Quantcast

UCLA Student Repeatedly Tazered

.:Jeenyus:.

Turbo Monkey
Feb 23, 2004
2,832
1
slc
i've read every post in this thread several times. it seems to me that people only see a fine line and that you must be on one side or the other. both parties were equally wrong, thats all im saying. i dont think anyone believe the amount of tazering was justified.....
:banghead:
 

MudGrrl

AAAAH! Monkeys stole my math!
Mar 4, 2004
3,123
0
Boston....outside of it....
This thread is frustrating...

and I'm incredibly happy that a few of you don't have tasers or authority....

because it seems that you are clearly not educated in use of force, which also sucks for you because you could be on the receiving end of the use of force.
 

untitledsince89

Turbo Monkey
Nov 11, 2005
1,317
0
Winston-Salem NC
This thread is frustrating...

and I'm incredibly happy that a few of you don't have tasers or authority....

because it seems that you are clearly not educated in use of force, which also sucks for you because you could be on the receiving end of the use of force.
yea i gues most of us are uneducated in tazering a limp subject 5 times
 

lugnuts

Monkey
May 2, 2002
101
0
maine
I don't know if this is so much a Use Of Force issue as it is an Escalation Of Force one.

The kid was being a dink and force was required to get him to comply with the cops demands. However they escalated strait to a taser?

As an MP we are required to meet the amount of resistance with equal amount of force (or only as little additional force as is required) to control the situation. In other words we don't shoot people for throwing rocks, if you know what I mean.

So the kid was kicking and screaming? Fine, we cuff him and stuff him. He wants to take a swing? Fine, then we can take it to the next level. But he would have to do a lot more than that before we zap him.

And on a side note, when I got zapped in training I was up on my feet the very second the juice stopped. . . . I was whinning like a little girl . . .but I was in complete control of my body. Oh, and to whoever was complaining that the "drive stun" is worse, I think I'd have to disagree from personal experience.

Just my belated pair of pennies.
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
And on a side note, when I got zapped in training I was up on my feet the very second the juice stopped. . . . I was whinning like a little girl . . .but I was in complete control of my body.
Here on the intarweb we have a saying... YMMV (your mileage may vary).

Just because that was your reaction, does not mean that EVERYONE will have the same reaction. My eSpeculation is that his ability to comply decreased with each application.
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,701
290
VT
Just because that was your reaction, does not mean that EVERYONE will have the same reaction. My eSpeculation is that his ability to comply decreased with each application.
That and/or they probably shock guard trainees on the lower setting - after all its just training.
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
That and/or they probably shock guard trainees on the lower setting - after all its just training.
Per manimal there is no setting:

this isn't star wars. there is no "setting". it's off and on, pull the trigger and POP go the barbs and then zzzzzzzap. power is controlled by the trigger off and on if needed.
See manimal, now I am citing YOU for you information that I know absolutely nothing about.

:cheers:

and syadasti, I eSpeculate they are not getting tased 5 times in training.
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,701
290
VT
and syadasti, I eSpeculate they are not getting tased 5 times in training.
Ah well length and number then, missed that. Uncle Sam wouldn't want to hurt their significant investment in the personnel.

Just like alcohol/medicine/the electric chair, effect varies in a case by case basis.

If you've every looked into the history of the electric chair, you'll see how varied and inhumane the electricity's effects can be - thats why very few states today use that method of execution.
 

Skookum

bikey's is cool
Jul 26, 2002
10,189
0
in a bear cave
i think that people on one half of the fence, could agree that the first tasing was acceptable if those on the other half would concede that further tasing was unacceptable.

Either way it's pretty obvious this guy with his "Patriot Act" statement, and subsequent running on violation of human rights will certainly have more success with that stance here in the United States, than if he were in the homeland of his forefathers.
 

lugnuts

Monkey
May 2, 2002
101
0
maine
Just to clear a few things up....

If memory serves me, I got trained on the Taser X26. It is a pretty standard device. It shoots the wire attached darts or can be used for the drive stun of the end of the device. It hits you with 50,000 volts, which is not adjustable. . .this isn't Star Trek. We can't set phasers to stun.
We had ours set so one pull of the trigger is a 5 second stun (I think that IS adjustable up to 30 seconds?). So when it sounds like the cop is just being brutal and holding his finger on the trigger, that isn't how it works. You pull the trigger and a pre-determined time later it ends. You can stop the stun early by turning off the safety if need be. Thats probably what the cop in the video should have done from stuns #2 on.

When I got trained on it there were 5 of us linked arm to arm. They stuck a dart in the bum of a guy on one end, and a dart in the bum of a guy on the other end. All 5 of us went down. In case you are wondering we all took a full 50K volts. It doesn't dissipate with the more people you zap. Once we were down they hit us a second time. I was actually able to wiggle free and break the circuit so we only got half of the second trigger pull. Then they pulled off the dart attachment and gave us all drive stuns. Keep in mind I did all this when I was in Iraq and expected to be "combat ready" at all times. So the Army was comfortable that they could zap me all afternoon and still expect me to be combat effective on a moments notice.

Yes, it sucked. Yes, I was b*tching and whining every time they zapped me. And yes I was perfectly fine once the juice stopped. I understand that it effects (affects?) everyone differently, I was just offering up my experiences on the matter.
 

Old Man G Funk

Choir Boy
Nov 21, 2005
2,864
0
In a handbasket
yea i gues most of us are uneducated in tazering a limp subject 5 times
I think what she's getting at are the people that are jumping to the conclusion that this kid "got what he deserved." The police escalated this situation needlessly. There was no mandate for the use of force, but they saw fit to not only use it, but use it repeatedly, and then threaten others with it as well.
 

Old Man G Funk

Choir Boy
Nov 21, 2005
2,864
0
In a handbasket
When I got trained on it there were 5 of us linked arm to arm. They stuck a dart in the bum of a guy on one end, and a dart in the bum of a guy on the other end. All 5 of us went down. In case you are wondering we all took a full 50K volts. It doesn't dissipate with the more people you zap.
How is that possible? You would all have to be in parallel, which it doesn't sound like that was the case. It sounds like you were standing in series, meaning that the voltage drop would be about 1/5 per person, meaning you only got hit with 1/5 of the voltage. The current stays the same in series, but the voltage is reduced. If you were in parallel, the voltage would have remained the same, but the current would have been reduced to about 1/5 (give or take depending on different body masses, etc.)
 

CrabJoe StretchPants

Reincarnated Crab Walking Head Spinning Bruce Dick
Nov 30, 2003
11,685
516
Groton, MA
How is that possible? You would all have to be in parallel, which it doesn't sound like that was the case. It sounds like you were standing in series, meaning that the voltage drop would be about 1/5 per person, meaning you only got hit with 1/5 of the voltage. The current stays the same in series, but the voltage is reduced. If you were in parallel, the voltage would have remained the same, but the current would have been reduced to about 1/5 (give or take depending on different body masses, etc.)

i could be wrong, but according to my ECE class it isnt the voltage that's dangerous, its the actual current that flows that is dangerous.
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,027
0
Miami, FL
How is that possible? You would all have to be in parallel, which it doesn't sound like that was the case. It sounds like you were standing in series, meaning that the voltage drop would be about 1/5 per person, meaning you only got hit with 1/5 of the voltage. The current stays the same in series, but the voltage is reduced. If you were in parallel, the voltage would have remained the same, but the current would have been reduced to about 1/5 (give or take depending on different body masses, etc.)
No... they completed the series. My high school physics teacher did this to a bunch of us (different system w/ MUCH less power)- no matter how many people were in the chain, it still felt just as strong.
 

CrabJoe StretchPants

Reincarnated Crab Walking Head Spinning Bruce Dick
Nov 30, 2003
11,685
516
Groton, MA
from http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2004/LukeWorkoff.shtml

The high voltage allows the current to enter the body, which also cause convulsions and spasms. This is caused by the high voltage, low current charge. A charge to a person for only a little over three seconds can cause him/her to stay on the ground for up to fifteen minutes.
"The high voltage is needed to get the charge into the other person's body, and the current is kept at a low level (3 mA) so that the recipient will not be injured severely."
the amount of voltage determines how much of the current reaches the target, but the current is what mainly affects how much damage is done.
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,701
290
VT
Here are the factors that influence its effectiveness:

wikipedia said:
The output current upon contact with the target will depend on various factors such as target's resistance, skin type, moisture, bodily salinity, clothing, the stun-gun's internal circuitry and battery conditions.

According to the many sources, a shock of half a second duration will cause intense pain and muscle contractions startling most people greatly. Two to three seconds will often cause the subject to become dazed and drop to the ground, and over three seconds will usually completely disorient and drop an attacker for at least several seconds and possibly for up to fifteen minutes.
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,701
290
VT
Wouldn't a taser have a limit to their max power output with their small stored current via 9V or AA w/capacitors - those extra bodies would add more and more resistance and eventually you'd hit a limit where you couldn't sustain enough power. Do you think they are really designed with enough power to shock 5 people at the regular amperage?
 

Old Man G Funk

Choir Boy
Nov 21, 2005
2,864
0
In a handbasket
No... they completed the series. My high school physics teacher did this to a bunch of us (different system w/ MUCH less power)- no matter how many people were in the chain, it still felt just as strong.
But, it's not the voltage that you are getting full blast, it's the current. I was simply pointing out that resistances in series do not receive full voltage.
 

Old Man G Funk

Choir Boy
Nov 21, 2005
2,864
0
In a handbasket
Wouldn't a taser have a limit to their max power output with their small stored current via 9V or AA w/capacitors - those extra bodies would add more and more resistance and eventually you'd hit a limit where you couldn't sustain enough power. Do you think they are really designed with enough power to shock 5 people at the regular amperage?
With more and more bodies, the amount of impedance on the system goes up.

V=IR

If the voltage is set at 50K Volts, then as the resistance goes up, the current decreases. So, if a normal person had 1K ohms of resistance, then the current felt would be 50 Amps (bad example, but used for round numbers.) If you throw 5 people in there, then the total system resistance (in series resistance is additive) is now 5K ohms. The current is then 10A at the same voltage level.
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
Wouldn't a taser have a limit to their max power output with their small stored current via 9V or AA w/capacitors - those extra bodies would add more and more resistance and eventually you'd hit a limit where you couldn't sustain enough power. Do you think they are really designed with enough power to shock 5 people at the regular amperage?
Tasers facts page (http://www.taser.com/facts/qa.htm) makes reference to body weight in testing.

Peer reviewed study used adult pigs chosen to simulate range of adult human body weights between 30 and 120 kg (66 lbs. and 264 lbs.)
Results suggest a safety index > 20:1 for human adults > 45 kg (100 lbs.)
Since the safety index is based on weight, one can only assume that a taser has less effectiveness at a greater weight and more effectiveness at a lesser weight. More subjects = more weight.

I have been unable to find any other evidence to support this. Still looking. Based on my electronics knowledge though, I agree with OMGF.
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
In my continued research, I came across this enjoyable read.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511392004

Read it all if ya like, but basically it says that in general, most police departments would find the use of taser force in this situation... acceptable.

So put that in your Mostafa and smoke it.

The various officers on the forum have made it clear that they enjoy a wide latitude in their actions, and that what they do to enforce the laws and ensure compliance is entirely subjective.

When dealing with a LEO the wisest course of action is to respond, "Yes sir. Right away, sir." Choosing another course invites a 50 thousand volt tickle.




EDIT:
At the end of the aforementioned document, there are some very good suggestions for taser usage:
Amnesty International recommends that:
5. departments using tasers should strictly limit their use to situations where the alternative would be use of deadly force. Examples would include: armed stand-offs, instances in which a police officer faces a life-threatening attack or injury, or threat of attack with a deadly weapon, or where the target presents an immediate threat of death or serious injury to him/herself or others. In such circumstances, tasers should be used only where less extreme measures are ineffective or without a promise of achieving the intended result.
6. Unarmed suspects should not be shot with a taser for arguing or talking back, being discourteous, refusing to obey an order, resisting arrest or fleeing a minor crime scene, unless they pose an immediate threat of death or serious injury that cannot be controlled through less extreme measures.
7. Operational rules and use of force training should include a prohibition against using tasers on the following groups, except as a last resort to avoid deadly force when no alternatives other than firearms are available: pregnant women; the elderly; children; emotionally disturbed persons or people who are mentally or physically disabled; people in vulnerable positions where there is a risk of serious secondary injury (e.g. in dangerously elevated positions, or near flammable substances); people under the influence of drugs.
8. Repeated shocks should be avoided unless absolutely necessary to avoid serious injury or death.
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,814
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
so let me ask you people this..........because i feel i am getting the wrong impression from a startling amount of you. do you feel the kid deserved no repremand at all? by the way many of you are arguing, and the results of the poll, it sounds like you feel he should have got away with it scot free. i agree 100% that the excessive tazering is uncalled for, but i want to make sure people realize the kid deserved some sort of action initially (i believe).....

if you feel that no action was warranted and called for, i am speechless.
it is not a cop's job to dispense punishment. he is there to uphold the law. so, no, the kid deserved NO REPRIMAND (beating/tazering) FROM THE COP. if he was being uncooperative, it's the cops job to subdue him with the least amount of force necessary, and it's the judge's job to lay out the punishment.

I'm a bit unnerved by the "he deserved what he got" comments on here, and hope a fair number of you never get into law enforcement. or rather, when I get tazered repeatedly by some over-enthusiastic cop, I hope that it's all caught on tape so I can quit my job and ride full-time. :cheers:
 

renorider40

Monkey
Aug 22, 2005
426
0
That's not the point. The kid absolutely refused the cop's orders several times, even after being warned that he would be tazed again.
Seriously did you not read a single page in this thread or watch the video. They didn't give him much time to get up either. Not to mention the fact that someone already said they couldn't get up for at least two minutes after they got tazed.

The second time he is tazed, you can very clearly hear him tell the officers to "Fvck off!" just prior to receiving a jolt
Ya I'd be pretty pissed off if I got zapped because I did't have an ID. And I was on my way out.

Hell, if I were a cop I'd damn sure be worried about 75 kids standing around, saying that it's "abuse of power" and "we want your badge number" and the possibility that it may become violent.
Yep because the kids asking for his badge number sounds pretty damn threatening and to me to. "I should look out, this kid wants my badge number (because I unjustfiably just shocked a kid multiple times with a tazer) he might attack me as well." I mean come on.
 

Reactor

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2005
3,978
1
Chandler, AZ, USA
care to enlighten us?
Mudgirl and I both (different branches) delt with nuclear weapons and had strict rules of engagement, actually harsh may be a better word than strict. I had weapons at other times and even stricter ROE. I've worked for law enforcement agencies for the last 10 years. Very few people with experience in law enforcement (military or civilian) would tell you that the actions of the UCLA police were fully justified.

They may have been justified in the originally tasering, and you really can't tell from the videos, since people didn't start taping until the situation was already well underway. Given multiple officers, one unarmed suspect, and lack of a clear threat, it would appear difficult to justify given the common standard of using a taser only where you would normally have to a gun. But we didn't see exactly what happened so I have to reserve judgement.

On the other hand, a tazer should never be used as a compliance tool. Tasering a suspect on the ground, surrounded by officers, multiple times, while yelling "get up or I'll taser you again!" is falls somewhere between misuse of a potentially deadly weapon and torture. I don't know any officers who would approve of they way the UCLA police tazered the student until he smoked. I fully expect the US district attorney to launch a civil right investigation.
 

CrabJoe StretchPants

Reincarnated Crab Walking Head Spinning Bruce Dick
Nov 30, 2003
11,685
516
Groton, MA
Ya I'd be pretty pissed off if I got zapped because I did't have an ID. And I was on my way out.

thats the thing..........he did have his ID, so all he had to do was show the ID, and none of this would have happened. therefore, i have a hard time feeling bad for the kid when he could have avoided this whole thing by simply showing his ID in the first place.......NOT SAYING HE DESERVED TO GET THE **** TAZED OUT OF HIM..........but he could have avoided any confrontation at all.
 

DirtyDog

Gang probed by the Golden Banana
Aug 2, 2005
6,599
0
thats the thing..........he did have his ID, so all he had to do was show the ID, and none of this would have happened. therefore, i have a hard time feeling bad for the kid when he could have avoided this whole thing by simply showing his ID in the first place.......NOT SAYING HE DESERVED TO GET THE **** TAZED OUT OF HIM..........but he could have avoided any confrontation at all.
Confrontation or not, there is no excuse for that level of violence. Keep trolling, kid.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,638
4
SF, CA
with a regulation of a private establishment makes me laugh.:cheers:
There are some HUGE differences between Rosa and Mostafa's situations and actions, but that's not one of the relevant ones. If you need help completing your side of the argument, let me know, because I can do it for you.

Another hint: that Rosa was on a bus and Mostafa was in a library is also NOT relevant.
 

MudGrrl

AAAAH! Monkeys stole my math!
Mar 4, 2004
3,123
0
Boston....outside of it....
care to enlighten us?
Sorry for being late.. had womanly responsibilities to tend to (cooking and what not)....


Anyway, as Reactor pointed out, I was a military cop.
And also as he pointed out, we learn about use of force and escalation of use of force.

I would definitely NOT be allowed to use a tazer if someone was screaming at me. And like someone else pointed out, I would not be allowed to discharge my weapon (9 mm) if someone threw a rock at me.

A cop should react to the amount of force he/she is facing, not escalate it. You should only use the amount of force that is necessary to end the situation....

If I had 2-3 other cops with me, there should be NO reason to use a taser unless the individual pulled out some sort of weapon, or was threatening bodily harm. Just saying "f you" doesn't justify that.

If I used a taser because someone told me to 'eff off', I would have a lot of explaining to do, and probably would be taken off the job as well.


If anyone wants to read up on a basic use of force model, and learn their rights in the process (though it is air force.... you may have to look elsewhere for specific things regarding your location... but this is a decent model...) lookie Here

In cases warranting the use of force, you must use only that force reasonably necessary to reach your objective. ... Once a particular level of force is no longer required, you must discontinue its use despite the fact a suspect's efforts to thwart or evade a seizure may arouse normal passions of anger, fear, or frustration
This is the Use of Force Model that we learned (adopted from the "Intecrated Force Management- Use of Force Model" first developed in 1991, byt the Professor Gregory J. Connor,k University of Illinois Police Training Institute and staff of the Federal Law Wnforcement Training Center):



The subject's action (Mostafa) was initially Compliant... and the officers should have just let him leave. Then officers escalated the use of force by administering the Taser (remember, the officers should only respond to the force that is given... not escalate it themselves). The subject then became Resistant (passive), the officers should have only been using Contact controls (restraint applications designed to guide or direct the non-compliant subject, first contact with the subject).

What I was saying before, when Renegad Rick asked me to clarify, was basically that if you don't know your rights, you will be trampled on.

All of the individuals here who advocate the use of taser in this case, don't know their own rights, nor do they know what the police can and can not do to them. They are ripe to be abused, and would probably thank the cops after for abusing them.
 

valve bouncer

Master Dildoist
Feb 11, 2002
7,791
36
Japan
Suffice is to say, if MG, John E and Manimal had have been the 3 cops there then I have no doubt this situation would have been defused quite easily. Having the power and knowing when it's appropriate to use it is one of the things that makes a good cop imo. Most good cops would never have let that situation escalate to the point it did there.
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
Can we all have a group hug now? Or a drink?

:cheers:

Hey MG:
The Amnesty International article seemed to think that most police departments thought it was OK to use tasers to get subjects to comply with LEO orders. Are you disagreeing with that?

Reactor said that he thought it should be as an alternative to lethal force (the top step on your chart).

Which is it?
 

binary visions

The voice of reason
Jun 13, 2002
21,700
506
NC
so everything in life is cut and dry, and only one party is at fault every time?

i dont buy it.
It doesn't matter because your argument is lame anyway. Just because the student did something that made the situation worse doesn't justify the actions taken by the officers. If we were arguing and I was the first one to yell, stabbing me isn't an appropriate response. The argument that I started it because I yelled first is stupid - one person escalating a situation doesn't automatically get pinned with responsibility for however that situation turns out. It was the officer's choice to escalate it to violence and the officer's choice to do it multiple times when other methods would have sufficed. They are the ones with the responsibility to use their weapons appropriately.

"But mom, he started it!"

There is no happy medium here where both sides did something equally wrong so we all call it a draw and walk away. Either the officers were justified in their actions, or they were not justified in their actions. To me (and apparantly to the people who run the show, as MudGrrl has demonstrated), only the student escalating the situation to the level of violence and a physical threat to the police officers would have justified the action taken.