Teen Dies After Police Use Taser on Him (Bay City, MI)

[ChefChiTown]

Blah. cops over use force constantly. if they can't get an unarmed 15 yr old kid under control. they don't need to be police officers. especially cops wearing protective equipment that could withstand bullets. let alone a 15 yr old swinging, throwing punches @ them. give me a fuckin bread. thats pathetic!

I hope that department gets sued for millions! that situation didn't warant a dead 15 yr old for throwing punches @ some cops. :nono:

When I was 15 years old, I could've beaten up an adult, even if it was a cop. The fact that the kid was 15 has NOTHING to do with self-defense. Also, even though this 15 year old attacked a police officer, people are looking at him like he was some innocent child. But, if that kid pulled out a gun and shot a police officer, nobody would be acting as if he was a child. They would, all of a sudden, be viewing him as an adult. Hypocritical.

Also, your everyday police officer doesn't wear equipment that protects them from hand-to-hand combat attacks. That's called riot gear and, since you think this kid was some easily controllable youngin', riot gear would be completely unnecessary in your opinion.

 

[STDiva]

You're making it sound like they intentionally murdered this kid. Maybe you should be a cop. It sounds like you could do a much better job.

 

[Marlo Manson]

When I was 15 years old, I could've beaten up an adult, even if it was a cop. The fact that the kid was 15 has NOTHING to do with self-defense. Also, even though this 15 year old attacked a police officer, people are looking at him like he was some innocent child. But, if that kid pulled out a gun and shot a police officer, nobody would be acting as if he was a child. They would, all of a sudden, be viewing him as an adult. Hypocritical.

Also, your everyday police officer doesn't wear equipment that protects them from hand-to-hand combat attacks. That's called riot gear and, since you think this kid was some easily controllable youngin', riot gear would be completely unnecessary in your opinion.

Standard protocol for domestic related calls usually requires or if the responding officers have any common sense they'd be wearing bullet proof vests @ all times. as far a riot gear. you never know when a dad, brother, cousin, uncle will get involved. riot gear is not out of the question. besides, the cops could have used several different tactics to sub due the fucking kid. and as for guns. they have to assess the situation and deal with it when it happens. no guns. or weapons were in possession of the kid.

You're making it sound like they intentionally murdered this kid. Maybe you should be a cop. It sounds like you could do a much better job.

Maybe, it was their intent, too kill him deliberately? :dunno: it doesn't sound like they gave the kid to much leeway. FFS they killed the kid using a taser. :wtf: thats fucking insane. me be a cop. nope. I am not trying to say I could do it, nor would I want to do it. but yeah I think in that instance. I would have sub-dued the kid without killing him. :yesyes:

 

[ChefChiTown]

Standard protocol for domestic related calls usually requires or if the responding officers have any common sense they'd be wearing bullet proof vests @ all times. as far a riot gear. you never know when a dad, brother, cousin, uncle will get involved.

You also never know when a suspect has a concealed gun, knife or other weapon that they can pull out at a moment's notice. Hence, the use of tasers.

no guns. or weapons were in possession of the kid.

A) Did they know that when the kid attacked them? No. Are they just supposed to assume that a crazed, uncooperative, obviously aggressive suspect doesn't have a weapon and isn't going to hurt them, even after that suspect has thrown a punch?

B) Even if he did have a gun or a knife in his pocket, you would still be acting as if the police had absolutely no right to taser the kid. So, what's your point?

 

[STDiva]

Don't punch cops.

 

[Marlo Manson]

You also never know when a suspect has a concealed gun, knife or other weapon that they can pull out at a moment's notice. Hence, the use of tasers.



A) Did they know that when the kid attacked them? No. Are they just supposed to assume that a crazed, uncooperative, obviously aggressive suspect doesn't have a weapon and isn't going to hurt them, even after that suspect has thrown a punch?

B) Even if he did have a gun or a knife in his pocket, you would still be acting as if the police had absolutely no right to taser the kid. So, what's your point?

Like I said thats what cops are trained to do. assess the situation and act acordingly. if their was a gun. that would be a different level of danger and whatever force the cops used would have prolly been justified. without the cops seeing a weapon. pepper spray, tear gas, batons, and billy clubs are acceptable retaliation for a lunging kid throwing punches. tasers are deadly proven over and over.

if you don't see my point, your not understanding the cops used terrible judgment.

I am sorry but tasers are just out of the question. they should be banned.

:2offtopic but lets see how many. unhealthy cops that smoke, have heart problems they didn't know existed, or take medications that would intensify the effect of a taser. so in essence before a cop can use a taser he has to be tasered himself so they know what it feels like to be tasered? so if they use their taser they would know what the victim would feel. and lets see how many of the cops die while being tasered or lets call it being trained to use a taser. :yinyang:

 

[ChefChiTown]

Like I said thats what cops are trained to do. assess the situation and act acordingly.

Let's assess the situation, shall we?

They get called to a fight. They show up to the fight and see that people are, in fact, fighting. There is an additional crowd, as there were a few family members present as well.

ASSESSMENT: We'd better handle this quickly, or things can get out of control.

Once the fight disbands, the teenager begins to get violent and attacks a police officer. He shows an obvious disregard for the law and exhibits a great deal of disrespect by swinging a punch at a police officer.

ASSESSMENT: The suspect is extremely aggressive and very uncooperative. He is obviously not going to go down easy, as he has already demonstrated a blatant disregard for the law and the people who enforce it.

The taser was pulled due to the assessment of the situation, as the police officers knew that the suspect wasn't going to be cooperative.

if their was a gun. that would be a different level of danger and whatever force the cops used would have prolly been justified. without the cops seeing a weapon. pepper spray, tear gas, batons, and billy clubs are acceptable retaliation for a lunging kid throwing punches. tasers are deadly proven over and over.

Now you're justifying the use of tear gas and billy clubs? So, if those cops hit the kid with a billy club and he died from a resulting injury, would you still say it was an "acceptable retaliation" for the kid throwing punches, or would you change your claim and then say that the billy club wasn't necessary?

tasers are deadly proven over and over

Trusting criminal suspects to be completely cooperative and submissive to physical takedowns is deadly, proven over and over again too. So, which side are you going to take now?

There are videos of police officers getting into hand-to-hand struggles while trying to take down a suspect, resulting in that police officer getting beaten to death or shot and killed. That's why tasers are used, so police officers don't die at the hands of an unlawful criminal.

so in essence before a cop can use a taser he has to be tasered himself so they know what it feels like to be tasered? so if they use their taser they would know what the victim would feel. and lets see how many of the cops die while being tasered or lets call it being trained to use a taser. :yinyang:

HAHAHAHA!!! A lot of police departments and law enforcement agencies require their officers to be tasered during training, so they know what the suspect will experience out in the field. The same goes with pepper spray.

My cousin is an officer on the United States Border Patrol and, in order to carry a taser, pepper spray and tear gas grenades, he had to experience the effects of every one of those things. He was sprayed with pepper spray while in a training exercise that involved hand-to-hand combat with a suspect. He had to sit in a room with tear gas and answer difficult questions, as he fought to keep his concentration. He was also shot with a taser for 10 seconds, just so he would know how it felt when he pulled the trigger and shot someone else with it.

So, those police officers (for the most part) know how it feels to be tasered.

 

[Marlo Manson]

Let's assess the situation, shall we?

They get called to a fight. They show up to the fight and see that people are, in fact, fighting. There is an additional crowd, as there were a few family members present as well.

ASSESSMENT: We'd better handle this quickly, or things can get out of control.

Once the fight disbands, the teenager begins to get violent and attacks a police officer. He shows an obvious disregard for the law and exhibits a great deal of disrespect by swinging a punch at a police officer.

ASSESSMENT: The suspect is extremely aggressive and very uncooperative. He is obviously not going to go down easy, as he has already demonstrated a blatant disregard for the law and the people who enforce it.

The taser was pulled due to the assessment of the situation, as the police officers knew that the suspect wasn't going to be cooperative.



Now you're justifying the use of tear gas and billy clubs? So, if those cops hit the kid with a billy club and he died from a resulting injury, would you still say it was an "acceptable retaliation" for the kid throwing punches, or would you change your claim and then say that the billy club wasn't necessary?



Trusting criminal suspects to be completely cooperative and submissive to physical takedowns is deadly, proven over and over again too. So, which side are you going to take now?

There are videos of police officers getting into hand-to-hand struggles while trying to take down a suspect, resulting in that police officer getting beaten to death or shot and killed. That's why tasers are used, so police officers don't die at the hands of an unlawful criminal.



HAHAHAHA!!! A lot of police departments and law enforcement agencies require their officers to be tasered during training, so they know what the suspect will experience out in the field. The same goes with pepper spray.

My cousin is an officer on the United States Border Patrol and, in order to carry a taser, pepper spray and tear gas grenades, he had to experience the effects of every one of those things. He was sprayed with pepper spray while in a training exercise that involved hand-to-hand combat with a suspect. He had to sit in a room with tear gas and answer difficult questions, as he fought to keep his concentration. He was also shot with a taser for 10 seconds, just so he would know how it felt when he pulled the trigger and shot someone else with it.

So, those police officers (for the most part) know how it feels to be tasered.

Ok obviously we disagree. No matter what points I make your gonna counter with another scenario. I think the kid could have been sub-dued without being killed. obviously you don't see it that way. IMO tasers are too dangerous.

You are pro-police no matter what. and I see it as a blatant case of excessive force and losing control of the situation and IMHO the police handled it in the wrong manner.

Hypothetically speaking, what if that was your brother, son, cousin, uncle, or best friend? would you say the cops killed him? would you say they used excessive force? my guess is if your honest with yourself, and you look @ in that prospective / respect you may get the point I am making and see where I am coming from? if not. its useless to argue. you've made your points as well as I've made mine. neither of are gonna come to an agreement on who's to blame, and who over-reacted. so lets just say its totally a shame a kid died in those questionable circumstance's.

Albeit, I bet the family is compensated in a court of law. by a jury of "our, their" peers, saying this kid was killed and died unnecessarily this whole situation could've been a totally preventable tragedy. :hatsoff:

 

[STDiva]

ya it could have been prevented if the kid didn't punch a cop.

 

[Marlo Manson]

ya it could have been prevented if the kid didn't punch a cop.

Sorry dude. Kid TRIES to Punch cop(s) = cop(s) killing kid. thats like comparing Apples to Noodles. it makes no fuckin SENSE and IMO its absolutely PATHETIC punching @ a police officer doesn't warant them killing him. :nono::ban::ban2::thefinger

p.s. bans and hostilities are @ the cops. (like fire the cops) not you.

 

[ChefChiTown]

Ok obviously we disagree. No matter what points I make your gonna counter with another scenario. I think the kid could have been sub-dued without being killed. obviously you don't see it that way. IMO tasers are too dangerous.

You are pro-police no matter what. and I see it as a blatant case of excessive force and losing control of the situation and IMHO the police handled it in the wrong manner.

I'm not pro-police no matter what. There have been pleny of instances where I have openly stated that police officers have been in the wrong.

In this case, the officer did nothing wrong. He was attacked, followed proper protocol and took down the suspect with his taser, as he was trained to do. Unfortunately, the kid died (maybe because of the drugs in his system, causing his heart to be unable to handle the taser), but the officer did nothing wrong.

Hypothetically speaking, what if that was your brother, son, cousin, uncle, or best friend? would you say the cops killed him? would you say they used excessive force? my guess is if your honest with yourself, and you look @ in that prospective / respect you may get the point I am making and see where I am coming from? if not. its useless to argue. you've made your points as well as I've made mine. neither of are gonna come to an agreement on who's to blame, and who over-reacted. so lets just say its totally a shame a kid died in those questionable circumstance's.

If someone I loved (father, son, friend, etc) swung a punch at a police officer, got tasered and ended up dying afterwards, I'm obviously going to point fingers at the police. I'd be mad that a loved one was dead and I would just look for any reason to excuse their behavior. But, after time passed and my initial state of shock and anger had passed, I'd realize that my loved one was at fault. Would I be happy with it? No. Would I accept it? Yes.

Albeit, I bet the family is compensated in a court of law. by a jury of "our, their" peers, saying this kid was killed and died unnecessarily this whole situation could've been a totally preventable tragedy. :hatsoff:

If this family took the police to court, they wouldn't win shit. Even the family admits that the kid attacked the police officer. That right there is enough for the judge to rule in favor of the police. Who do you think a judge is going to side with? A punk kid who attacked a police officer? Or, a police officer?

Answer: THE POLICE OFFICER

 

[Lucky7000]

Alrighty, let me just share my 2c on a few things...

1) It's difficult to deduce exactly what happened in any of these things since it's impossible for us to know what the media has left out or exaggerated...

2) Tasers, batons, bean bag bullets, rubber bullets, tear gas, pepper spray, etc. are all designed to be able to take down someone without killing them. That's why they're called "non-lethal" force... does it mean that someone hasn't died from it? No, they have, but that all depends on the situation and people using it. Just as guns and knives are "lethal force" because they're designed to take down someone by potentially killing them, though it doesn't mean people always die from them.

When officers are threatened, they're trained to react with the appropriate level of force... now, the appropriate actions taken might vary from department to department, but when police react to a situation they're not trying to be manly or get a reputation, they're trying to take tactical advantage and control over a situation. Before tasers it was mainly with nightsticks/batons, etc.

Even officers that wear a bulletproof vest, this offers limited insurance against handguns, and absolutely no insurance against melee attacks or rifles, and when you're dealing with a crazed assailant you have no idea if he's gonna whip out a knife which would go right through a level 2 bullet resistant vest.

IT's really sad when anyone has to die, surely. But when it comes to justice you have to be able to seperate emotion from logic, and fiction from fact. In this and most cases of people being killed or seriously injured by LEOs, the officer was just reacting with what he deemed, in a split second, to be the most appropriate tool for the situation. LEOs are not in the business to look macho, they are in the business to quickly diffuse a bad situation and live to diffuse the next one.

If the LEO hesitates after identifying a threat, then he risks the life of himself and everyone around him.

It really sucks that anyone has to die like this, and my sympathies for the family... if only someone got to the boy before he flipped out, these sorts of things shouldn't happen.

 

[SonOfSparda]

Sometimes it just pisses me off to hear what people have to say about the police, alot of people i see hating and having a go at the police are people in easy jobs that don't involve putting yourself in a position of danger for others. Every time i hear people say that they should of handled it wouldn't be able to do it themselves. Too many people see the Police as a single group that all Police are the same, And people who think that every Police officer is super human and should be able to deal with everything without the use of incapacitating a violent offender, i mean im hoping to get into the police in a few years time (for my own reasons, and im not some power hungry cunt who just want's to beat people because i have the authority to do so as so many people see the police) and my current girlfriend isn't to happy that i want to anyway because of how dangerous it can be. Do you ever think these officers have family? do they have young children at home that need a father? it's only when i see on the news that a police officer has been killed it's then when people go oh that's horrible who would of done such a thing and his family is left without a father, till that point everyone seems to hate the police.

Yeh i can understand your pissed that this 15-year-old died but it was his choice to start attacking a police officer, maybe this officer had no other choice but to use his tazer, he didn't mean it to kill the kid only to incappacitate him from hitting him and other officers, they need to put their lives in priority at a time they have someone attacking them, if not they'd do there jobs and let everyone walk over them and give them a beating without them being able to do anything to prevent the attacks.

You can flame this post if you wish but i just want to point out these guys are people too, they make mistakes yes it's bad when it fucks up to the point there is an unintentional death, but everyone makes mistakes im sure their are surgeons who have fucked up before and accidently resulted in the death of a patient. You can't expect all police officers to go out there to a call of a violent fight, to a place full of people and use some force to show that they need to calm down and need to deter the rest of the group getting rowdy. The Tazer is one of the only option's they could have taken to incapacitate him and maybe the officer thought it would be less harmful than taking a shot at the kid or using his baton to take the kid down. another factor is intoxication of drink and drugs, people are unpredictable in the way they act, they also don't know when to stop and this could of escalated to a point that things could have got worse, Reactions are lesser when intoxicated, the kid may have been able to take a hit or two from a baton when intoxicated and still be violent maybe even more so, Tazer is the most effective and quikest option for the police to stop the offender and prevent further harm to anyone.

Is it really fair on the officer to the extent that he didn't know this would happen to the kid, they even called immediate medical support but were unfortunatly late, that officer will never feel the same again after killing a child (by accident) why does no one think of the police officer put in the situation, he's always the bad guy. We might aswell get rid of the police i guess and have free rain the way some people see them.

My rant is over, this isn't really against anyone in the board just to the generalisation that all Police are evil and wrong doers.

 

[STDiva]

Alrighty, let me just share my 2c on a few things...

1) It's difficult to deduce exactly what happened in any of these things since it's impossible for us to know what the media has left out or exaggerated...

2) Tasers, batons, bean bag bullets, rubber bullets, tear gas, pepper spray, etc. are all designed to be able to take down someone without killing them. That's why they're called "non-lethal" force... does it mean that someone hasn't died from it? No, they have, but that all depends on the situation and people using it. Just as guns and knives are "lethal force" because they're designed to take down someone by potentially killing them, though it doesn't mean people always die from them.

When officers are threatened, they're trained to react with the appropriate level of force... now, the appropriate actions taken might vary from department to department, but when police react to a situation they're not trying to be manly or get a reputation, they're trying to take tactical advantage and control over a situation. Before tasers it was mainly with nightsticks/batons, etc.

Even officers that wear a bulletproof vest, this offers limited insurance against handguns, and absolutely no insurance against melee attacks or rifles, and when you're dealing with a crazed assailant you have no idea if he's gonna whip out a knife which would go right through a level 2 bullet resistant vest.

IT's really sad when anyone has to die, surely. But when it comes to justice you have to be able to seperate emotion from logic, and fiction from fact. In this and most cases of people being killed or seriously injured by LEOs, the officer was just reacting with what he deemed, in a split second, to be the most appropriate tool for the situation. LEOs are not in the business to look macho, they are in the business to quickly diffuse a bad situation and live to diffuse the next one.

If the LEO hesitates after identifying a threat, then he risks the life of himself and everyone around him.

It really sucks that anyone has to die like this, and my sympathies for the family... if only someone got to the boy before he flipped out, these sorts of things shouldn't happen.

thank you.

Sometimes it just pisses me off to hear what people have to say about the police, alot of people i see hating and having a go at the police are people in easy jobs that don't involve putting yourself in a position of danger for others. Every time i hear people say that they should of handled it wouldn't be able to do it themselves. Too many people see the Police as a single group that all Police are the same, And people who think that every Police officer is super human and should be able to deal with everything without the use of incapacitating a violent offender, i mean im hoping to get into the police in a few years time (for my own reasons, and im not some power hungry cunt who just want's to beat people because i have the authority to do so as so many people see the police) and my current girlfriend isn't to happy that i want to anyway because of how dangerous it can be. Do you ever think these officers have family? do they have young children at home that need a father? it's only when i see on the news that a police officer has been killed it's then when people go oh that's horrible who would of done such a thing and his family is left without a father, till that point everyone seems to hate the police.

Yeh i can understand your pissed that this 15-year-old died but it was his choice to start attacking a police officer, maybe this officer had no other choice but to use his tazer, he didn't mean it to kill the kid only to incappacitate him from hitting him and other officers, they need to put their lives in priority at a time they have someone attacking them, if not they'd do there jobs and let everyone walk over them and give them a beating without them being able to do anything to prevent the attacks.

You can flame this post if you wish but i just want to point out these guys are people too, they make mistakes yes it's bad when it fucks up to the point there is an unintentional death, but everyone makes mistakes im sure their are surgeons who have fucked up before and accidently resulted in the death of a patient. You can't expect all police officers to go out there to a call of a violent fight, to a place full of people and use some force to show that they need to calm down and need to deter the rest of the group getting rowdy. The Tazer is one of the only option's they could have taken to incapacitate him and maybe the officer thought it would be less harmful than taking a shot at the kid or using his baton to take the kid down. another factor is intoxication of drink and drugs, people are unpredictable in the way they act, they also don't know when to stop and this could of escalated to a point that things could have got worse, Reactions are lesser when intoxicated, the kid may have been able to take a hit or two from a baton when intoxicated and still be violent maybe even more so, Tazer is the most effective and quikest option for the police to stop the offender and prevent further harm to anyone.

Is it really fair on the officer to the extent that he didn't know this would happen to the kid, they even called immediate medical support but were unfortunatly late, that officer will never feel the same again after killing a child (by accident) why does no one think of the police officer put in the situation, he's always the bad guy. We might aswell get rid of the police i guess and have free rain the way some people see them.

My rant is over, this isn't really against anyone in the board just to the generalisation that all Police are evil and wrong doers.

thank you.

 

[STDiva]

Sorry dude. Kid TRIES to Punch cop(s) = cop(s) killing kid. thats like comparing Apples to Noodles. it makes no fuckin SENSE and IMO its absolutely PATHETIC punching @ a police officer doesn't warant them killing him. :nono::ban::ban2::thefinger

p.s. bans and hostilities are @ the cops. (like fire the cops) not you.

ok so he tried to punch a cop. whats the difference if he connected or not? the officer is still in danger, and so is everybody else in the vicinity.

you're making it sound like he pulled his gun out and shot the kid, purposely killing him. the cop used his non lethal weapon to take down the target without injuring him or anybody around. tazers are non lethal weapons, whether you want to admit it or not.

which reminds me.

http://www.stickdeath.com/frameset.htm

check out the one titled "non lethal" about 3/4 down the page. very relevant.

 

[Hypergalaxy]

Wow obviously a lot of people disagree in this thread but both sides of the argument make sense.. All in all the kid shouldnt have swung at the cop but at the same time police are becoming more and more comfortable with tasers when they are a lot more dangerous then they make them out to be (trust me I have been threatened with a Taser for the STUPIDEST shit when I was growing up).. Thats not saying this cop meant to kill this kid or that he doesnt feel terrible about it now.. I know one thing in the future he will more then think twice before taking out his taser again

 

[Marlo Manson]

Wow obviously a lot of people disagree in this thread but both sides of the argument make sense.. All in all the kid shouldnt have swung at the cop but at the same time police are becoming more and more comfortable with tasers when they are a lot more dangerous then they make them out to be (trust me I have been threatened with a Taser for the STUPIDEST shit when I was growing up).. Thats not saying this cop meant to kill this kid or that he doesnt feel terrible about it now.. I know one thing in the future he will more then think twice before taking out his taser again

Thank you.

I never said the cops shouldn't have used force. the kid did swing @ them. but FFS a taser? excessive IMHO.

I don't think the cop was trying to kill the kid. I just think cops under estimate the danger of those portable electrocution guns. :eek:

 

[Lucky7000]

I will acknowledge that, that not all departments are pristine in their education.. this is the most important thing, proper education. Too many accidents happen to civilians and officers because of the lack thereof.

In my local department there hasn't been a single death or serious injury from a taser, because of the quality of education.

 

[SonOfSparda]

I forgot to mention the UK police officer who died here last year now that they've finally convicted his murderer. The Officer PC Henry responded to a call in the middle of Luton city centre where there was a phone call from a member of public that a man had just assaulted a window cleaner. Officers there were armed with a stun gun but could not use them until PC Henry was fatal wounded by the man who was carrying a knife, it was also reported that the two window cleaners were injured. The man who attacked these three people was a Schizophrenic and that was one of the reasons they wern't able to use a stun gun on him straight away.

I think this is relevant to show you what happens when non-fatal force isn't used by an officer, sometimes he dies. He left one child and a wife.

 

[larss]

Police will very seldom attempt to subdue an offender one on one without some kind of weapon, be it a baton, pepper spray, tazer or gun. Normally at least 2 officers (often more) will subdue the offender to protect both themselves, and the person being subdued. The more officers involved, the less force is required. Someone mentioned using "rubber" bullets instead of a tazer. These are rubber, or rubber coated projectiles (they can also be plastic or wooden) that are USUALLY non-lethal UNLESS fired at short range. They are often heavy enough to break the skin. They are not possible replacements for tazers as they can really only be used for longer range, and usually to disperse crowds. A rubber bullet fired point-blank can easily kill, and they have been known to kill at long range, especially when the victim is hit in the chest over the heart or in the head. Shooting the legs with these projectiles (also mentioned above somewhere) is not an option. The aim is ALWAYS at the body as this is the largest target – this is the same for normal guns, tazers and "rubber" bullets.

The story that prompted this discussion is sad, and yes, safer alternatives to the tazer need to be found, but that does not get around the fact that in this case the 15 year old (only days from being 16), did not comply with the police, and was a possible danger to the police, others around him and himself, and needed to be subdued. With gun and knife crime so prevalent these days, officers have no way of knowing what to expect, especially from an obviously violent individual and have to act quickly – not always having time to access a situation. You also have to remember that the police are only human, and adrenaline will not always help you make the right choice. I feel sorry for our police – berated whenever anything goes wrong, and very seldom praised for what they have to do every day.