Taser Use Appropriate?

I think it's important to note that the issue at hand was "Did the officer follow the Taser use policy?" The question posed was not "Do we agree with the use of the Taser in this instance?"

I think in any case where judgment is required you will have multiple opinions on what should have been done. Simply pointing out that this officer has used his Taser twice is irrelevant. As humans we tend to rely on what has worked for us in the past. If I did something and it worked before, I'd be inclined to use it in similar situations and hope for similar effects.

In this case, it appears the officer followed policy. The officer is not at fault with his actions in regard to the policy. If there are concerns with the usage in this instance, the fault lies with the policy, not the officer. I completely agree that it should be standard to request assistance from another officer if able to do so when confronted with a volatile person or situation. That is simply an officer safety issue. The Chief stated he will look at this issue, and I think we have a responsibility to ensure that appropriate changes are made as needed.

I think the most challenging point raised was the question of active vs passive resistance. While we all have our opinion on the subject, we cannot simply ignore the guideline the officer was trained to follow. In this instance it appears he followed the guidelines of the policy and his training. We should not find fault with that.

If you do not believe the policy is appropriate, you need to get involved. It takes a lot of courage to stand up for one's convictions. While I disagree with most of what my wife had to say at the meeting, I understand her concerns and applaud her courage for raising them. I thought there was a lot of great discussion on the subject in general, and I applaud the fact that citizens are willing to make their voices be heard. You will never make a difference in the world if you aren't willing to put your name beside your convictions.

Another point I would like to make is the invocation of civil disobedience and Thoreau. I don't think the argument was being made that the act of trespassing is inherently unjust. There are some that are willing to treat their property as communal, but as a general rule society respects a person's right to property. Further, the argument was not being made that the commands of a police officer placing you under arrest are inherently unjust. Without the rule of law, these conversations would not even be taking place, so there is certainly a place for it in a civilized society. I just don't see how this particular issue relates to something as unjust as racial segregation, slavery, etc. If this is in someway trying to be related to homeless rights, or mental health advocacy that's a separate discussion but at no point was that issue raised.

As a society we have empowered our police officers to protect society and establish order. It is the responsibility of society to establish the guidelines we expect them to follow. If we fault the prescribed guidelines, that is a failure of society.