nothing more than speculation at this point although 5 does seem likely. While this is certainly true: "3) The retirement home can also decide who is allowed on their property." that makes the victim the nursing home owner, no? My post was in response to a post that suggested focusing on the "perp" was misplaced sympathy and it further implied (although not explicitly stated) that one might feel differently if one thought about the victim instead. As best I can tell from the article (obviously a sparse source of info) the only victim would be the nursing home owner who had been trespassed against....somehow my sympathies were not aroused. I was also unconvinced by the analogy presented therein but decided to raise questions about one issue at a time. Frankly, I'm going to shut up now since any further argument will just require too much speculation and I still don't know who it is that considers a taser to be less forceful than any sort of touching and how on earth one arrives at that conclusion (or if I am misstating the case) and what implications does it have for those of us who are not in law enforcement. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:41:16 PM EDT
[#36]
Thanks, Doublefeed.  |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:43:41 PM EDT
[#37]
The question is not about whether policy was followed...it's whether the policy is bass ackward. Either using a taser is considered to be "lesser" on the force continuum than all touching or it is not...if it is... why doesn't that trickle down? Why is using a taser (when used by a citizen) more forceful than a touching but less forceful when used by law enforcement? Either I have misstated the case or the policy is nonsensical... to suggest that it's a different level of force when a citizen is involved suggests that law enforcement is a priveleged class and the rest of us are lower tier citizens. I can't fathom how policy plays into that assessment. The question for me is not whether the officer followed the policy like a good little robot but whether, if that is the policy, it should be the policy. eta: what if the policy was to shoot all apparently violent criminals on sight? good 'nuff, eh? eta: incidentally, parents typically have more authority with repect to their children than government actors... parents are not subject to strictures of due process, rationality, proportionality or any of those things. In fact, the state has to take extraordinary measures to stand in loco parentis... so if anything, the differences between law enforcement and parents militate in favor of parents being allowed to tase misbheaving children. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:44:39 PM EDT
[#38]
try REREADING the article, Aparrently there's a diffrence of opinion as to the jerking or swinging of arms. Oh I forgot the occifer said it happened so it must have . Roy |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 1:56:41 PM EDT
[#39]
Because a taser is "disabling". If you are disable by the police, in the course of an arrest or restoring order etc. The police are assumed to be "disabling" for a lawful purpose, arresting etc. If Joe Schmoe is "disabling" someone, there is generally a concern about why that disabling is taking place. Taser is also selling M18(?) units to the public, that supposedly "disable" longer to allow the user time to escape. It's kinda like OC, if the police use it on you it's to arrest you, and is considered a low level of force. If you OC a police officer, he'll likley shoot you, because the disabling caused by OC makes the officer vulnerable to attack.
I got nothin'................ Then again my parents set boundaries, punished, talked to etc. So after a bit disobeying wasn't an option. More parents today treat their kids like they are "little adults" and don't want to use certain words, like "NO". That "I wanna be cool" style of parenting is more of a problem than the actual tools to get the job done. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 2:04:32 PM EDT
[#40]
Pretty convincing, I must say.... I just can't get around the idea that taser is always considered less force than any touching... your post suggests that the "force contunuum" doesn't account for touching that is less than a disabling nature...if that's so, the taser's place on the force continuum is probably appropriate...but then it ignores the reality that some situation can be handled without disabling force.... I suppose one doesn't see too many cases like that in the big city but in Mayberry where I live, plenty of situations are well managed by our local guys with what might be referred to as a "forceful request" or an "authoritative urging" 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 2:08:06 PM EDT
[#41]
Hmmm.....a taser on a 75 year old.
Either he was having a really bad day, and a stubborn old lady was the last straw, or this guys needs to be accompanied by his FTO. Either way.....I'd cut the guy some slack, I've met some pretty stubborn older folks in customer service, who I wished I could zap them!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 2:14:58 PM EDT
[#42]
I don't see what your point is; public or private, if a rep of the hospital tells you to leave, you leave or you get arrested. Citizens may live in the same city, but my experience is that most are woefully unfamiliar with the criminal goings-on in that city. Why? because they don't have to deal with it unless they have been victimized. You cannot compare the two. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 2:18:06 PM EDT
[#43]
Usually it goes something like this Presence Dialogue Control Talk Escort Holds * Compliance Holds Decentralization Active Counter Measures Impact Weapons Deadly Force --------------------------------------- The asterisk is where OC and Taser generally fit in. In the article it says the officer tried to get Kimbrell to leave "Kimbrell refused, jerking her arms away when Macon tried to lead her toward the door." That is probably under the heading of escort hold. Since that failed, the next step is......................... As I said before compliance holds on an elderly person will result in bruises, an escort hold could (result in bruises), and fractures, torn muscle, and injured tendons are also VERY possible. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 2:28:46 PM EDT
[#44]
Simple cause and effect, treat people with respect and they will listen to you, treat people like criminals and they will behave like criminals, calm down rather than escalate the situation into a crisis. By the way tcsd 1236 you are a citizen no better or worse than any other, as to law you have no more basis of authority than any other citizen, powers of arrest, leathal force etc. are still based on due process. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 3:02:25 PM EDT
[#45]
You should see if a local PD will hire you as a community policing rep. You seem to spout their mantras pretty well. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 3:13:11 PM EDT
[#46]
Exactly. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 3:14:31 PM EDT
[#47]
Now this makes sense...except I don't know what is meant by "decentralization" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 3:25:34 PM EDT
[#48]
"Do not expect justice where might is right." --Plato
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 4:19:41 PM EDT
[#49]
Throw to the earth. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2004 4:32:17 PM EDT
[#50]
So WHAT? The "use of force continuum" or "use of force matrix" has no meaning at all outside the internal workings of a given department. NONE. The sheriff of Yeehaw Junction can issue a continuum or matrix which puts "douse suspect with gasoline and apply match" just below "apply thumbscrew" and that just below "impact weapon." The continuum/matrix is meaningless, except as it affects qualified immunity for office employees. It is the department's assesment of appropriate use of force, and that's it. To answer the question, what they did wrong is to inflict suffering on an old woman who presented no credible threat to anybody's well-being. The taser, however non-lethal it may be (and perhaps because it usually does no damage), is an instrument of torture: it applies suffering to bring about compliance with the will of its possessor. To me, the real question is whether the friend being visited had previously been declared incompetent. If not, somebody's in deep, deep shit, because the friend's children had no authority to decalre the visitor persona non grata. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
