University of Florida Student Tasered Into Submission

Police departments have a standardized 'escalation of force' procedure established to subdue people. Meyer was still resisting, actively, with all the enforcement people at hand, so they should have used the next step up in the escalation. If their procedures include pepper spray, that might be the next step, but it could be that their procedures are 1) physical restraint, 2) taser, 3) batons, or 4) bullets. In that case, no matter how the video looks, the taser is the least dangerous to Meyer and the rest of the people around him.

Freedom of speech is not absolute; in this case, its limited by the rules everyone agrees to by attending the event. One news report I saw said the time for public questioning was over; Meyer was already given special consideration as he bullied his way to the microphone after the time was over, and Sen. Kerry asked that he be able to answer his question. Is Meyer's freedom of speech greater than the rest of the people who didn't get a chance to ask questions? Why does Meyer have greater freedom of speech than all the rest of the people? Because he's able to push people out of the way and bully people?

If the police acted in accordance with their policy, Meyer should not get a dime.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(FL_Prius_Driver @ Sep 20 2007, 01:46 PM) [snapback]515422[/snapback]</div>

It all depends where the case is brought to trial. And what evidence gets admitted for the the jury to see. Do you think a jury of college students (arguably Meyer's "peers") would like to see (much less experience for themselves) tapes of people getting zapped with a Taser and describing what it felt like afterward?

It is not about rewarding Meyer for his behavior; it is about compensating Meyer for the excessive use of force after he was under restraint.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Sep 20 2007, 03:41 PM) [snapback]515487[/snapback]</div>

Well, you are formulating a hypothetical. The adequacy of the escalation of force policy will be subject to scrutiny at trial. You still haven't explained the rationale for zapping Meyer after he was subdued (or the reason for 4 iterations of being zapped).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Sep 20 2007, 03:41 PM) [snapback]515487[/snapback]</div>

I don't think this is going to ultimately be about Freedom of Speech - excessive use of force is a much more actionable issue.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Sep 20 2007, 03:41 PM) [snapback]515487[/snapback]</div>

Even if the officers acted within the policy, that does not excuse the excessive use of force. Do you think the police in the 1960s were not acting within the department policy (if it even existed) when police dogs were let loose on civil rights marchers in southern states? If the officers acted within the university policy for use of force, they just get to keep their jobs and don't have any exposure to being compelled to contribute to the damage award. There still was an excessive use of force.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(apriusfan @ Sep 20 2007, 04:40 PM) [snapback]515504[/snapback]</div>

He was still struggling, and still fighting them. Those are not the actions of a rational person, and he presented a danger to the officers and all the people around him. The rules call for an escalation of measures before you shoot and kill him. The primary goal must be the safety of the innocent people around him, and the innocent officers called upon to protect those people.

One option would have been a choke hold, which if used correctly, is not harmful. The "arm bar" choke hold, which is a pain compliance hold, is the one that caused deaths among perps who were on drugs (and therefore did not react to the pain of the choke hold). The "arm-bar" choke hold was banned by many communities, but along with it many communities also banned the use of the artery choke hold that rendered the person unconscious for a few minutes. That gives the officers time to cuff the hands and legs subdue him before he wakes up. People complaining about "choke holds" are the reason it no longer exists as an option, and the less options there are, the faster you get to more lethal methods of subduing someone.

What are the options for the officers when 4 people can't subdue him? 6 people? 8 people? Pain compliance is a very effective tool, used against protesters all the time (including the anti-abortion folks in the 1980s). It includes holds and twists that can break bones.

Tasering someone is not excessive force. It is non-lethal force, and is probably safer than a choke hold. Since the swarm didn't cause him to comply and settle down, how would you protect the people around this obviously non-rational individual?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Sep 20 2007, 08:21 PM) [snapback]515585[/snapback]</div>

1 person versus 4 (or 6) strains credibility of the claim that Meyer was still struggling. In one of the videos that I saw, Meyer was essentially frog-marched to the back of the auditorium by what appeared to be a single officer. Additionally, a continued struggle defense might justify being zapped once. But four times? With no inquiry into whether Meyer is going to submit between the zaps? I don't think the coontinued struggle defense will justify the excessive use of force. Officer Mallo is still in excessive use of force territory.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Sep 20 2007, 08:21 PM) [snapback]515585[/snapback]</div>

You are raising questions/issues that are beyond the scope of the present discussion into what occurred in an auditorium at the University of Florida, so I will pass. A choke hold was not used. If it had been used, there may have been further problems for the university; which is likely why it was not used.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Sep 20 2007, 08:21 PM) [snapback]515585[/snapback]</div>

The controversy has occurred because Meyer was zapped repeatedly after he was being restrained with no respite between being zapped.

 

Would any of the people arguing the tazer was too much keep a loaded gun in their home for protection of their home and family?
Not looking for a fight, just wondering.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Marlin @ Sep 20 2007, 11:41 AM) [snapback]515369[/snapback]</div>

Well, according to Taser International, the manufacturer of the X26, which another poster wrote was the Taser used, and seems to be the industry standard, a single deployment results in a "five-second discharge" cycle. Therefore, one application is a five-second "duration of its cycle."

The Taser being deployed on Meyer four times would mean that 20 seconds would have elapsed. In the video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE , the police appear to be deploying the Taser for five seconds, from 1:59 to 2:04.

It seems unlikely that the officer would attempt to misrepresent the Taser use in the report, as the Taser unit itself features "2nd generation dataport technology [that] captures time and date of each device activation as well as additional data such as duration of application, temperature, battery status, and automatic conversion from GMT to local time zones." It seems both reasonable and likely that the officers are aware of this feature.

Additionally, if it was used as described by Officer Mallo, as "One contact tase to the man's left shoulder was deployed for the duration of its cycle," then it was used at the lower of the two force options available. This first is the deployment of the Taser by deploying "two small probes that are attached to the TASER X26 by...wires." "The Taser transmits the electrical pulses along the wires and into the body." The second method, apparently used in this incident, operates at a lower level and does not cause the NMI (Neuromuscular Incapacitation) that the probe deployment does. Both options are immediately available to the user; he or she chooses the method of deployment.
Again, technological accountability is built in, as the device would not only capture the use of the Taser in the probe mode, but "every time a Taser cartridge is deployed [in the probe mode], at least 24 small confetti-like Anti-Felon Identification (AFID) tags are ejected...Each AFID is printed with the serial number of the cartridge deployed, allowing departments to determine which officer deployed the cartridge."

The Taser International website is www.Taser.com

Legal information from Taser International: http://www.taser.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/Controlled%20Documents/Legal/TASER%20Device%20Liability%20and%20Litigation%20Risk.pdf

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(patsparks @ Sep 21 2007, 01:33 AM) [snapback]515665[/snapback]</div>

A number of people do (keep a loaded firearm at home for protection). Out of curiosity, why the inquiry? I personally don't see a conflict between being against excessive use of force and keeping a firearm for protection.

 

I really want this shirt.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Betelgeuse @ Sep 21 2007, 11:34 AM) [snapback]515883[/snapback]</div>

What, two days and it is already on backorder?

 

It's probably on backorder because they haven't even printed them yet - it's a pre-sale item. Some people will just try to capitalize on everything...

 

It seems our aggrieved student protester now agrees with me:

From http://www.gainesvillesun.com/article/2007...00319/1007/NEWS

His attorney has all but ruled out a lawsuit, and the article quoted above indicates that the apologies are probably part of a plea agreement to avoid prosecution on the misdemeanors and one felony Meyers committed prior to being "tazed".