StrictConstruct

8 responses so far ↓

• 1 MetGreDKo // Feb 22, 2008 at 2:25 am

  I work for the New York Police Department as a police administrative aide. Essentially this means that I take police reports for those who walk into the precinct, transfer phone calls to the appropriate places and dispatch police for non-emergency calls. I can only speak for my own command and those brought in and I must say that you are sorely mistaken. In over a year that I have been at my command only once did *anyone* use a taser out of hundreds of arrests. When a hundred officers from this command and then others are concerned, because sometimes narcotics and other units bring their arrests to our precinct for processing, that’s an astonishing low number. Then consider the population an average precinct has in its boundaries and you’ll be even more astonished.

  We must keep in mind however the size of the nations police force and it’s a given that such will occur. We must also keep in mind the fact that only a few occurrences have been reported in the media and that by no means gives any sort of indication as to the over all rates. So few reports I would personally think is good though because it suggests either that they don’t happen so frequently or they aren’t quite so clear cut.

  Further while it’s nice to think that tasers or anything else is unnecessary I have the unfortunately knowledge that sometimes arrests are just too belligerent and too hostile to put in a cell or in a car and sometimes force must be used. A taser generally though is only used to scare them and in most cases it works. If it doesn’t then usually a psych evaluation takes place at a hospital just to check them out. After it they go through the process as appropriate.

  I most certainly agree that sometimes officers go too far and do things they most certainly should be punished for but don’t take a few examples and automatically make a big crusade out of it when you have absolutely no evidence to support such assertions as those which you are making.

• 2 Rebel with a Cause // Feb 22, 2008 at 7:17 am

  I appreciate why you would be concerned about the very broad brush I have used to paint LE’s. If it’s any consolation, I use such large strokes for all sources of power that are designed to serve the public interest and maintain their trust. Such criticism comes with the territory. My trust, taxes, and vote put these people in these positions. I am not their livestock to control. When the watchdog goes rabid and attacks it’s charges, then it’s time to put the heat on the owner of the watchdog. The concentration of power and resources of any institution, be it government, military, law enforcement, education, or church, demand that scrutiny and outrage to be made loud and clear. The disparity of power that they possess verses the individual citizen is so great, that pointed and public outrage is the only defense that the citizen has. To wait the next voting cycle to throw the bums out, or to trust the very system to police itself objectively, is not enough to put such institutions on their best behavior. I have found over time all institutions become detached from the people they serve, and serve their own interests. The founding Fathers recognized that when they designed the Constitution to be a check and balance on behalf of the people, and not a license for the government to do as it pleases. If it seems unfair to emphasize the abuses, and not the positive things, that is the nature of public service, to be taken for granted that such institutions are serving the public interest by be accountable for their employees behavior.

  In your comment you remarked:
  
  “We must keep in mind however the size of the nations police force and it’s a given that such will occur. We must also keep in mind the fact that only a few occurrences have been reported in the media and that by no means gives any sort of indication as to the over all rates. So few reports I would personally think is good though because it suggests either that they don’t happen so frequently or they aren’t quite so clear cut.”

  Your assertion, from a personal point of view, unsupported by facts, that such incidents are few and far between, is very naïve, to say the least. Just because where you reside such incidents are rare, does not give you the perspective to see the aggregate total nation-wide. Using your logic, the converse is true. I believe we are only be seeing the tip of the iceberg of such abuses. With the advent of consumer camcorders, we are now obtaining evidence that before could only be captured by the news media—if they were around at the time. Or not compromised. My faith of media as the public watchdog has diminished considerably by the biased and selected emphasis they have practiced in the last two and half decades. The very fact that camcorders are now installed in LE cars and jails only justifies the contention that abuses have and will likely occur again, notwithstanding the blocking of said camcorders by officers like Mr. Willis, so his word cannot be contested that the suspect merely “fell” to obtain such terrible injuries while under his charge.

  Please do the research. Not casually. Not just a few sites, not just a day or so. Do with the fervor of a college graduate that has to get his 25 -page term paper in by next month, or else. Google the increase use of tasers, and the number of deaths attributed to them. Here’s one to start with; 150 from 2004 to 2006 (http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=ENGAMR510302006)

• 3 MetGreDKo // Feb 23, 2008 at 1:38 am

  The statement you had quoted was a part of a larger point and one I openly stated that we both clearly lack the date to support assertions one way or the other that it’s common place or is not. It is entirely possible that while these articles bring great audiences to them and so great money that they present the issues less frequently then they would desire in order to prevent over saturation. The point also consisted of your sseming to considering a few occasions as representative that there is a far greater ratio of these occurrences to officers then there are legitimate cases where such force is used. I was merely using what I deemed as your logic against said point.

  You ask me to do research and I have first hand experience — first hand research on a given area — as to the extent which officers go to avoid it. Further I first hand see what officers put up with and all the claims they spout when things don’t go their way. If a complainant wants something to be considered an assault but by legal definition is an harassment they throw a fit and report you for something. Sometimes the person reported deserved it and sometimes they didn’t. Quite a few complaints are most unnecessary althought not necessarily the majority. If however a complaint is founded and an officer did indeed assault someone and wasn’t merely trying to detain them then they definately should be arrested for assault. If however the suspect was struggling with the officer then I think that is a gray area where it’s hard to define whether it is assault or whether it was doing their job and whether rightfully or wrongfully perceiving a greater threat then is present. Intention of the officer also is present as a reason to go one way or the other. One may very well openly state a desire to hurt the suspect in which case it should be assault. If however they say to stop and they want to question and frisk you as there was a robbery in the area by someone with your description then again, it gets tricky.

  No one is denying that authority should be monitored. I’m fully in favor of internal investigative services and personally feel government as a whole should be smaller then it presently is. However I do oppose that belief that one should question it with the assumption that they are wrong. One should be impartial with regards to the authority be it police or government as a whole rather then automatically opposed to their actions. Find out what the situation really was then criticize or critique it. You posted a mere four links in your statement which I responded to which hardly qualifies as extensive study. And the 150 deaths in two years from tasers also isn’t anything astonishing when the country comprises of 800,000 police officers of all types. (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/lawenf.htm)

  Further, I know how frequently officers get injured from making arrests, how hectic it gets when there are chases as well. I recall one arrest of a group of males for controlled substances where half of them fled and the resulting chase and struggle as they fought to get away caused our precinct drug team to get injured. Approximately five of them ended up with injuries. Then the midnight tour one evening ended up with four being out due to injuries. Half of them were brief excusals while half were broken/sprained bones on both cases.

  With regards to taser deaths themselves according to two studies they are safe for use on approximately 99.7% of individuals (http://www.physorg.com/news111080086.html) (http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/84955.php). However even if those statistics are not necessarily accurate, tasers are far less lethal then a gun and far less dangerous then a baton when trying to subdue someone. There are also extenuating circumstances such as if someone has heart problems, if someone has a pace maker and all sorts of things which will affect the rate with which people fall seriously ill or die from use of a taser. A good general policy though is don’t fight the cops, let them bring you in and fight it in court or through reporting any legitimate concerns about their behavior after the fact. If you fight a legal authority in squashing crime, especially when you just committed a crime then I say a taser is appropriate. This however gets into individual usage of tasers and of course, as with most things, people are bound to abuse them. Training should cover their usage and securing them properly. Further properly punish those guilty of abusing them.

  However, if someone who just suspected of a crime — I use suspected rather then committed because one could have done one or not and be a suspect — struggles with officers and officers have difficulty detaining them, putting them in the vehicle or in the cell, what do you suggest the officers do in such a case? I mean it as a sincere question and not as sarcasm or anything else. There are times when commands are short staffed or busy and so wouldn’t have the manpower or necessarily the room to literally carry someone into the precinct that is fighting like mad to get loose. My entire point is that it isn’t quite so clear cut as you seem to suggest and neither is it necessarily unfair for officers to use the least lethal or harmful means available to them, in this case a taser.

  All I ask is that you are more balanced in your approach of the issue.

• 4 Rebel with a Cause // Feb 23, 2008 at 8:12 am

  “And the 150 deaths in two years from tasers also isn’t anything astonishing when the country comprises of 800,000 police officers of all types.”

  Compared to what? Perhaps 150 deaths that would have not occurred if tasers were not used? Obviously when tasers were evaluated, they were tested on relatively physically fit individuals, not on the general populace. The UK has just approved the use of tasers on children. Given time, the US may well follow. Hence my desire to make a stink lest we continue on this slippery slope to an Orwellian society like the UK.
  
  “However, if someone who just suspected of a crime — I use suspected rather then committed because one could have done one or not and be a suspect — struggles with officers and officers have difficulty detaining them, putting them in the vehicle or in the cell, what do you suggest the officers do in such a case?”

  In the case of Officer Willis, he should have requested more help. Obviously, he was incapable of insuring the suspects safety while processing her. If Steffy Hope can have several officers, both male and female, subdue her while being stripped-searched, I’m sure that Officer Willis could have requested assistance if he was losing his grip–Literally and figuratively–while handling the suspect.

  The argument that I should be fair and balanced is it of itself an unfair one. When power is abused by public servants, outrage is the only reasonable outlet to make it known that it is not acceptable. I am not advocating anything other than the public servants be held to the same accountability and standard that citizens are. Citizens cannot taser, arrest, and detain those who abuse them outside the rules of engagement. Again, all the power is on the government and enforcement side. If it my criticism seems unbalanced, it must be weighted against the power that is held by the other point of view.

• 5 MetGreDKo // Feb 23, 2008 at 4:56 pm

  [i]”Compared to what? Perhaps 150 deaths that would have not occurred if tasers were not used? Obviously when tasers were evaluated, they were tested on relatively physically fit individuals, not on the general populace. The UK has just approved the use of tasers on children. Given time, the US may well follow. Hence my desire to make a stink lest we continue on this slippery slope to an Orwellian society like the UK.”[/i]

  Compared to the amount of officers nationwide and how tasers are in widespread use the statistics are quite low. In fact they are lower then alcohol related deaths, cigarette related deaths, vehicle accident related deaths, gun related deaths and countless others.

  Perhaps those deaths would have occurred if lethal force was used; perhaps more deaths would have occurred; perhaps the officers would be in the hospital or dead themselves. Perhaps is a poor statement because virtually anything is possible if you do not know the outcome. So far as present means of detaining individuals I don’t see what the big fuss about tasers themselves is about. If someone wasn’t resisting arrest but was tasered out of the blue then I can entirely understand a point of view where they are totally responsible and should be criminally charged. If however they are in a struggle then certainly a taser has its benefits. It incapacitates the person resisting for the moment with usually minimal injuries.

  Further, I feel I must ask, why shouldn’t tasers be used to try and get people to cease fighting them? What other options are there besides a gun and a baton? Would you rather the increased risk of death with a gun or how about the broken bones with a baton? Again, there aren’t always additional officers available to assist with detaining suspects nor is it necessarily easy to get someone into a car, out of the car then through the doors and into the cell even if you have a number of people, when said person is struggling.

  If someone resists a legal authority which combats crime, fighting them, are they not taking their life into their own hands and risking it? Perhaps the 150 people with possible heart conditions should [b]not[/b] have resisted if they didn’t want to face the risk of injury or death. There are far fewer consequences if you just go along with it and it’s far more likely you’ll find a favorable solution if you don’t resist.

  [i]”In the case of Officer Willis, he should have requested more help. Obviously, he was incapable of insuring the suspects safety while processing her. If Steffy Hope can have several officers, both male and female, subdue her while being stripped-searched, I’m sure that Officer Willis could have requested assistance if he was losing his grip–Literally and figuratively–while handling the suspect.”[/i]

  I don’t know about other commands but the NYPD has a strict policy of only a member of ones gender strip searching them. No male officers will be present in the room when a female is strip searched. Such usually occurs in a restroom anyway. Additionally if a command lacks a member of a gender to do a search they will reach out to other commands until they get one. I can picture it now though, if several male officers were there while her being strip searched is conducted you would then say it’s a sex abuse case waiting to happen because you seem to have an axe to grind against cops.

  With regards to specific cases, the officer who was beating on the wheel chaired individual certainly should be charged. The one with the lady alone in the room and a camera, it looked like her face or head hitting the cabinet was indeed an accident rather then intentional. The covering of the camera I do however question what happened then and it is indeed suspicious.

  [i]”The argument that I should be fair and balanced is it of itself an unfair one. When power is abused by public servants, outrage is the only reasonable outlet to make it known that it is not acceptable. I am not advocating anything other than the public servants be held to the same accountability and standard that citizens are. Citizens cannot taser, arrest, and detain those who abuse them outside the rules of engagement. Again, all the power is on the government and enforcement side. If it my criticism seems unbalanced, it must be weighted against the power that is held by the other point of view.”[/i]

  I fail to see how asking you to take a moment to think and consider things prior to posting and keeping your mind open on the topic is unfair or unreasonable. No one is asking you to keep quiet if there are legitimate cases of abuse of power. I am merely asking you to hold off on judging everything and everyone in enforcement as such and implying it’s a plague ever present in every command and done by every person. I also have first hand knowledge that when people file complaints against each other or officers, the story tends to change quite a bit. This happens for both parties on many occasions and we need to be careful with how we go about judging them because it can have a negative impact on the efficiency of enforcement agencies without reason.

  You appear to have no experience in the field of enforcement and while it’s great you wish to change things (I’d love to see some degree of change) you need to acknowledge that you don’t first hand know what officers go through and are faced to confront in split second decisions at times. It’s quite easy to use hindsight to look at a situation from a neutral perspective from the safety of our homes. Once detained however and they are not resisting then I would say such changes and less leeway should be given to officers because the threat has subsided. When in a scuffle however there’s the risk that the person resisting arrest might get their hands on the officers gun and they don’t have safeties so you can imagine what might happen.

  Additionally I find it hypocritical how you would tell me to do the research to such an extent to not respond to you until I can formulate a 25 page paper and yet you totally ignore the statistics I gave briefly with regards to how few people die from tasers and how many officers there are. If only 0.3% die and there were 150 killed by them in a two year period then mathematically speaking we can assume 50,000 people were tasered in that same period. I would say that it’s an acceptable risk when the well being of officers, standers by and society are concerned. I too would like to see the number reduced but until we get a method that actually achieves that tasers will do fine.

  How many of those tasered were justified, I have no idea and that’s an entirely separate issue from tasers themselves but the rate of survival is greater then you seem to imply by sheer numbers of deaths themselves. Further I see a lack of sources from you which approach any where near the volume of research which you told me to conduct and I look forward to seeing them so that we might have a deep discussion then what has thus far taken place.

  Lastly, by your argument that asking you to be fair in your judgment is unfair I find it incredibly hard to believe that you are [i]”not advocating anything other than the public servants be held to the same accountability and standard that citizens are.”[/i] Outrage is never reasonable for it runs on emotions. Logic, rationale when not filled with said emotions is the only reasonable outlet for only with it can you truly make things better by properly reaching for ideals in a situation with well thought out plans and preparation. You appear to want revenge on all officers, not justice, not accountability on the relative few. If I read you wrong then please correct me with how you intended the statements that can be seen as anti-enforcement rather then pro-accountability.

• 6 Rebel with a cause // Feb 23, 2008 at 8:26 pm

  I have made only specific references to those that abused their authority. If the shoe fits, wear it. If it doesn’t, please ignore it. I have not demanded revenge on all officers. My outrage stems more than just the individual acts of those officers involved—It extends to the departments that allowed those incidents to happen. Sheriff Swanson’s officers in Stark County conducted a mixed gender strip search of a woman under his watch. That was wrong, and he should be the one condemning the action, instead defending it.

  When Brian Sterner was dumped out of his wheelchair by a 17-year veteran deputy, the officers present did nothing. They did not even react, except for the one smirking at the camera as he walked by. Hillsborough County Sheriff David Gee did not find out about the incident until the local news station brought it to his attention. There was not even a written report of the incident. One can only think that the unwritten code of silence is being practiced by these departments in question. Surely the lack of surprise of the officers present when Charlette Marshall-Jones dumped Brian Sterner could only indicate that she was acting in a manner that was long condoned by the whole station house.

  If these acts are going on with either the consent or ignorance of the people who charge, what does that do for the public’s perception of Law enforcement? Especially those who are in charge that do not discipline and weed out the bad apples that show signs of committing such abuses. How can any there be any other conclusion that these departments are not policing their own police? I do admit such pointed criticism seems unfair to those departments like yours that maintain professional integrity performing their duties. If my post has made you feel that way, I apologize. But at the same time, I cannot take lightly these incidents. If pubic outcry at this behavior gives notice to officers and departments that such conduct will not be tolerated, and encourage them to keep their houses in order, then it will have served its purpose.

• 7 Edbert // Feb 25, 2008 at 12:32 pm

  Only answer is to incarcerate these “officers” amongst the general population, even though their thugerry and crimes are worse since they were given the trust and authority by those they injured. I’d advocate announcing to said population their former choice of career too.

• 8 Rebel with a cause // Feb 25, 2008 at 1:15 pm

  I understand the sentiment, but I would not stoop to their level by announcing their profession among the prison population. Just give offending LE’s the same justice, no less, no more, as any citizen who commits a similar offense, and demand proactive leadership by the LE departments to prevent future incidents of abuse, is all I ask.

Leave a Comment