2) Because this woman refused to sign, she was subject to arrest as according to state law.
3) The police tried to do their job and arrest her, as state law demands when someone getting a citation refuses to sign for it.
4) She refused to comply to the arrest.
5) The police used the taser on her in order to force compliance from her for the arrest.
So even though she was not threatening the police, she was still refusing compliance to being arrested. Therefore, the problem is not using a taser to get her to comply to the arrest but rather that she refused to comply to the arrest, which is demanded by state law.
So I don't see anything wrong with the police using a taser in this regard. It's much better than other ways in which police could try to force compliance on someone who refuses to be arrested.
And if we don't allow the police to use some kind of force to force lawbreakers to comply to arrests, then what's the point of having laws at all?
Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
I have zero issue with her being tazered with the infomation in the OP
actually Ive never had a real issue with any tazer story/video.
they all go the same way, officer is dealing with somebody breaking the law, they are told to stop of given instructions to do something, they refuse, they are told again, they refuse, they are told yet again and also told if they do not comply they will be tazered, they refuse again and get tazed. Then for some reason they are "surprised" they got tazed lol
In these cases I dont see it as excessive, the officer has to protect himself why risk injury over a person that isnt smart enough to do what they are told once the word tazer is mentioned.