[RenegadeRick]

Tests have shown a tazer does not effect a pacemaker. Even when the electrodes are hooked directly to the pacemaker.

Really? My research suggests otherwise.

Of course, TASER International has data that contradicts that claim. And their data is what should be relied upon. After all, they are completely impartial and have no relevant interests at stake in the matter.

Good thing nobody questions the safety of tasers... Oh carp... some people do? They must be freedom™ hating terrorists.

 

[ohio]

Really? My research suggests otherwise.

Did you read your research? It says that the jolt caused the heart to beat and the the pacemaker continued normally afterwords.

That corroborates with the extensive study by the European Society of Cardiologists that said the same thing. The pacemaker is unaffected by a Taser.

Doesn't mean it is death-proof or accident proof, and it doesn't mean that police cars shouldn't come equipped with defibs, but they would be needed for someone with arhythmia that DOESN'T have a pacemaker. If you have a pacemaker, you're safe.

 

[CRoss]

Actually it does. A restraining device (that means tazer) is justified only when detention is warranted but for some reason or another cannot be accomplished. A 20 year old with a hot temper is more of a threat than a geriatric smartass. I know you don't understand this but I just wanted to clarify for anyone who's not a bullheaded tough guy with no sense of scale.

The 20 year old is a threat to the officer. The 72 year old is a threat to herself. I wonder what you guys would be saying if the headline read "Cop tackles 72 year old woman for speeding." This is definitely a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Looking at the whole situation and how she treated the officer and responded to him she is to blame for the results. If you are pulled over for speeding the only words you should say are sorry officer and thank you officer. This is something a 72 year old should be very aware of. I am not saying she should have been tased because she dared him. She was warned multiple times and acknowledged those warnings. She still chose to keep giving resistance. It makes you wonder if he tried to forcefully handcuff her how much of a battle was she going to give and what kind of injuries would she have suffered? I am sorry but in cases of breaking the law age does not give you preferential treatment.

The fact she is calling the officer and his report a complete lie just leads to less sympathy for her.

 

[BurlyShirley]

The 20 year old is a threat to the officer. The 72 year old is a threat to herself. I wonder what you guys would be saying if the headline read "Cop tackles 72 year old woman for speeding." This is definitely a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't.

...because those are the only two options when dealing with a 72 year old woman who was speeding. Tackle or taze her bitch a$$. She smarted off to an almighty enforcer of the law, she must be punished. I'd like to meet that fat sack of a police officer, unarmed in a back alley some time.

 

[CRoss]

With the way she was resisting I easily see them falling as he tries to handcuff her. Which everyone would be up in arms about this officer tackling a 72 year old lady.

If you are not willing to deal with the consequences do not do the crime, it is as simple as that.

 

[Westy]

Non issue. Old bat could have gotten seriously injured if the officer tried to physically subdue here.

 

[JohnE]

The news chica is seriously hawt...Keri Bellacosa...

 

[MikeD]

Cop was 100% within his legal, and even moral, boundaries with his actions.

However, that doesn't mean he did the only possible thing. Not to second-guess him, but he could have taken the alternative tack of letting her get in her car and drive away, then showing the dash-cam footage to a judge and getting a summons, or even a warrant, based on her actions.

A judge giving her a stern talking-to followed by a day in jail, heavy fines, and picking up trash on the side of the road is a lot better for him than having to deal with this BS.

Still, cop's actions were right-on.

 

[MikeD]

Just as you should not point a gun at anything you aren't willing to shoot, you shouldn't tase anyone you aren't willing to kill.

Is that better?

It does make your idiocy more clear, if you consider that "better."

Why have tasers instead of guns, then? If I'm using lethal force, I'll use the best tool available for the job. I'll use a shotgun or rifle, in fact, if it's available instead of my handgun...I won't think "maybe I should use my pistol, since while very lethal, it's less likely to kill that subject..."

Putting Granny on the ground to handcuff her might have crushed her ribs and snapped her spine and/or given her a heart attack. So we shouldn't handcuff her unless we're willing to kill her, either.

The fact that YOU have a bug up your ass about tasers, based on the Internet-fed outrage you so desperately crave, is what drives all these threads...so it is all about you, despite what you claim.

 

[JohnE]

Shouldnt taze anyone you dont want to kill? THAT is retarded, RR, even for you. The whole point of less then lethal weapons is that they are less than lethal (most of the time). You taze subjects you dont want to kill. Thats the intent, else the cop would have straight out shot granny.

You make a huge deal out of how many have died after tazeing, but perhaps a better stat would be how many have lived after tazeing, rather then having taken a bullet?

 

[Silver]

Cop was 100% within his legal, and even moral, boundaries with his actions.

However, that doesn't mean he did the only possible thing. Not to second-guess him, but he could have taken the alternative tack of letting her get in her car and drive away, then showing the dash-cam footage to a judge and getting a summons, or even a warrant, based on her actions.

A judge giving her a stern talking-to followed by a day in jail, heavy fines, and picking up trash on the side of the road is a lot better for him than having to deal with this BS.

Still, cop's actions were right-on.

Except for the fact that apparently he was attempting to arrest her for an imaginary crime...

 

[MikeD]

Except for the fact that apparently he was attempting to arrest her for an imaginary crime...

If the local laws didn't allow him to arrest her for the traffic violation (which in most places AFAIK, the law does at the discretion of the officer) or some other legit offense (looked to me like failing to sign the ticket was the problem), then yeah, that's a real problem...

My impression was that since the citation is often offered an alternative to arrest, it needs to be signed by the person cited to indicate they've received it (not that they have to agree with it or that they admit guilt by signing it) in order to complete the process; otherwise, an arrest is authorized.

 

[syadasti]

Sitting on the porch is threatening, good thing they have backup too...

 

[RenegadeRick]

Do you have any context to go along with the story? I had seen this too, but even in my wildest conspiracy theories, I have trouble accepting 8+ cops going to taser someone just fer settin' on the porch. There has to be a pretty compelling reason to have gotten them out of their air conditioned vehicles.

 

[syadasti]

Could not find anything but that video when I googled folsom and various terms...

 

[Evil Sylvain]

http://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/9aq97/man_tasered_who_is_just_sitting_on_his_porch/