Tasers used on KIDS??

[CFLarsen]

Miami-Dade County Police are reviewing their policy on using Tasers after officers stunned two children with the weapons in the past few weeks.

...

The more recent of the two incidents occurred November 5, when a 12-year-old girl who was skipping school was found drinking and smoking in a swimming pool, Miami-Dade police officer William Nelson stated in an incident report. He said he responded to an anonymous call about the activities.

He said he told the girl he was taking her to school. As they walked to the police car, she ran away.

"I advised her to stop several times," he said in the report. She "continued running even to the point of starting to run into lanes of traffic."

Nelson said he used the Taser for his and the girl's safety, striking her in the base of the neck and lower right back.

The girl was released into her mother's custody and taken to a doctor.

"I couldn't breathe, and I was, like, nervous, and I was scared at the same time," the girl told CNN.

...

About two weeks earlier, a first-grader was shot with a Taser at school when he threatened to cut his leg with a piece of broken glass, authorities said. The boy's family said he vomited after the jolt.

"If there's three officers, it's nothing to tell a 6-year-old holding a glass, if you feel threatened, 'Hey, here's a piece of candy, hey, here's a toy. Let the glass go,'" the boy's mother told CNN.

But police insisted using the gun was the only option.

Source: CNN

What in the blue......(insert 4-letter word here)......are these people thinking? They use tasers on kids??

 

[Tmy]

TO not scare the kids they should at least they yell out "PIKACHU!!!!!" before they fire.

 

[TragicMonkey]

What in the blue......(insert 4-letter word here)......are these people thinking? They use tasers on kids??

I don't know about the 6 year old with the glass, but in the girl's case, had they let her run into traffic and get hit, there would be an immediate lawsuit for millions, media circus, the cops would be suspended or fired, and oh, yeah, the girl would be dead and so would, possibly, some of the car passengers once the cars started veering around trying not to hit her and ending up hitting each other. That would have been so much better than using a non-fatal weapon to stop her.

 

[CFLarsen]

Re: Re: Tasers used on KIDS??

I don't know about the 6 year old with the glass, but in the girl's case, had they let her run into traffic and get hit, there would be an immediate lawsuit for millions, media circus, the cops would be suspended or fired, and oh, yeah, the girl would be dead and so would, possibly, some of the car passengers once the cars started veering around trying not to hit her and ending up hitting each other. That would have been so much better than using a non-fatal weapon to stop her.

I'm sorry. I may not be privvy to the innards of the American Judicial System, but could you explain to me how anyone could file a lawsuit against a police officer for "failing" to prevent a 12-year old kid from running into traffic?

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Re: Re: Tasers used on KIDS??

I don't know about the 6 year old with the glass, but in the girl's case, had they let her run into traffic and get hit, there would be an immediate lawsuit for millions, media circus, the cops would be suspended or fired, and oh, yeah, the girl would be dead and so would, possibly, some of the car passengers once the cars started veering around trying not to hit her and ending up hitting each other. That would have been so much better than using a non-fatal weapon to stop her.

Unfortunatly, there is a media circus either way.

 

[Tony]

Re: Re: Tasers used on KIDS??

I don't know about the 6 year old with the glass, but in the girl's case, had they let her run into traffic and get hit, there would be an immediate lawsuit for millions, media circus, the cops would be suspended or fired, and oh, yeah, the girl would be dead and so would, possibly, some of the car passengers once the cars started veering around trying not to hit her and ending up hitting each other. That would have been so much better than using a non-fatal weapon to stop her.

Or they could just stay the hell out of her business. If she had been killed in traffic, it would have been the cop's fault.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

So the kid was going to cut himself, he gets tasered, and he vomits, and the mum's upset about the vomit? Next time the cops should just let the kid bleed a bit before they act. I'm not so certain a kid set on lacerating himself is in the mood to be bribed with candy.

And I'll second TM on the girl playing in traffic. (In both cases, the officers should have flung feces instead, but that's another matter altogether.)

Having said that, is there any reason not to taser a kid? Seriously, what are the risks? Are there long-term side effects involved with stunning kids?

 

[Luke T.]

Having said that, is there any reason not to taser a kid? Seriously, what are the risks? Are there long-term side effects involved with stunning kids?

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.

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

Re: Re: Re: Tasers used on KIDS??

I'm sorry. I may not be privvy to the innards of the American Judicial System, but could you explain to me how anyone could file a lawsuit against a police officer for "failing" to prevent a 12-year old kid from running into traffic?

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.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Re: Re: Re: Tasers used on KIDS??

I'm sorry. I may not be privvy to the innards of the American Judicial System, but could you explain to me how anyone could file a lawsuit against a police officer for "failing" to prevent a 12-year old kid from running into traffic?

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.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

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.

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?

 

[shanek]

Re: Re: Re: Tasers used on KIDS??

I'm sorry. I may not be privvy to the innards of the American Judicial System, but could you explain to me how anyone could file a lawsuit against a police officer for "failing" to prevent a 12-year old kid from running into traffic?

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

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?

 

[TragicMonkey]

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.

 

[Luke T.]

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.

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.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

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.

It's the current what gets ya, actually. But current is figured from Ohm's law as E/R, where E=Voltage and R=Resistance. So, the taser fires at whatever voltage, and the current produced is based on that and whatever the body's resistance happens to be. As I recall, overall body mass has little to do with the resistance in question, as it relies mostly on the distance between contact points (the length of the circuit.) Based on that, I don't see how it's a riskier proposition to taser a kid than an adult, but if I'm wrong, I'm listening.

 

[Luke T.]

It also depends on what organs the current passes through.

And whatever path it follows, it burns a trail through your body in the path, which is vulnerable to infection.

 

[TragicMonkey]

It's the current what gets ya, actually. But current is figured from Ohm's law as E/R, where E=Voltage and R=Resistance. So, the taser fires at whatever voltage, and the current produced is based on that and whatever the body's resistance happens to be. As I recall, overall body mass has little to do with the resistance in question, as it relies mostly on the distance between contact points (the length of the circuit.) Based on that, I don't see how it's a riskier proposition to taser a kid than an adult, but if I'm wrong, I'm listening.

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.

Hey, it's not my fault I couldn't learn science. My physics teacher was named "Mr Hoots". I spent all year laughing at that. He wore a braided friendship bracelet.

 

[LostAngeles]

In the case of the six year old, tasering the child, however distasteful, was likely the safest option. From the reports I heard, the child was waving about a bit of broken glass and was cutting himself. Simply tackling the child could have caused a shard of glass into soft, vital places on either the child or the tackler, same goes for trying to take it away.

So his mother's concerned about the vomiting? How about the fact that this child has either an emotional disturbance or a severe behavoiral problem, if not both?

Compilation of several stories here:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/11/1705018.php

 

[crimresearch]

Gotta love the woo woo pro-criminal mindset.

'Taser a KID???' What's next? Tasering grandmothers? Churchgoers? White people??'

'I'm outraged that any police officer should follow the policies put in place by the voters through their elected officials and decades of court rulings on use of force issues!!!'

Look for lots of media hype on 'evil semi-automatic assault shock treatment guns'.

Reality is, the officers were presented with a problem, and they chose from the tools they were allowed to carry...if they chose wrong, then there should be a process in place to determine that, along with the appropriate reaction.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

It also depends on what organs the current passes through.

And whatever path it follows, it burns a trail through your body in the path, which is vulnerable to infection.

True and true, but is there any reason to believe the risk is significantly greater in children? I'm not denying any risk at all, but it seems to me the tasering risk was lower than either the running in the street risk or the stabbing self with glass risk.