Allahpundit

I thought cops were supposed to use tasers to repel physical attacks, though, not to subdue nonviolent (albeit loud and obnoxious) resisters.

Eh, from what I understand, there is a use of force continum, which ranges from placeing a hand on someone to move them, pressure points, taser use, baton strikes, to use of a firearm.

The point of all of this isn’t just to stop someone from attacking, all though that is certainly part of it. It also consists of getting compliance from the suspect and making him do something he might not want to do. (like get arrested, or searched)

I went to the Taser web site to see what I could see. It looks like they have a MS Word document that lists some court cases that indicate tasers can be used to make someone do something, and not just to incapacitate them.

Michenfelder v. Sumner, 860 F.2d 328 (9th Cir. 1988) The appellate court held that the use of Taser guns was not cruel and unusual punishment and a policy of allowing use of Taser guns on an inmate who refuses to submit to a strip search does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The court noted that Nevada’s Department of Prison authorities believe the Taser is the preferred method for controlling prisoners because it is the “least confrontational” when compared to the use of physical restraint, billy clubs, mace, or stun guns. By disabling the inmate, it prevents further violence. The court held that the Taser gun is not per se unconstitutional.

Jolivet v. Cook, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 3950 (10th Cir. 1995)The appellate court upheld the holding of the district court which concluded that the correctional officers used taser weapons in a good faith effort to maintain and restore discipline after the inmate refused orders to be handcuffed before being moved from his cell.

Walker v. Sumner, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 26517 (9th Cir 1993)The court affirmed Michenfelder v. Sumner, cited above, where the court held that the threatened use of a taser to enforce compliance with a search had a reasonable security purpose and was not unconstitutional.

Hernandez v. Terhume, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18080 (ND Cal. 2000)
The district court held that taser guns may be reasonably used to quell disorders and to compel obedience, but they cannot be used to punish a prisoner.

Drummer v. Luttrell, 75 F. Supp. 2d 796 (WD Tenn. 1999)The court held that prison officials are entitled to use physical force, including devices such as tasers, to compel obedience by inmates.

Parker v. Asher, 701 F. Supp. 192 (Nev. 1988)The court affirmed Michenfelder v. Sumner, cited above, where the Ninth Circuit held that Taser guns are not per se unconstitutional as long as they are “used to enforce compliance with [an order] that had a reasonable security purpose. The legitimate intended result of a shooting is incapacitation of a dangerous person, not the infliction of pain.

Now I can’t say with any legal certainty that it is legal to use a taser to make someone stand up.

But it looks like these court cases might shed some light onto if it is theoretically legal or illegal.

And I’m in not position to comment on LAPD policy or CA state law or anything else.

Lawyers, do with this whatever you all want. I’m heading to the library.

EFG on November 17, 2006 at 5:40 PM

By the way, in some of the few actual glimpses of this guy on the video that I watched several times, it looks like he is handcuffed when they taze him.

In my opinion, it looks like he is cuffed, and they are trying to escort him out, but he is refusing to stand up and walk.

So they tazed him to try to force him to comply.

EFG on November 17, 2006 at 5:42 PM