72 year old woman tasered in Austin. Justified?? (medical, rating)

[TexasHorseLady]

I find it interesting that there is reference here to "deadly force", when the study quoted above clearly shows that tasering is less likely to cause injury or death than the other options available (99.75 percent receiving no injuries or scrapes and bruises (which they would also receive using just about any other type of restraint if they were resisting arrest). It would appear that the officer in question used the potentially least harmful method of restraint at his disposal, based on research on actual use of tasers.

I do just love factual information like that in these discussions. (Though clearly even such factual information as a videotape can be viewed more than one way.) Thanks, Fomalhaut!

[mlassoff]

Waterboarding is not deadly. No one has died from it. Perhaps we should allow the police to use that technique?

I can't believe people are willing to cede so much power to the government and police. (Probably many of you call yourself "small government" people) I guess you've never had a problem with a police officer.

Maybe you'll think differently when it's your butt on the line, or someone you love-- not a 72 year old crazy woman.

[austinaggie]

Originally Posted by statefan

There are also enough cases of innocent police officers shot and killed during a routine traffic stop, or hit and ran over during a routine traffic stop. The officer has to assume there is danger. When a suspect refuses to cooperate and follow simple instructions (regardless of age, sex, religious orientation, etc.) the officer had every right to assume they are a danger to him and anyone else.

This is so true. My husband is a former Sheriff's Deputy and he has always said that there is no such thing as a "routine" traffic stop. Traffic stops can be very dangerous and unpredictable. The police officer has no idea what type of person he is dealing with until he gets the information back from the license check. Also, even if the person driving has a clean record there could be a passenger or passengers in the car who have long criminal records. Just because this woman was 72 does NOT mean she or her actions were harmless. The longer she screwed around mouthing off on the side of a very busy and VERY dangerous stretch of highway the longer she put herself, this officer and other drivers at risk. The fact that she defied him and told him she was getting back in her car proves she is not a very intelligent person and in my opinion it showed she thought she was above the law. Not in my wildest dreams would I tell a police officer to basically "blank off". She did this.

She then went on TV and acted like butter wouldn't melt in her mouth and oh so sweetly told the reporter that she was in no way defiant or combative proving she is a huge liar. Then when the same reporter went back to interview her (after the tape came out proving she lied) and she did not answer her door.

As I said before, I don't feel sorry for her at all. She was warned numerous times she would get tasered and she kept defying the officer. When she pullled out the age card it did not work and rightly so. By the way, according to the Oak Hill Gazette she has previously gotten a ticket from a Burnet County officer and pulled the same stunt of driving away without signing the ticket. Maybe this time she learned a valuable lesson but somehow I doubt it.

[loves2read]

would like to know what her insurance company is going to do about her rate now

[Fomalhaut]

Hey was it a 88 year old man that went into that Smithsonian Museum shooting with a .22 rifle. Maybe they should of waited and called for back up to hand cuff him before shooting him. People would of called those guards stupid if they would of used a taser in that situation. Age means nothing. It is the human mind that can be dangerous at any age!!!

[homeinatx]

Studies can totally be cherry-picked. Here are two recent reports of the risks of tasers

New study raises concerns on the safety of Taser stun guns
Tasers And Heart Attack Risk

Many police departments across the country have policies against the use of tasers on people over 65, pregnant women and small children, unless the officer's life is threatened.

U.S. Mayor Article | Mayors Explore Non-Lethal TASER Technology (June 19, 2006)
http://www.oaklandnet.com/government...0(1-12-06).pdf

There were no smart, responsible people in this encounter.

[Indigoblue]

It's been said so well so many ways but I especially liked this post. I really feel that some people ARE being duped by the fact that she's a 72 year old woman - just like she kept yelling. I could be wrong about genders but it seems most of the female posters think the 72 year old woman deserved the consequence of her bad behavior - in other words - we don't feel we should be treated differently than anyone else defying a police officer, even if we're old

And on a conversation going on elsewhere on the internet among Austin area moms, so far everyone commenting is unanimously in agreement. Particularly a mom who works for the police department and commented on the Austin police officer who was shot and killed by an 80+ year old man at a traffic stop.

As I said earlier in the thread, if you watch the video very carefully, just before he tasers her the first time, she makes a move in the direction of the passenger side of her car. In my mind (and probably the officer's mind) she was either planning to try to run or go for the gun in her glovebox to "defend" herself from the unrighteousness of a police officer attempting to arrest a 72 year old woman.

Originally Posted by bbguy05

If she ACTED her age, then she wouldn't have been in this mess. This lady clearly thought that her being a "72 year old woman" meant she was above the law. She got what she deserved.

I find it funny how people are saying this cop is in the wrong, when this lady was CLEARLY being combative and resisting arrest. Had this been a "thug" doing the EXACT samething, I wonder if everybody would be quick to say the cop was wrong?

Point is, no matter who you are, if you are being combative and resisting arrest, you get what you deserved.

[mmac12]

Originally Posted by statefan

There are also enough cases of innocent police officers shot and killed during a routine traffic stop, or hit and ran over during a routine traffic stop. The officer has to assume there is danger. When a suspect refuses to cooperate and follow simple instructions (regardless of age, sex, religious orientation, etc.) the officer had every right to assume they are a danger to him and anyone else.

I agree that this Offier felt he was in danger... only because of his total lack of experience. If he couldn't control and handle this situation with a 72 yr ols women, I 'd hate to see what he would do with a real criminal

[love roses]

I'd love to see what you'd do with an out of control 72 year old woman or even older. And not in the comfort of your own home but in similar circumstances.

[mmac12]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

I find it interesting that there is reference here to "deadly force", when the study quoted above clearly shows that tasering is less likely to cause injury or death than the other options available (99.75 percent receiving no injuries or scrapes and bruises (which they would also receive using just about any other type of restraint if they were resisting arrest). It would appear that the officer in question used the potentially least harmful method of restraint at his disposal, based on research on actual use of tasers.

I do just love factual information like that in these discussions. (Though clearly even such factual information as a videotape can be viewed more than one way.) Thanks, Fomalhaut!

It may be nice that you find the reference to the use of "deadly force" interesting, but it's irrelevent When a Officer uses a taser ---the guidelines of that Police Dept. mandate the requirement of when and why you may use it. Under these guidelines a taser is considered deadly force!