The American Scene

An ongoing review of politics and culture

• Politics
• Economics
• The Media
• Culture

• Home
• About
• Archive
• Search

Leave a Reply

1. I teach professionals who work with the mentally ill and developmentally disabled how to respond to crisis situations, up to and including physical assault. I have used these techniques to avoid being physically assaulted, while being assaulted, after being stabbed, even with a knife held to my throat. The number one rule to understand is that if you have to resort to any kind of “hands on” escort or restraint, you have utterly failed in your professional duty. A physical response is necessary because you did not properly use your words, body language, and the environment to contain the situation and prevent it from escalating. You did not properly consider all of your alternatives in the time allotted to you to respond appropriately.

   A Taser is a form of physical restraint. When they were first introduced, Tasers were a less-lethal alternative to firearms and batons for disabling a physically dangerous attacker: they allowed you to keep your distance, like a firearm, but did not require miraculous shooting technique to keep from killing your assailant, who perhaps was not in their right mind or was attacking you with a weapon that would require them to close in. Pepper spray is another, similar device.

   Somewhere along the line, Tasers and pepper spray stopped being a less-lethal alternative to a firearm or baton, to be used only in the same type of circumstances, and instead became a tool for compelling compliance with an officer’s authority. And therein lies the rub: I also teach that if you allow a situation to become about power, it becomes a struggle between you and the person you are attempting to control, and one you will find yourself resorting to physical violence to win.

   Many departments train their officers in de-escalation techniques, such as “verbal judo.” Unfortunately, such techniques often require a calm head, quick thinking, and an ability to observe, reflect on the effect of your actions, and adjust them appropriately. There are many police officers who are good, and some who are truly excellent or even virtuosos, at doing so. Unfortunately there are many, many more who cannot be bothered, do not care, or are frankly too stupid. More and more, law enforcement agents are taught to enforce compliance, not diffuse crises. Take that video for example: The officer/deputy in question would have already radioed in that elderly woman’s license plate number to run a check. So what if she drove off? Had he been thinking of anything other than asserting his control, he could have followed calmly, and had units waiting at her home. The end result would have been the assertion of order and punishment of her behavior. But a 72 year old woman wouldn’t have been shot with a device known to kill people with heart problems, which are common in the elderly.

   — Erik Vanderhoff · Jul 31, 01:17 AM · #

2. Mr. Friedersdorf,

   I disagree with a great deal of what you write. But the point you make here cannot be repeated often or loudly enough. Abject submission and humiliating obeisance to agents of the state, extorted by pepper spray and electric shocks, is not the mark of a free people.

   — A Constant Reader · Jul 31, 03:46 AM · #

3. I’m not sure I’m 100% with you on this video, although it’s unsettling. She’s resisting arrest and risking pushing them both into traffic. It seems like he has two alternatives—pushing her to the ground or tasering her (i.e. hands-on or taser). My understanding is that cops are trained to use the taser in situations like this because it is <i>less</i> likely to result in injury to the cop or the criminal. Now in this case, it could be that the rationale doesn’t apply, and that shoving her to the ground would’ve been the better course; I can at least see a rationale for training cops to use a taser in most situations like this one, though, and can see why that training would be applied in a dangerous situation like this even if shoving her to the ground would be marginally better in this specific case.

   — JAB · Jul 31, 04:00 AM · #

4. Rereading the post, your argument may be that the training is wise, but that the cop should’ve had better judgment than to tase this particular woman in this case. Perhaps, but it’s hard for me to say that this is “sickening”—the judgment isn’t that bad. Pushing her to the ground seems like the only other option, and it can’t be so much better that a reasonable cop would choose it correctly in the space of a couple of seconds in a situation of potentially life-or-death danger.

   — JAB · Jul 31, 04:07 AM · #

5. That should read “…a reasonable cop would always (or more than, say, 80% of the time) choose it…”

   — JAB · Jul 31, 04:08 AM · #

6. JAB: How about grabbing her by the arm and putting a handcuff on her wrist? She’s 72!! Even better, let her rant, call you names, have a temper tantrum, and at the end, give her the ticket. This guy never once speaks to the woman the way a young man should address an older woman. He’s using this cold, weird “cop talk” that regular people don’t understand. Candid Camera once did a bit on argumentative motorists. The cops were hilarious. They just stood there writing the tickets and ignoring the obnoxious speeders. These cops need to get a sense of humor.

   — Lasorda · Jul 31, 05:26 AM · #

7. Tasers are a thorny problem.

   One the one hand, they basically have become a scientifically metered beating. Cops can safely deliver pain to people who are being jerks without (in most cases) permanently injuring them.

   On the other hand, if you take them away, you’re going to get more physical confrontations. If the cop had gotten in a physical confrontation with a 72 year old woman, he easily could have hurt her worse – caused a fall, broken a bone, struck a head on the pavement, etc. If that had happened, we’d be blaming him for that, too. (Of course, a taser causes a fall too, so that’s probably not any better).

   I suppose the third alternative is just to let her rant, and/or to let her drive away and follow her, as some commenters have suggested.

   — J Mann · Jul 31, 12:39 PM · #

8. The officer clearly has a tremendous size and strength advantage over her; look at how deftly he shoved her back just before he tased her. He was clearly using the taser as an offensive weapon to subdue her, not as a defensive weapon to protect himself.

   — Tom Meyer · Jul 31, 01:11 PM · #

9. I’m not sure about the idea of letting the motorist drive off. What if she doesn’t go home? What if she drives for six or eight hours? Traffic stops would quickly become impossible if this rule were put in place.

   — y81 · Jul 31, 02:09 PM · #

10. y81,

    Why need it be a rule? Why can a supposedly trained professional not be trusted to exercise his judgment? If, for example, she was pulled over for speeding — so what? You’ve got her plate number — cite her for the ticket and for resisting arrest (I believe you’re technically detained when you get pulled over, yes?) and hand over the ticket later. In this specific instance, the old woman refused to sign her ticket — which by law she does not have to do.

    Let me repeat that. The confrontation was ostensibly over the cop insisting she do something that, by law, she did not have to do. The cop started the confrontation, and he ended it with assault with a deadly weapon.

    — Erik Vanderhoff · Jul 31, 05:03 PM · #

11. “He’s using this cold, weird “cop talk” that regular people don’t understand.”

    The artistic sapphire that is Mike Judge’s Idiocracy has many facets, each of which shines brighter than the last, but the way the cop talked while escorting Luke Wilson to jail is definitely among my favorites.

    — Matt Frost · Jul 31, 05:10 PM · #

12. My artistic gemology must be off; all this time I thought Idiocracy was a rhinestone.

    — Kristoffer V. Sargent · Jul 31, 06:00 PM · #

13. My 4 cents
    1 – What was she doing outside the car? I thought cops wanted you in the vehicle, unless they had PC to investigate more. He either screwed up from the start, or this escalated to the point it did.
    2 – The A/V doesn’t tell the whole story.
    3 – She did resist and pull away when he tried to cuff her. Poking a bear when your eye to eye is plain stupid.
    4 – Like it or not, most urban/suburban communities are part of the police state we live in today. You want to live there, learn to accept some bad behavior from some of the police. You don’t, move to the sticks.

    — AJ · Jul 31, 06:34 PM · #

14. clearly another case of profiling gone astray!

    — sfoster · Jul 31, 10:01 PM · #

15. Clearly several people don’t understand what’s going on in this video. She’s refused to sign the ticket and is being placed under arrest. The question is how to most safely effect her arrest. She will be arrested due to her own actions, and she is resisting arrest in a physically dangerous way. I agree that the cop probably should have pushed her to the ground instead of using the taser. It’s absurd to suggest he should just give up on the arrest, though.

    — Joe Bingham · Jul 31, 11:23 PM · #

16. NB: apparently cops have the option of letting someone go when he/she won’t sign the ticket. This isn’t standard practice, though, and when you have someone who seems unlikely to appear for court (thus leading to a later visit and arrest) it’s wiser to arrest them.

    — Joe Bingham · Jul 31, 11:39 PM · #

17. he shot an old woman with a taser, the context well relevant doesn’t overshadow that fact. the only difference btw that so called “man” and a common criminal is a badge

    — steve b · Aug 3, 12:07 PM · #

18. “She’s refused to sign the ticket and is being placed under arrest.”

    Refusing to sign your ticket is, in fact, not a crime, or even bureaucratically necessary. Argument fail.

    — Erik Vanderhoff · Aug 3, 04:53 PM · #

19. Refusing to sign your ticket is, in fact, not a crime, or even bureaucratically necessary. Argument fail.

    Whatever traffic violation she’d committed was an arrestable offense. The arrest was legally legitimate. I obviously didn’t imply that refusing to sign the ticket is criminal. You’re welcome to read my comments before responding.

    — Joe Bingham · Aug 3, 07:52 PM · #

20. Joe, you wrote: “She’s refused to sign the ticket and is being placed under arrest.” It’s kind of hard to backpedal that. The arrest is not legitimate. Her conduct is immaterial: The officer abused his power and then shot an old lady with a weapon known to cause death.

    — Erik Vanderhoff · Aug 3, 08:39 PM · #

21. “She’s refused to sign the ticket and is being placed under arrest.” It’s kind of hard to backpedal that.

    Which part do you deny? You deny that she’s being arrested, or that she refused to sign the ticket? I’m not sure what there is to backpedal; they’re two incontrovertible facts.

    The arrest is not legitimate.

    In what sense? You’re not aware that cops can legitimately arrest traffic offenders?

    — Joe Bingham · Aug 3, 09:17 PM · #

22. If the cop had not had a Taser, would he have needed to hit her with his stick to safely resolve this situation? I think not. Any time a Taser is used in a situation where using the stick would be abusive overkill, it’s abusive overkill.

    — Michael Straight · Aug 4, 03:05 PM · #

23. I agree that the taser use was bad judgment. My problem is with Vanderhoff’s misrepresentations.

    — Joe Bingham · Aug 4, 03:54 PM · #

24. I’m starting to think that Taser situations ought to be handled similarly to those in which a weapon is fired: in each instance, the Taser should be confiscated by IID until investigation is complete as to whether the use was warranted.

    Think of the paperwork as opportunity cost.

    — Patrick · Aug 5, 01:14 AM · #

25. The fox article makes it sound as if she was being arrested in response to her decision not to sign the papers, which is (I take it) her legal right. Even if she’d originally engaged in an arrestable offense, I think you can see the problem with the scenario:

    1) Officer declines to arrest individual for arrestable offense (and I have a hard time believing that a speeding ticket is or should be cause for an arrest).
    2) Individual declines to something which she is not legally obligated to do.
    3) Officer arrests her for the original offense.

    We can always use fuller context, but it sure looks like the officer escalated the situation because he found her behavior inconvenient. Whatever legal claims he had look like a pretext.

    — Justin · Aug 9, 09:33 AM · #

Commenting is closed for this article.

↑ testing, testing

↓ "...When They're Being Pushed Around"

All contents copyright The American Scene unless otherwise noted. Colophon. Archive.