Tasers used on KIDS??

[CFLarsen]

Unless there's a "Six Year Old" setting on tasers ("Set your phasers on stun"), then I would imagine zapping a small child with the same current as you would a 250 pound crazed meth-head is not recommended in the operator's manual.

It most definitely isn't. The article speaks of a 60-pound limit. I honestly don't want to think of how they found out.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Wow. Thanks. As far as I'm concerned, electricity is millions of tiny gnomes running very fast, and they sting you if you touch them.

That's actually not too bad an analogy. It's just free electrons running around in circles. The stinging comes if they're running to fast.

 

[CFLarsen]

I know how ridiculous it sounds CF, but Americans are sue crazy.

In this particular case the girl was in the custody of the policeman, what that translates to is that the duty to protect the girl was the policeman's responsibility.
If he cuffed the girl or tazered her , he's guilty of use of excessive force. If she got run over he was negligent.

Here it's damned if You do and damned if You don't.

I've lived in the US. New York, even. I know.

 

[CFLarsen]

Lol. Are you being ironic? America is the land of litigation madness. You can sue for anything, and everyone does. Especially for police actions. We had a local case a few years ago where a family sued the city over the actions of police--the cops shot a guy who was trying to run them down with his car. The guy's family argued it was completely unnecessary, those cops should have let themselves been run over, and can we have twenty million dollars for our loss? And whenever there's a car chase, the cops get in trouble for pursuing the criminals, to the extent that the city actually considered ordering cops to let anyone get away if they began fleeing in a car. Yeah, that'll work.

Fix the problem, then. Isn't that what I heard when I was living there? Yep.

 

[CFLarsen]

But do you know and not just imagine? I'll admit it sounds pretty screwed up to me to taser a kid, but do we know what the actual risk level is? If we do not, how can we assess whether it's an acceptable risk level?

Don't you think it would be a good idea to find out before you gave it to 5,000 police agencies?

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

It most definitely isn't. The article speaks of a 60-pound limit. I honestly don't want to think of how they found out.

A 12 year old girl, on average, clears the limit by 30 lbs. A 6 year old boy, admittedly, is under the limit by about 12 lbs. I wonder how much the risk increases under the limit.

Another thing that would be nice to know would be the length of time the officers held the charge. Was it just a zap, or a sustained stun (I believe a 4-5 sec sustain is recommended for taking down your average crackhead.)

 

[CFLarsen]

Are you honestly saying that he should base his actions on what consequences it would have for him, and not the child?

Of course not. Where did you get that idea??

Is there any evidence that tasers cause more damage to children? And if so, does that approach anywhere near the level of damage she would have suffered by running into lanes of traffic?

Again, this would be a good idea to find out before the thing was distributed to 5,000 police agencies.

 

[CFLarsen]

I'm sure someone's looking up taser articles now, but I'd hazard a guess that size isn't really that material. It's not like dosing with drugs, where body weight affects the effects (awkward phrasing!). Wouldn't electricity flow through the body with the same effects regardless of size? I mean, to electrocute someone you need a certain number of volts. I didn't think there was a sliding scale, "it takes 1000 volts to kill a 100 pound woman, and 2500 to kill a 175 pound man". But I'm not an expert on electricity, or the human body although sometimes the junction of the two, in certain situations, can be quite amusing if done safely and with the right person.

Think "electroshock".

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Don't you think it would be a good idea to find out before you gave it to 5,000 police agencies?

If they come with advice to use only above 60 lbs, it seems they did find out beforehand. With that weight limit, the 12 year old girl is probably a non-issue, unless she's severely underweight.

The boy, however, was likely under it, and so it should be investigated. I would hope the officers receive training including knowing that limit. If this is a case of one officer ignoring procedure, he should be dealt with. (Remembering, of course, that he took a calculated risk to save the child from what he saw as more serious harm.) If this is a case of the MPD not fully informing its officers in the use of their equipment, then they need to shape up.

Either way, the woman should be far more concerned about her kids desire to cut himself than his tummy ache from the bad cops and their stun guns.

 

[CFLarsen]

It so happens I am an expert on electricity.

It ain't the volts, it's the current that kills ya. Around 100 milliamps will do it. And body electrical resistance varies widely from person to person, depending on bodyfat, weight, perspiration, what you are standing on, your shoes, and so on.

edited to add: I've never looked up tasers either, but I imagine the current flows between two leads, in which case your shoes, the floor, etc. don't make any difference.

Precisely. I took an electronics class once. Do not ever put your fingers in an old TV set, even though it is unplugged.

Ever.

 

[glsunder]

warning, extremist rant follows:

A big reason why we americans are so sue happy is because no one will admit fault here. People have to sue to get anything at all when someone else causes damage to them. Everyone's told to lie -- dont incriminate yourself. There's basically no ethics here when it comes to screwing up. Great christian values, hmm? If someone causes damage to me and wont admit it, I'd be mad enough to sue for big damages too.

The good news is that at least it's beginning to change. Doctors are experimenting with saying their sorry and settling without lawyers forcing them to lie -- and get this, it's saving them money. Maybe it'll spread and there wont be that many lawsuits anymore. Most lawyers only make money if someone is lieing, so I'm sure they'll fight it tooth and nail.

 

[CFLarsen]

If they come with advice to use only above 60 lbs, it seems they did find out beforehand. With that weight limit, the 12 year old girl is probably a non-issue, unless she's severely underweight.

The boy, however, was likely under it, and so it should be investigated. I would hope the officers receive training including knowing that limit. If this is a case of one officer ignoring procedure, he should be dealt with. (Remembering, of course, that he took a calculated risk to save the child from what he saw as more serious harm.) If this is a case of the MPD not fully informing its officers in the use of their equipment, then they need to shape up.

Either way, the woman should be far more concerned about her kids desire to cut himself than his tummy ache from the bad cops and their stun guns.

No.

The question is, why did the officers fire (if that is the right term) the tasers in the first place, if they had been taught how to use them correctly?

Forget about the mother being concerned about her child. All mothers are concerned about their children, it's a given.

Focus on the taser, and how it was used.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

edited to add: I've never looked up tasers either, but I imagine the current flows between two leads, in which case your shoes, the floor, etc. don't make any difference.

Didn't see your edit earlier, but yes, the current flows between the leads. Shoes aren't much service.

 

[CFLarsen]

A 12 year old girl, on average, clears the limit by 30 lbs. A 6 year old boy, admittedly, is under the limit by about 12 lbs. I wonder how much the risk increases under the limit.

Another thing that would be nice to know would be the length of time the officers held the charge. Was it just a zap, or a sustained stun (I believe a 4-5 sec sustain is recommended for taking down your average crackhead.)

Don't you think it would be prudent to find out before the tasers were fired??

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

No.

The question is, why did the officers fire (if that is the right term) the tasers in the first place, if they had been taught how to use them correctly?

In the first case, it seems he fired to keep the girl from running into the street, endangering herself. The girl was most likely above the limit, so I really fail to see the problem with this one.

In the second case, my guess is he fired on someone under the limit either because of improper training, rash decision making, or a calculated decision that the risk of firing was less than the risk of not firing. (or he's really bad at eyeballing weight)

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Don't you think it would be prudent to find out before the tasers were fired??

Sure, rev up the time machine, and let's go look into it.

Seriously, why are you working from the assumption that these questions were not answered before the tasers were fired? It should be part of the training. I have agreed with you on this. If it is not part of the training, it should be remedied immediately.

 

[crimresearch]

I for one, would certainly like a link to the references showing that the M26 or X26 carried by Miami officers burns a hole through the subject leading to chances of infection.


BTW, here are the specs:

18 to 26 watts, 162ma and output = 1.76 joules per pulse

 

[Luke T.]

It most definitely isn't. The article speaks of a 60-pound limit. I honestly don't want to think of how they found out.

Puppies? Baby seals? Abu Ghraib prisoners?

 

[Ranb]

Don't you think it would be a good idea to find out before you gave it to 5,000 police agencies?

The point is that tazers are nonlethal, or at least much less lethal than firearms. They are an effective option available to the police when they need to disable a subject quickly, but not kill. Even though there may be much more to learn about their use, it is already well established that getting shot with an electric gun will leave the victim alive to regret his/her actions instead of dead or paralyzed from a bullet.

Ranb

 

[shanek]

I mean, to electrocute someone you need a certain number of volts.

Amps, actually. I forget the exact amount, but so many milliamps to the heart will cause it to go into fibrillation. That's true regardless of your size, weight, or age.