The first argument that really stood out to me was that Tasers are overused (Kleinig, 2007). Kleinig’s argument is based purely on opinion, not facts. He even states that figures for the use of Tasers are more than likely not possible to attain. The fact of the matter is, without the review of the specific report from each case, we have no idea whether or not each of the estimated 70,000 uses the U.S. GAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office) report he spoke of were legitimate. Tasers are overused, compared to what? Any new technology is going to warrant more use than the older technology used for the same effect.
The next argument that stood out to me was made by both Adams/Jennison and Kleinig; the training for the Taser is not as in depth as it should be. I agree with this statement. Adams and Jennison (2007) state that the policies for Taser-use in police departments across the USA is unknown because of how different each department handles the training for the weapon. A lot of problems with differences in training, curriculum and standard operating procedures exist that make interdepartmental, joint police work very tough to complete without relative confusion from one department to another. To me, the solution seems quite simple; implement a nationally recognized training regiment and qualification system that officers must complete in order to carry and use the CED. Annual testing, certification and qualification should take place no less than yearly. That being said, nothing is fool-proof and mistakes are bound to be made. All of the training in the world cannot stop this.
There are laws in place to punish officers who violate a civilian’s 4th Amendment rights and prematurely reach the level of continuum of force necessary to employ the CED. The Doctrine of Qualified Immunity releases an officer of liability in the case of a subject’s death, as long as the officer acted according to training standards. If the officer is found to have violated the subject’s 4th Amendment rights, the liability will fall on the officer. In order to charge the officer liable, the court must prove that the officer acted unlawfully in order to do this. If the liability falls on the officer, he/she will be responsible for the plaintiff’s attorney fees and any punitive damages assessed. Also, the officer will face disciplinary action and criminal prosecution (Fitterman, 2007). The risk of facing legal action is harsh enough for officers who violate policies regarding use of force and 4th Amendment rights. In my opinion, no further action needs to be taken to put a stranglehold on the use of the Taser.
The relatively small number of deaths connected to the number of uses of the CED are, in comparison, not as bad as what people who are against it would like to believe. According to Fitterman (2007), over 150 deaths had occurred as a result, either directly or indirectly, from the Taser by 2005. Kleinig (2007) stated that the U.S. GAO reported that the Taser had been used approximately 70,000 times by 2005. Without the data to support how many lives were actually in jeopardy when the Taser was deployed, it is impossible to predict how many lives have been saved (spared) by the Taser. If that number could be obtained, the 150+ deaths might not seem like such a big deal. To me, a 0.2% mortality rate is still well worth the risk if officers can perform their jobs more safely.
The media is one of the biggest factors involved in negative publicity towards the use of the Taser. The media’s attention towards Taser-related abuse has caused a lot of controversy.
Works Cited
Adams, K. & Jennison, V. (2007). What we do not know about police use of Tasers.Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 30(3), 447-465.
Fitterman, E. (2007). Control Devices: Legal Aspects Overview. NTCSL e-Newsletter, 7(4), 3-5.
Kleinig, J. (2007). Ethical constraints on Taser use by police. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 1(3), 284-292.
Great blog post Chris. I couldn't agree with you more on the topic and I think all of your points are pretty spot on. I especially like your idea of implementing standardized Taser training across all departments and agencies. My one argument would be that officers are going to be more willing to use CED's knowing that they are less lethal but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. I believe that CED's allow the officer to do their job in safer manor while not being as circumspect. Like you said, the media is to blame for all this bad publicity on Tasers, but that's expected in today's world.
ReplyDeleteI think that the argument for the use of Tasers fits pretty well with Packer's article on the Due Process and Crime Control Models. The connection I saw exists in that those opposed to Officers using Tasers seem to be more closely connected with the Due Process model with the strong emphasis on the value of ones' Fourth Amendment rights. While those who are for Officers using the weapon are those who lean more towards the Crime Control model. Personally I am all for Officers being able to carry Tasers and I like your idea of the implementation of a national training standard for the weapon. Tasers allow Officers to handle resisting individuals in a win-win situation. The win-win is simple that the individual resisting does not receive lethal force (with the exception of some cases), and at the same time the Officer is provided with an option that keeps them safe.
ReplyDeleteTasers are becoming one of the most common topics in the criminal justice system. Personally I think that Tasers is one of the best ways for police officer to handle/ control an individual without putting themselves or other into harm’s way. The way I look at the situation is, an officer could shoot you with a taser or the lethal weapon personally I would rather be shot by a taser.
ReplyDeleteVery nice article. I am a proponent of departments across the world implementing the use of Tasers. With any new weapon, there should certainly be a very strict policy and training system that goes along with using the weapon. Police officers risk their life on a near daily basis. With that being said, an offer who feels his life or the life of the public is in danger, he can use this non-lethal tool to subdue a subject. Like Billy-clubs, batons, etc, this weapon can also be overused and misused. I would hope that the general public, and most criminals would welcome more non-lethal forms of weapons for police officers. Like the article mentioned, the death rate associated with the use of Tasers is statistically insignificant. To me, it is a no brainer for departments across the world to implement the use of this non-lethal weapon.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with the author of this post. In most cases officers are not going to tase someone that is not behaving out of control. It is a way to subdue an offender without causing too much damage. Apparently some people have died from this but were there other outstanding factors that caused the death, such as a heart problem? All the blame cannot be put on the officer, I mean what are they supposed to do before they tase someone, yell out " hold on do you have any outstanding medicial conditions that could cause this taser to kill you ?!" Do not get me wrong if an officer improperly uses the taser then he should be repremanded, but I definitely think the taser is a useful tool that police can use. It is definitely better than shooting someone.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great blog and I would like to say I agree with your point of view. I also believe that there needs to be a significant amount of training required to use a taser. In the training there needs to be situations, people involved and the crime committed before the taser can be use. I understand that some departments have different guidelines when a taser should be used but I dislike this. There is too much gray are and that might be the reason some people disagree with the CED. Perhaps if all departments across the world hade the same policy for using the use of force then I doubt there would be compliants. As far as the death totals go, it is very rare to see a death occur via taser so this isnt that big of an issue. But as a person speaking morally,one death is too many for a taser to be considered a less lethal use of force.
ReplyDeleteIn my close i would like to say that there needs to be less gray area, more training and less discretion from the police when dealing with questionalbe issues on the use of force. However if it is stated in the policy then the officer has full rights to lay down the law.
I also agree with the use of tasers in police departments. As long as the officer goes through the proper training and is certified the officer should be allowed to use it. Also, it should be done only if verbal commands arent working or if the police are in danger but do not need to use their gun. Even though the taser has caused deaths, tasers can save more lives by the officers not having to use a gun when a taser could do the job. The only drawback to this is the officer wont know if the person has a heart condition or any condition that would cause death from being tazed.
ReplyDeleteChris, I think you made a valid point or two in your arguments regarding taser use, but it seems to me there is more to the issue than your opinions for taser use, as well as some authors opinion. We all have opinions, but lets talk about the real issue, and that is who are the real victims? After doing much of my own research regarding the use of the tasers, I have found that it has assisted in lowering the physical agility standards for many police departments. At one time if you didn't have the means to physically apprehend a suspect without the 0.2% chance of killing them with a taser, then you were not allowed to be a police officer. That is why police are equipped with a gun, mace, and knight stick. If these are not enough then something needs to be done, and I don't mean by risking the citizens lives by adding the taser to the gun belt. The gun is there to assist the officer and is used as a last resort, but I don't see how you can compare the taser to the firearm. An officer isn't going to shoot the suspect who is only drunk and disorderly, but there is a good chance they may tase him, which might kill him. I guess what I'm getting at is what is the next step? Are we going to allow severely handicapped individuals patrol the streets? It's a slippery slope once we start sliding, and it seems to me we have begun the slide. Again it goes back to the physical ability of the police officer.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteMr. Simulis, what you've just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone subscribed to this blog is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Deleteprops on the Billy Madison Reference
DeleteI agree with you that the use of a taser if safe to use. It is safer than using a firearm and can protect the officer in less dangerous situation where a firearm would exceed the lethal use. I feel the taser provides a safe middle ground of protection for the officer and allows them to do their job more effectively.
ReplyDeleteGreat blog and great arguement. I also agree that the use of tasers is necessary. As you said there is no statistical way to measure how many lives are saved because of the taser. Some of the situations that the taser is used in are so severe that if the taser was not available then it is likely lethal force may have been used if the situation continued to escalate. Tasers give officers a way to quickly control a situation that is getting out of control. It is also a great tool to have for officers that may be alone and waiting on backup. Officers that are alone are in potentially more danger than officers that are together. The taser acts as a tool to not only protect them but also to protect the suspect from the officer using more force. I definitely agree with the statement that the media protrays things in a negative light. There are always going to be bad eggs in policing, so some of these stories are correct, but more often they are blown out of proportion.
ReplyDeleteTasers seem to be all the rage these days, and why shouldn't they be? A very effective alternative to deadly force seems like an excellent idea. I would be willing to bet that hitting someone in the ribs and especially the head with a baton can cause a greater chance of major bodily harm or death than a taser. Tasers also allow officers to subdue suspects from a safe range, before there was no such item or weapon that could achieve such effective results from a distance. I have absolutely no problem with officers using a taser if they feel the suspect will be violent and not cooperate
ReplyDelete