Cop tasers pregnant woman (video)

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/11/29/delgreco.pregnant.taser.whio?iref=mpvideosview

It's in Ohio again. This cop needs to be FIRED!

I sure hope the novelty of tasers wears off soon.

Seriously, though, they didn't know she was pregnant? They also don't know if someone might have a heart condition or other serious illness. The cops just have to stop being so lazy and only use tasers as a last resort.

they would have had to have shot her or beat her up with their clubs, and then where would the baby be.

:sarcasm:

I mean, here it is, causing hormonal changes in its mom's belly. The cops tell her to stop, and it START KICKING IN THE WOMB. Bad idea, fetus. If you don't want to get tasered, obey the cops. It's that easy. No, instead, you refuse to freeze, put your arms up, and come out of hiding. Instead you actively resist.

I say we try both the mom AND the fetus. In adult court. That'll teach the little scum.

on edit: 'cause then it's called abortion!

a mother, her abusive arresting officer, and his taser.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Yeah, I realize this is no laughing matter, but you still cracked me up! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

pnorman

You are full of wit today! (more than usual)

My god. I hope video shot by bystanders won't be outlawed before tasers are.

I'm surprised she even alive!

It's like watching torture on prime time television. Makes me sick.

as if that were really the only problem.

Unless use different titles in Ohio the police chief wasn't speaking. Most likely, they have a board not under control of the police department for appearances of impartiality to conduct investigations and approve suspensions and firings. Whether it is or not might be debatable. Many public safety boards might be appointed with those that are spouses or otherwise might have a conflict of interest.

...the woman never warned that she was pregnant."

What's she suppose to do? Scream over and over, "I've got another person with me!!!" :crazy:

A taser fires a projectile.

That was a stun gun.

Does it make it better, or worse? What's your point?

Suddenly every weapon that involves high-voltage electrical discharge is being called a "Taser".

It's almost as disgusting to me as abuse of the weapons.

:argh:

Apparently it is within proper protocol to use the taser as a drive stun. The tips of the darts make contact (thats why he chose the neck on the heavily clothed woman), but don't pierce the skin. It causes pain, but not the neuromuscular paralysis experienced when the darts pierce the skin.

Its the kinder gentler taser. :)

But then again, it could have been a stun gun as you say.

I believe every product sold by Taser International Inc. shoots darts.

they still do the same thing

http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2007/11/28/taser-here-come-the-lawyers.aspx

Just when it looked as though TASER (Nasdaq: TASR) could be the next Avon (NYSE: AVP) or Tupperware (NYSE: TUP), another stunning controversy has the company back in the news.

This time, it's the death of a man who was shocked during an incident at the Vancouver airport. Manners don't permit me to show you the YouTube videos of this sad event. But you don't really need to see what happened, do you?

I don't think so. What should matter to us as humans is that a man is dead. What should matter to us as investors is that TASER is once again in the media, facing blaring headlines. The whole mess takes sickening to a new level. Thus, and not surprisingly, the response has been varied -- and extreme.

Canadian authorities are demanding an investigation. TASER is leaning on studies showing that its devices save lives and reduce officer injuries. The company is also attacking -- rightly, I might add -- those who take the unsupported leap of calling this and incidents like it "TASER deaths."

Rightly? Yes, rightly. As David Gardner recently pointed out on our discussion boards at Motley Fool Rule Breakers, stunning headlines are a concern to both the company and investors, for they foster the false perception that the TASER is a deadly weapon, a notch below the handguns built by the likes of Sturm, Ruger (NYSE: RGR) and Smith & Wesson (Nasdaq: SWHC).

I feel that I shouldn't have to say this, but given the times and the headlines, I'll say it anyway: A TASER isn't equivalent to a gun. It never will be.

Yet I'd be lying if I didn't admit that the same media that's burned TASER from time to time has also served it extremely well, thanks to some clever-if-somewhat-questionable PR.

Witness this feature story in Canada's National Post, which, frighteningly, tells the tale of a former TASER employee who says she saw TASER's top managers shredding documents related to hundreds of injuries suffered during TASER training for police officers.

Talk about an explosive accusation. It has yet to be proved, but ... ouch.

Yet even this supposedly thorough National Post investigation perpetuated the fallacy that TASER boasts an unblemished legal record. Quoting: "Its litigation record is impressive: 61 lawsuits have been dismissed; at least two brought verdicts in TASER's favor; and 39 suits are pending." (Emphasis added.)

Wrong. Hard evidence has been published here and elsewhere that TASER's legal record is neither perfect nor unblemished. To the contrary -- it's littered with settlements that the company has colored as victories. Still, the myth persists.

So what are we, the investors, left with? A company whose technology is far safer than the mass media has depicted and a management team that, if allegations are to be believed, may have committed at least one serious crime. (But innocent till proven guilty, remember!)

That's as tough an environment as you'll find when it comes to investing. For now, I believe as David does: that the rewards of investing in an alternative to deadly force more than compensates for the risk that an army of fee-hungry lawyers creates.

But as we've seen with the housing bust and the ensuing credit crunch, conditions in the stock market can change very quickly. Especially when regulators get involved. That's about to be what we have with TASER. Invest accordingly.

A stunning array of related Foolishness awaits:

Host a TASER party? What do you say, Oprah?
TASER delivered stunning results last quarter.
No, you didn't miss out on TASER.
http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2007/11/28/taser-here-come-the-lawyers.aspx

I cannot condone this officers actions but people must be aware that anytime you are detained by a police officer you are in an arrest situation. Anything you say to him/her will be used against you. That is why you should just give the officer yes or no answers and nothing more. If you refuse to sign a citation the officer can arrest you and take you before the magistrate. The guy who got tasered in Utah was refusing to sign his ticket and the officer got pissed off. I think in both cases the officers over reacted. Here is the real kicker, if you are tased you are then arrested and you are charged with resisting arrest in addition to the other charges you may be facing. Cops don't give a crap about your 1st amendment rights and if you give them the slighest excuse they will taser you.

:eyes:

If they can't do that - they have no business having the job they do. A person in that position needs to the skill and proper training to diffuse a situation, to evaluate a situation, to judge whether a person is mentally ill, physically ill and make a reasonable assessment whether a person poses a threat.

The UN rightly called tasering people a form of torture. Every video I've ever seen where a cop is tasering someone there is too much goddamn glee and brutality - like that young woman crawling around on the ground trying to get away while the cop asks 'do you like that' while zapping her over and over. Disgusting - pure sicko sadism. The incidents that get in the news are usually because there has been witnesses with cameras. God knows how often shit like this happens. Police need these disgusting 'toys' taken away from them, and they need better training and screening than they are obviously getting.

Now I believe that they were the result of gang killings. But, how many as a result of poor use of resources by the cops will be killed by others? Because they use tasers when they should be capable of detaining possible offenders.

to defend themselves from a POLICE STATE! We will take away the tasers and if they don't straighten up, we will take away their guns too. This is NOT and we never be NAZI Germany!

"If you refuse to sign a citation the officer can arrest you and take you before the magistrate. "

Here in New Mexico you can choose not to sign the traffic citation. In fact, signing it is an admission of guilt!

on top of the woman.

Don't cops tell those they are arresting that they will also be charged with resisting arrest in addition to any other charges?

Was the cop incompetent that he couldn't handcuff her without tasering her? Anyone that knows wrestling knows that when one is on top of another person with intent to keep the person on the bottom it is usually difficult for the person on the bottom to escape. Especially, when the person on top weighs more.

You know, I think we're building up this wonderful body of anecdotal evidence that cops generally have no way of immediately knowing/assessing the physical condition of people they try to detain or subdue...pregnancy, Alzheimer's, schizophrenia, heart rhythm problems or pacemaker,epilepsy, diabetic ketosis (vs. intoxication), and so forth.

Why is this device being used as a standard "equalizer" when it's becoming increasingly clear that it is suitable only as the last resort in non-deadly force situations?

The question on this zapping, at least to me, is why did the officer when, apparently, he had the woman under enough control to handcuffer her zap her instead?

The population is kept docile and stupid and basically controlled with cattle prods.

It's depressing to see this particular fiction becoming a reality.

in use is (1) cops are getting lazy about using their hands in physical force situations, and (2) society is suit-happy about injuries. The down side to the cops using their hands for physical force is that it increases the likelihood that both the cop(s) and the suspect will be injured.

Batons were certainly not called for in this case. Pepper spray in an enclosed area is always bad. That leaves hands and tasers. In this case hands would seem have been the correct response.

Like cattle prods and stun guns.

:argh:

when that woman was face down on the ground with the cop on top of her he was pretty much in control of the situation. Certainly in enough control to wait a few moments for assistance. No need to pull out the damn taser. This looked like an abuse of power to me.

I'm sure most cops are in law enforcement for good reasons, but it's clear that this profession will also attract guys who get off on the "power trip" aspects of the job. I think that Ohio cop that tasered the speeder was from the immature asshole variety. He could hardly wait to use his new taser. If you remember, he put his clipboard on the bumper of his cruiser and was pulling out his taser BEFORE he had even turned around to see the speeder WALKING back toward his car. I think his reaction was not only unnecessary, but criminal.

It's hard to tell what exactly was going on in this video when the cop had the woman on the ground, but it seems likely there was no need for the taser. If he can't maintain control of a woman he has pinned to the ground then he should get further training before he wears a badge again, although I think there's a good chance this guy is just another asshole.

Tasers should only be used as a next to last resort. I understand that a cops often have to make a split second judgment call and for this reason should always get the benefit of any doubt. But, tasers are only non-lethal MOST of the time, and for this reason using one recklessly should be a criminal matter. At the very least it should mean permanent dismissal.

putting a bag on someone's head and filling it with pepper spray might not kill them either, but do we want to live in a society where police are allowed to do that?

I want to view the video but if it's hard to watch I will pass on it.

self delete. Wrong video....

The figures are dark, you can't see faces, and without the description I wouldn't have even been able to tell if it was a man or woman. Plus, I don't think there is any sound either. It pretty much looks like someone tackling someone else. It's really not very graphic.

At least that seems to be the trend based on a quick scan of news articles via Google.