Cops tase 11 year old

[jaeger19]

It was lazy,callous expedience IMO. They did none of those things.

.

Very possible.

And there's no risk of heart attack, etc with physical restraint. Bruising yes.

Actually there is a risk of heart attack with physical restraint. People have died from heart attack after being taken to the ground and arrested.

If you say.. well she was 11 and no heart problems.. well then she was not at risk for a taser.

However, she gets taken to the ground by an adult male and there is very much the likelihood of serious injury to the chest, neck and head.

So while that's not desirable in any way, it's part of their job to restrain people physically and properly

Which has very very real risks of injury. And truthfully, more likelihood of serious injury than being tased.

Also IMO, your last sentences are an excuse.

It was not an excuse.. it was an explanation. Cops are being taught that they need immediate control.. that they must force compliance and immediately. in fact.. sadly.. even good cops are getting the attitude that "well, if I don't make that guy comply immediately.. then what happens the NEXT time they come in contact with a police officer.. what if they do worse than argue and decide to fight the cop?".

I actually had that discussion with an officer that had been on the job for 20 years and had never had an excessive force complaint (which is pretty rare and yet he had a ton of arrests). We were discussing compliance and I was pointed out that many of my elderly patients would not be able to comply with the officer because of being hard of hearing, because of physical limitations or just being confused by multiple commands and not sure why they are being treated as dangerous criminals.

The officers argument was 1. " Well how long do I have to stand on the side of the road explaining"... (and I pointed out. as long as it takes that you both go home safe)..

and 2. "Well, what happens the next time this guy sees a cop etc." As if the general public is always looking to hurt a police officer and so in any case of non compliance.. however slight.. needs to be met with force to "teach these people a lesson".

 

[jaeger19]

I get so sick and tired of hearing this.
Cops are their to enforce the law.

Their job is also their to ensure safety of everyone.

If they chased this girl down she could get hit by a car not looking.
She could have fallen and broke something or she could have injured someone else.

If they wrestled her to the ground they could have broken, ripped or torn something trying to wrestle her.

They took what they thought was the safest way possible to ensure safety for everyone.

If they would have wrestled her down and something happen you guys would be screaming police brutality.

Well the thing is.. they could have resolved this without any of that either. NOR being tased..

And that's whats being missed here.

 

[holbritter]

At least the child wasn't shot.

With as many police officers as we have seen shooting unarmed people, I guess I won't complain too loudly if they're all going to switch over to tasers until police departments start vetting and training their officers better.

How many is that? Out of over 756,000 officers, how many are have shot unarmed people without just cause?

 

[holbritter]

Tasers are not completely safe. People have died being tased.

don't run and don't resist. You won't be tased. Pretty simple really.

 

[PoS]

don't run and don't resist. You won't be tased. Pretty simple really.

Oh yeah, let's tase that 2 year old because he's had a tantrum and is running away! MAGA!

 

[Lursa]

Very possible.



Actually there is a risk of heart attack with physical restraint. People have died from heart attack after being taken to the ground and arrested.

If you say.. well she was 11 and no heart problems.. well then she was not at risk for a taser.

However, she gets taken to the ground by an adult male and there is very much the likelihood of serious injury to the chest, neck and head.



Which has very very real risks of injury. And truthfully, more likelihood of serious injury than being tased.



It was not an excuse.. it was an explanation. Cops are being taught that they need immediate control.. that they must force compliance and immediately. in fact.. sadly.. even good cops are getting the attitude that "well, if I don't make that guy comply immediately.. then what happens the NEXT time they come in contact with a police officer.. what if they do worse than argue and decide to fight the cop?".

I actually had that discussion with an officer that had been on the job for 20 years and had never had an excessive force complaint (which is pretty rare and yet he had a ton of arrests). We were discussing compliance and I was pointed out that many of my elderly patients would not be able to comply with the officer because of being hard of hearing, because of physical limitations or just being confused by multiple commands and not sure why they are being treated as dangerous criminals.

The officers argument was 1. " Well how long do I have to stand on the side of the road explaining"... (and I pointed out. as long as it takes that you both go home safe)..

and 2. "Well, what happens the next time this guy sees a cop etc." As if the general public is always looking to hurt a police officer and so in any case of non compliance.. however slight.. needs to be met with force to "teach these people a lesson".

This is an amazing and arduous reach to excuse them.

We mentioned earlier about heart attacks. Not only that they DID get a barb in her spine.

Bruises would be better. and if cops cant restrain an 11 yr old without doing more, they are incompetent.

She was walking away and no further attempts to stop her were made...he went to the taser.

Nothing you wrote excuses the fact that they still have their own judgement in every case. He shot the girl in the back as she walked away. She was not a danger to the public or herself, he had other options, he CHOSE not to use them.

Lazy, callous expedience IMO

 

[ludin]

Well the thing is.. they could have resolved this without any of that either. NOR being tased..

And that's whats being missed here.

Were you there?
Do you know the situation or what they were dealing with at the time?
Do you know that they didn't try other things first before using the taser?

If you think you do then submit proof or evidence to support yourself.

 

[Bodi]

Oh yeah, let's tase that 2 year old because he's had a tantrum and is running away! MAGA!

:lol:

Is that really how you want to come across? Comparing this to a 2 year-old and making a Trump comment out of the blue?

 

[Bodi]

Sadly, I don't think he is.

A very good lesson though...

 

[Bodi]

Or her arm.. or her leg, or her back or neck.

So cops don't use deadly force and they STILL get **** from the public...

 

[Bodi]

The article said it was food.

The article also says she was released to a guardian, not specifically a parent.

I wonder what the situation is there where she lives.

It is survival of the fittest... did you see how fat her mom is? She is eating all the food so of course the girl has to steal.

 

[Bodi]

Actually there is a high risk of injuring the girl when they put their hands on her.

What probably should have happened is that they just should have followed her to the point where she just gave up.

Then the cops would be accused of Stalking her or of purposely trying to terrify her by relentlessly chasing her...

 

[jaeger19]

So cops don't use deadly force and they STILL get **** from the public...

Actually most excessive force complaints stem from force that is not deadly force.

 

[jaeger19]

This is an amazing and arduous reach to excuse them.

Nope.. just an explanation.

We mentioned earlier about heart attacks. Not only that they DID get a barb in her spine.

Naw.. look she was unharmed.. the "barb in her spine" is bull puckey. You actually injure your spinal cord with a barb.. then you have an issue. And there is no way a barb is penetrating a lumbar vertebrae.

Bruises would be better

how about a dislocated shoulder? Dislocated cervical spine? Head injury?

once the decision is that they need to restrain her.. that's whats possible.

She was walking away and no further attempts to stop her were made...he went to the taser.

Nothing you wrote excuses the fact that they still have their own judgement in every case. He shot the girl in the back as she walked away. She was not a danger to the public or herself, he had other options, he CHOSE not to use them.

Yep.. I agreed to all that.

BUT what you have to agree is that by attempting to restrain her... more severe injury could result than what she suffered.

because that's the facts.

 

[jaeger19]

Then the cops would be accused of Stalking her or of purposely trying to terrify her by relentlessly chasing her...

that's pretty far fetched there.

 

[Lursa]

Yep.. I agreed to all that.

BUT what you have to agree is that by attempting to restrain her... more severe injury could result than what she suffered.

because that's the facts.

It's not the facts and I dont agree.

There are spaces between vertebrae and ANY kind of electrical charge has the potential to damage the entire nervous system. If she collapses, she can fracture her skull, since 'she's not restrained.'

And as I wrote, if copS (multiple, as were on the scene) cannot restrain an 11 yr old without more than bruising, but such as you described, then they are very poorly trained, incompetent, or both.

 

[gulfman]

Its the mom's fault.There should have been plenty of credit left on her EBT card.

 

[Bodi]

that's pretty far fetched there.

But probable...

Actually most excessive force complaints stem from force that is not deadly force.

I realize that...

 

[jaeger19]

It's not the facts and I dont agree.

There are spaces between vertebrae and ANY kind of electrical charge has the potential to damage the entire nervous system. If she collapses, she can fracture her skull, since 'she's not restrained.'

And as I wrote, if copS (multiple, as were on the scene) cannot restrain an 11 yr old without more than bruising, but such as you described, then they are very poorly trained, incompetent, or both.

Actually yes.. they are the facts.




Take a look at the spine on the right.. that's the posterior view (from the back)... see how well protected it is by bone?

And THATS after you get past several layers of muscle and tendon/fascia.

and no.. not any kind of electrical charge has the potential to damage the entire nervous system. The nervous system is basically an electrical system. and electricity is applied to the nervous system all the time in medical procedures from TENS unit stimulation, to electroconvulsive shock therapy.

now.. right.. if she collapses.. she could fracture a skull. Now imagine that she is being brought to the ground by the weight of a 190 pound officer.

And as I wrote, if copS (multiple, as were on the scene) cannot restrain an 11 yr old without more than bruising, but such as you described, then they are very poorly trained, incompetent, or both.

And as I point out.. that's simply not factual. Multiple things can happen that you NO amount of training can foresee or prepare for. Heck.. I get a hold of her arm.. and she twists to get away and slips? Dislocated shoulder. Just that easy.

In fact. if you did a study on serious injuries when restraining people. vs serious injuries with a taser? the taser is likely safer. It was one reason it was developed.

Dr. Jared Strote at the University of Washington Medical Center led a group that examined the medical records of nearly 900 patients subdued by the Seattle Police Department with a Taser over a six-year period. Less than one percent required hospital admission for an injury related to the restraint incident. No deaths occurred, even when patients exhibited signs of excited delirium.

Injuries by police are quite rare in general when it comes to restraining suspects.. but there are definite serious risks of injuring the suspect when you put your hands on an 11 year old girl.

The best thing in this situation was to follow and attempt to reason with her versus restrain her in any manner. She would likely have just given up when she realized she was not going to get away.

 

[Rogue Valley]

WHOOSH!!!!

Look up quick!

Why? You contribute nothing to the story.

 

[Rogue Valley]

In fact. if you did a study on serious injuries when restraining people. vs serious injuries with a taser? the taser is likely safer. It was one reason it was developed.

My nephew is a cop and very familiar with the taser. With individuals wearing no/thin shirt, if either of the barbs (or both) lodge in the spinal area, that is a department-mandated trip to the ER via ambulance.

The ER performs back-radiographs to verify position and depth. Usually an ER doc can carefully remove the barb. Sometimes barb removal is dicey and a trauma surgeon is summoned.

There is also a danger of Thoracic spine compression fracture after being tasered from thrashing about.

 

[Lursa]

Actually yes.. they are the facts.

View attachment 67238040


Take a look at the spine on the right.. that's the posterior view (from the back)... see how well protected it is by bone?

And THATS after you get past several layers of muscle and tendon/fascia.

and no.. not any kind of electrical charge has the potential to damage the entire nervous system. The nervous system is basically an electrical system. and electricity is applied to the nervous system all the time in medical procedures from TENS unit stimulation, to electroconvulsive shock therapy.

now.. right.. if she collapses.. she could fracture a skull. Now imagine that she is being brought to the ground by the weight of a 190 pound officer.



And as I point out.. that's simply not factual. Multiple things can happen that you NO amount of training can foresee or prepare for. Heck.. I get a hold of her arm.. and she twists to get away and slips? Dislocated shoulder. Just that easy.

In fact. if you did a study on serious injuries when restraining people. vs serious injuries with a taser? the taser is likely safer. It was one reason it was developed.


Injuries by police are quite rare in general when it comes to restraining suspects.. but there are definite serious risks of injuring the suspect when you put your hands on an 11 year old girl.

The best thing in this situation was to follow and attempt to reason with her versus restrain her in any manner. She would likely have just given up when she realized she was not going to get away.

Still wrong but it's sad you feel the need to go that far to prove yourself right 'on the Internet. Feel free to provide a source that that electrical charge cant cause damage to the nervous system. And the charge is conductive, even if it doesnt completely penetrate, cartilage is not bone.

And AGAIN, I have to repeat this: there would be no 'falling to the ground fracturing her skull' if the multiple cops there unless they were incompetent or very poorly trained. Restrained properly there wouldnt be more than bruises to an 11 yr old. She didnt even need to be tackled or chased. She was walking :doh

Those studies mean little since grown men present a clear and present physical danger at the same level as the cops. Esp. one amped up on drugs or adreneline. This is about a calm, walking 11 yr old girl. With no additional escalation, it's pretty clear they chose the wrong option.

 

[Doc91478]

Were the cops so in fear of their lives that they had to taser an 11 year old girl because they couldnt handle her physically?

Hmm....., LEO's use tasers routinely on fleeing felons, rather than using deadly force..
Fleeing felon Rule Common Law
Fleeing felon rule. At common law, the fleeing felon rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight. Force may be used by the victim, bystanders, or police officers.
https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/fleeing-felon-rule/

 

[Rogue Valley]

Hmm....., LEO's use tasers routinely on fleeing felons, rather than using deadly force..
Fleeing felon Rule Common Law
Fleeing felon rule. At common law, the fleeing felon rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight. Force may be used by the victim, bystanders, or police officers.
https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/fleeing-felon-rule/

She wasn't a felon or suspected of a felony. She was an 11 year old that shoplifted a candy bar.

Geezuz. What in the hell is the matter with some of you people?

If you're this full of righteous indignation and aggression, join the military and beg 'em to ship your ass over to the suck.

 

[Doc91478]

She wasn't a felon or suspected of a felony. She was an 11 year old that shoplifted a candy bar.

Geezuz. What in the hell is the matter with some of you people?

If you're this full of righteous indignation and aggression, join the military and beg 'em to ship your ass over to the suck.

~~~~~~
The original post did not identify the stolen items....."Cincinnati police officers used a Taser on an 11-year-old girl accused of stealing from a supermarket. Officers approached the girl on Monday night after suspecting she was using a backpack to shoplift items from the Kroger store."


I served in the military more than likely well before you were a glimmer in your mother's eyes.