If an officer testifying in my jurisdiction's traffic court can't say when they were trained in radar, when their radar was calibrated, and what model of radar they use, the citation is automatically dismissed. I have certifications for all three of those that I present in evidence immediately after giving general testimony. The smart phone is completely irrelevant to this case.
Essentially, lacking the predicate to introduce the radar into evidence, the officer was saying "he was speeding because I said so, and therefore I wrote him a ticket." Of course the judge threw it out.
While it sounds funny, when I actually read it my thought was "he seems like a reasonable man."
He saw something happening, used his past observations to predict a likely outcome if no action was taken, realized this outcome would be dangerous to the people he was sworn to protect, and then asked people who are smarter than he is what he should do to prevent or reduce the bad outcome.
He gave them some ideas that he had come up with and asked if they were worth investigating. While they may have been silly ideas, at least he had the common sense to ask smarter people for help figuring out what to do instead of just pursuing whatever boneheaded idea he came up with. Does anyone remember the recent "possums released into NYC to deal with rats" story?
I think we could use more public officials like this guy.
Observation is a learned skill, and anything that makes police better observers is great in my book. I train my fellow officers in some simple observation exercises. My favorite takes place during meal breaks.
When sitting down at a restaurant, I instruct them to maintain eye contact with me, but describe every article of clothing the person at the table next to us is wearing. By forcing them to use their peripheral vision to gather details, they slowly learn to better use their unfocused vision and not get easily distracted. It's also a lot of fun.
For the less-than-willing male officers, I tell them it means they can check out women without actually looking at them...
I wouldn't mind a tasteful, text-only add in its own table that doesn't interrupt the flow of the text I'm reading. I would mind full-image or full-page ads.
I suggest doing it the way authors like Terry Pratchett and Douglas Adams used footnotes. Put an asterisk, add a footnote advertisement, and make it funny and in context with the text. Then I might actually buy whatever crap they're hawking.
Gamestop's prices when buying used games aren't that great. Personally, I go to Gamestop because my local Gamestop gave me some of the best customer service ever a few years back. I know the staff personally and am glad to give them my business.
I don't care much for the corporation, but the local guys are A-OK in my book.
What I want to know is why CMI has been allowed to be in contempt of court for so long. There have been past court orders demanding the source code, which they have ignored without consequences. They should have been raided by Federal agents with search warrants empowering them to execute the earlier court orders.
I work in the State of Florida as a police officer, and I arrest and charge people with DUI on a regular basis.
In my opinion, this ruling was exactly on the money, and far too long in coming. If a company refuses to disclose evidence, the State should immediately stop using their product to obtain evidence.
As a certified expert witness, I am able to testify to the impairment of a subject without the need of a breath analysis to verify. About 20-30% of the cases I testify in have no breath results because the defendant refuses to provide a breath sample. We only forcefully obtain samples (of blood, not breath) when a traffic homicide is involved.
If the evidence is faulty, I *need* to know. I can only uphold my oath of office if I can testify in good faith that I am using proper methods of obtaining evidence. If this company is witholding vital information, they should not be allowed to sell their product to law enforcement.
While I'm definitely a proud geek, my job is very physical in nature and I exercise many hours a week to stay in shape.
I have a gym routine, which I will not cover here, and a home routine.
For starters, determine your goal. Weight loss, cardiovascular health, and muscle tone are all distinct goals with different workout types to most effectively reach each area.
A weight loss workout should focus on muscle extremities, core muscle groups, and long-term cardiovascular exercise. Light weights for the arms using a bicep curl is a good start. Doing sit-ups and sitting on an exercise ball while at your computer will provide good core muscle strength. Skipping rope or jumping jacks provide a cardiovascular and leg muscle workout. Try to go fifteen minutes at once in a slow, easy pace. You want to be sweating when done, but not out of breath.
For cardiovascular health, skipping rope and jumping jacks should be done at a faster pace. You *want* to be out of breath when you're done, and keep increasing the speed and time worked out as much as your body can stand.
For muscle tone, add a light protein shake or supplement to an after-workout snack. Work with heavier weights, and use them on pectoral muscles in addition to arms. Do push-ups as well as sit-ups. Try to get a chin-up bar and use it.
As a former introvert (the mind and emotions *can* be trained, believe me!), I understand the reluctance to try a gym, and suggest that maybe you find a friend who will be a "work-out buddy" and act as a private trainer. It helps to have someone help keep count and encourage you not to cheat yourself out of a better workout.
Aim for twenty minutes a day for your first couple weeks. Try to push it to 45 minutes by the end of the second month. Bravo on a choice to be healthy and fit!
>1. It's clear that some individuals, because they were full of illegal drugs or possibly >for other reasons, have died after being shot by tasers. It's also been asserted that at >least one police officer has died in a training exercise after being shot by a taser; >presumably he or she was not full of illegal drugs. So, knowing this and assuming the above >is true, would you willingly be shot by a taser again as part of a training exercise?
If an officer died after being shot by the Taser, there was probably some condition that was agitated by the Taser, or the Taser malfunctioned and delivered sufficient amperage to cause electrocution. There is also the possibility of legal drugs causing a reaction that led to death. I am not going to be so blind or stupid as to say that the Taser *cannot* be the cause of death, but I would say that considering the thousands of non-lethal uses of the Taser, it is statistically unlikely that it will cause my death or the death of a suspect I need to subdue. I am still willing to be shot with it, because I am not willing to use any potentially questionable subdual methods on the citizens of my city without first having it used on me. I will not have myself held above the people I protect.
>2. You stated that the taser must be used appropriately, and made reference to drugs and >unnamed medical issues. Could you define more specifically what that means? Having read the >TFA, do you think there is a possibilty that the taser is being used inappropriately either >by accident or on purpose?
When I reference drugs, I specifically mean cocaine, methamphetamine, LSD, and "multi-vector intoxication", which is a "cocktail" of multiple drugs both prescription and "street". In my experience, any stimulant is the most agitating factor in death or serious harm when dealing with police vs. suspect use of force, Taser or otherwise. When assessing the situation, we often have seconds to react, but in ideal circumstances we watch for rapid eye movement, heavy and rapid breathing, and someone taking off their clothes for no apparent reason. If these signs are present, I try to find an alternative to the Taser, such as a lot more officers to subdue for medical assistance. This has only happened to me once, and unfortunately even six of us could not subdue the suspect without the Taser. He threw me off of him, and I'm 6'5" tall and built large.
There is always the possibility that the Taser is accidently misused. Careful training and an honest, open assesment of the data will lead to reducing or eliminating these accidents. Deliberate misuse almost certainly happens. I've never seen it in my agency, but not all officers are idealists. There are thugs who wear a badge.
>3. As a police officer, you and your coworkers are obviously constantly in situations where >you're subjected to serious bodily harm, and let me be the first to say that as a citizen I >deeply appreciate it and think the police are not supported as well as they should be from >a financial and operational perspective. That being said, do you believe that the >mitigation of serious injury is worth the death of a suspect? Put another way, would you >forego the use of the taser and accept increased risk of bodily harm if you thought there >was a heightened risk of the suspect's death?
To say that we are *constantly* in dangerous situations would be an exaggeration. While the "supercop" ideal is appealing, the job is really hours of boredom or tedium, punctuated by heart-pounding terror. I'd also like to say that the citizens of Florida reward us very handsomely for our service, maybe 5% to 10% less than the private sector for equivalent experience and education. I'm very grateful to the people of Florida for my salary; I'm not wealthy, but with a sensible budget I can live quite comfortably.
To answer the question, I definitely believe in forgoing the Taser as often as possible. The Taser as designed isn't capa
Disclaimer: I am a police officer in Florida. I use the Taser. I do not own stock in Taser International.
To say that a Taser didn't *contribute* to the deaths is probably wrong. To say that a Taser *caused* the deaths is almost certainly wrong.
The amperage on a Taser is too low by a few orders of magnitude to cause death by electrocution. It will cause central nervous system disruption, which is very uncomfortable, and causes some unusual side effects.
I've been shot with a Taser. Not a stun-gun, a full-fledged Taser with the barbed prongs and ranged shot. I took a five second burst of 50,000 volts. It isn't fun, but I'd prefer it to pepper spray (which I've also been hit with). At least it's over in five seconds, instead of three hours.
During the shot, the Taser causes you to literally scream out all the air in your body in about two seconds. You spend three seconds trying to force out air that isn't there. In someone full of drugs or with pre-existing medical problems, this can definitely pose a risk.
As a police officer, I've had six situations where using the Taser has saved me from serious bodily injury. In all but one case, the defendant was immediately back on his feet after I helped him up, and quickly back in good spirits. In two cases, they spent the ride to jail joking with me. In one case, the defendant had to go to the hospital due to a cocaine overdose. He lived due to timely medical intervention, but we expected him to be in bad shape and had an ambulance standing by to assist the minute we had him secure.
As for calling the Taser torture, let me put it this way: I would willingly be shot with a Taser again in a training exercise. I've willingly subjected other people to it after feeling its effects. I would *not* willingly be shot with pepper spray/mace again. I have not and will not willingly subject other people to it after feeling its effects. The Taser is a valuable, but dangerous weapon that must be treated with caution and only used appropriately. Pepper spray is torture.
Pre-post info: I am a police officer with three years of work experience. I work in Florida.
Having a site like this is a great idea. As long as it doesn't show any protected or privaledged information (such as address, phone number, marital status, date of birth, etc), people should be able to see their police officer's and rate them.
I'd be proud to be rated by the citizens in the city where I work. If I'm doing a bad job as an officer, I want to know.
The term "deathalyzer"'s similarity to the breathalyzer reminded me of a very funny situation I came across in my career as a police officer.
While running a driver's license on a normal traffic stop, the computer came back with the message "Deceased." The photo on the license was obviously the driver, and our computers return the license photo with the records request, so I knew it wasn't a fake ID. So I went back and told him "Sir, I really don't know how to tell you this, but according to your license, you're dead."
He looked at me, then looked at the license in my hand, then he checked his pulse! Then he laughed and told me he knew all about the problem and had been fighting with the DMV for months over the error. We shared a good laugh and he got a "please drive a little slower" instead of a speeding ticket.
I suppose with the deathalyzer I would say "your license says you're dead, please blow into this so we can make sure."
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, but I am a police officer and have testified as a witness in many trials. I am also well-versed in most criminal and constitutional case law, and with Florida criminal statutes.
Typically, trial and appeals courts don't examine whether or not you had a *right* to privacy. They usually examine whether "under identical circumstances, would a reasonable person expect privacy?"
In other words, if you're doing something in your un-fenced back yard, you have no "reasonable" expectation of privacy, even though you are on private property. On the other hand, if you are in your home, you do have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Tasers have their proper use and proper place. Calling them torture is alarmist and absurd. They don't really hurt. I've been shot by my own Taser (in training), and while I would call it very unpleasant, I would not call it painful. It's like being sat on by a very heavy person and having all the air forcefully expelled out of your lungs. The itching afterwards is also very unpleasant.
First, a Taser is not a non-lethal weapon. It's a less-lethal weapon, and should be treated as such. It cannot kill a normal person under normal circumstances, but people under the extreme influence of drugs (a state of excited delerium) can have their status exacerbated into one known as "aggravated delerium", which is almost 100% fatal.
Using Tasers for "acting suspicious" is also absurd. They are designed and should be used as a weapon to stop imminent violence or flight. I have used mine three times in the line of duty.
The first was a fighting suspect who had jabbed another officer in the stomach, and only had one handcuff on and was about to break loose. In this case, the wires broke and I had to chase him four blocks.
The second was a 6'4" tall, very well built person, who had already broken my hold when I tried a non-violent handcuffing technique and took a swing at me. He promptly surrendered afterwards.
The third bit me, kicked another officer, and broke the nose of my sergeant, a 24-year-veteran who has seen more street fights in real life than I've seen in movies. We tried everything before the use of the Taser, because of fears that the Taser could react with the drugs in his system. The only reason I used the Taser in this case is because if I had not, I would have had to shoot him. He successfully fought of six officers at once and was *attacking*, not trying to escape.
If misused, the Taser can be torture. Properly used, it is a life-saver.
Pepper spray, on the other hand, *is* torture. I flatly refuse to use it for any reason. It hurts like hell for hours, continues to burn for days, and lacks the stopping power of a less-lethal weapons like punching, using a baton weapon, or using a Taser.
I have a better idea. Instead of conforming to the sun, let's define a time system we like, then alter the orbit and rotation of the Earth to match the time system.
Global ecological disaster is nothing compared to the nuisance of changing the calendar every four years!
I blame the paramilitary and militaristic mentality in most police forces. In fact, I would go so far as to say I don't even like the term "police force."
I'm a police officer in Florida. There are several principles I follow which have resulted in my getting only two complaints against me in the past two years.
1. I'm a peace officer, not a law enforcement officer. My goal is the peaceful resolution of conflict, using the law to do so. 2. You cannot insult me. I take offense at nothing while on the job. 3. I will never threaten to arrest someone: I will only warn them that they can be arrested for their actions and will give them several options for peacefully resolving the issue. 4. I will always explain my reasons behind my actions to anyone who asks, so long as safety permits. 5. I will never blindly follow the rules. 6. When in doubt, ask myself if I could talk with my family about what I was about to do to someone without feeling ashamed.
The military mindset is POISON to the civilian police service. If I could do only one thing to improve police relations with the community and performance levels, I would eliminate everything remotely resembling the military. No sergeants, no lieutenants, no military-looking uniforms. Cops should look, think, and act like the civilians they are.
These are obvious fakes! Everyone knows the moon doesn't exist and was just made as a fake destination so America could fake a landing on its surface to beat the Soviets!
Considering she hasn't killed anyone in the time she's been out, I think they should consider the possibility that she is not a danger to society and change the conviction to manslaughter with credit for time served.
Assuming the writer is telling the truth, this is a very bad arrest. You are only required to provide your full name, date of birth, and (in some cases, but not often) an address and phone number.
Showing a photo ID is a good idea, so the officer can see that you aren't lying about any of those things, but it simply can't be compulsory in a street-level encounter!
I usually back up the police as much as I can. I am a police officer, and I don't like seeing us look bad. This time, the cop was wrong. I doubt it was maliciously done, but it was wrong.
Disclaimer: I am a police officer in the US state of Florida. I make a lot of DUI arrests and specialize in traffic-related crimes.
If this works as advertised, it would be a wonderful way to deter the dangerous and all-to-common crime of DUI.
Of all these ideas, the eye movement cameras are the strongest indicators of impairment, but sound difficult to implement correctly. Sluggish, jerky eye movement and poor tracking is the single strongest indicator of impairment I look for when evaluating whether a driver might be impaired or not. If people with these signs were told by their vehicles not to drive, it would be one of the best things that could happen to traffic. I'd be interested to see how the sweat sensors work out. That's not something we can conclusively detect with human senses for the purposes of courtroom testimony. No judge will allow a jury to hear an officer saying "he reeked of booze and was sweating alcohol right out of his pores."
Making it mandatory rubs me the wrong way, but mandatory for people *convicted* of alcohol-related crimes (DUI and under-21 alcohol use might be a good step) and minor drug possession crimes could have this mandatory on their vehicles in lieu of jail time.
People who cry fascism, just remember that DUIs don't involve police coming into your life and telling you what to do. It involves drunk people going out into the public, and recklessly endangering, maiming, and killing innocent people. Alcohol-related vehicular homicide is far, far more common than murder, but people keep acting like DUIs are "victimless crimes." I'll be sure to tell that to the next family of a pedestrian I scrape off the road.
Slashdot Mirror
If an officer testifying in my jurisdiction's traffic court can't say when they were trained in radar, when their radar was calibrated, and what model of radar they use, the citation is automatically dismissed. I have certifications for all three of those that I present in evidence immediately after giving general testimony. The smart phone is completely irrelevant to this case.
Essentially, lacking the predicate to introduce the radar into evidence, the officer was saying "he was speeding because I said so, and therefore I wrote him a ticket." Of course the judge threw it out.
While it sounds funny, when I actually read it my thought was "he seems like a reasonable man."
He saw something happening, used his past observations to predict a likely outcome if no action was taken, realized this outcome would be dangerous to the people he was sworn to protect, and then asked people who are smarter than he is what he should do to prevent or reduce the bad outcome.
He gave them some ideas that he had come up with and asked if they were worth investigating. While they may have been silly ideas, at least he had the common sense to ask smarter people for help figuring out what to do instead of just pursuing whatever boneheaded idea he came up with. Does anyone remember the recent "possums released into NYC to deal with rats" story?
I think we could use more public officials like this guy.
Observation is a learned skill, and anything that makes police better observers is great in my book.
I train my fellow officers in some simple observation exercises. My favorite takes place during meal breaks.
When sitting down at a restaurant, I instruct them to maintain eye contact with me, but describe every article of clothing the person at the table next to us is wearing. By forcing them to use their peripheral vision to gather details, they slowly learn to better use their unfocused vision and not get easily distracted. It's also a lot of fun.
For the less-than-willing male officers, I tell them it means they can check out women without actually looking at them...
>"give the insurers the ability to carefully videotape"
If they're spending $100k per simulation, I would hope they could afford to upgrade to digital solutions.
If I'm still alive then, I'll head to the expected impact site. Best funeral pyre ever!
I've seen a lot of ATMs get stolen. It just takes a pickup truck, a crow bar, some chains and a couple of guys willing to take a risk.
If they'll do it for cash, anyone want to bet the percentage of gold ATMs that get stolen will be a lot higher than the percentage of regular ATMs?
I think it's more a case of "Top 10 Things Hollywood thinks audiences think computers can do."
They aren't *that* stupid. But they think we are.
I wouldn't mind a tasteful, text-only add in its own table that doesn't interrupt the flow of the text I'm reading. I would mind full-image or full-page ads.
I suggest doing it the way authors like Terry Pratchett and Douglas Adams used footnotes. Put an asterisk, add a footnote advertisement, and make it funny and in context with the text. Then I might actually buy whatever crap they're hawking.
This is why successful leaders tend to prefer advice from their "right hand man". Who listens to their "left hand man"? No one - that's who!
I guess their left hand man is busy listening to them.
Gamestop's prices when buying used games aren't that great. Personally, I go to Gamestop because my local Gamestop gave me some of the best customer service ever a few years back. I know the staff personally and am glad to give them my business.
I don't care much for the corporation, but the local guys are A-OK in my book.
What I want to know is why CMI has been allowed to be in contempt of court for so long. There have been past court orders demanding the source code, which they have ignored without consequences. They should have been raided by Federal agents with search warrants empowering them to execute the earlier court orders.
I work in the State of Florida as a police officer, and I arrest and charge people with DUI on a regular basis.
In my opinion, this ruling was exactly on the money, and far too long in coming. If a company refuses to disclose evidence, the State should immediately stop using their product to obtain evidence.
As a certified expert witness, I am able to testify to the impairment of a subject without the need of a breath analysis to verify. About 20-30% of the cases I testify in have no breath results because the defendant refuses to provide a breath sample. We only forcefully obtain samples (of blood, not breath) when a traffic homicide is involved.
If the evidence is faulty, I *need* to know. I can only uphold my oath of office if I can testify in good faith that I am using proper methods of obtaining evidence. If this company is witholding vital information, they should not be allowed to sell their product to law enforcement.
While I'm definitely a proud geek, my job is very physical in nature and I exercise many hours a week to stay in shape.
I have a gym routine, which I will not cover here, and a home routine.
For starters, determine your goal. Weight loss, cardiovascular health, and muscle tone are all distinct goals with different workout types to most effectively reach each area.
A weight loss workout should focus on muscle extremities, core muscle groups, and long-term cardiovascular exercise. Light weights for the arms using a bicep curl is a good start. Doing sit-ups and sitting on an exercise ball while at your computer will provide good core muscle strength. Skipping rope or jumping jacks provide a cardiovascular and leg muscle workout. Try to go fifteen minutes at once in a slow, easy pace. You want to be sweating when done, but not out of breath.
For cardiovascular health, skipping rope and jumping jacks should be done at a faster pace. You *want* to be out of breath when you're done, and keep increasing the speed and time worked out as much as your body can stand.
For muscle tone, add a light protein shake or supplement to an after-workout snack. Work with heavier weights, and use them on pectoral muscles in addition to arms. Do push-ups as well as sit-ups. Try to get a chin-up bar and use it.
As a former introvert (the mind and emotions *can* be trained, believe me!), I understand the reluctance to try a gym, and suggest that maybe you find a friend who will be a "work-out buddy" and act as a private trainer. It helps to have someone help keep count and encourage you not to cheat yourself out of a better workout.
Aim for twenty minutes a day for your first couple weeks. Try to push it to 45 minutes by the end of the second month. Bravo on a choice to be healthy and fit!
>1. It's clear that some individuals, because they were full of illegal drugs or possibly
>for other reasons, have died after being shot by tasers. It's also been asserted that at
>least one police officer has died in a training exercise after being shot by a taser;
>presumably he or she was not full of illegal drugs. So, knowing this and assuming the above
>is true, would you willingly be shot by a taser again as part of a training exercise?
If an officer died after being shot by the Taser, there was probably some condition that was agitated by the Taser, or the Taser malfunctioned and delivered sufficient amperage to cause electrocution. There is also the possibility of legal drugs causing a reaction that led to death. I am not going to be so blind or stupid as to say that the Taser *cannot* be the cause of death, but I would say that considering the thousands of non-lethal uses of the Taser, it is statistically unlikely that it will cause my death or the death of a suspect I need to subdue. I am still willing to be shot with it, because I am not willing to use any potentially questionable subdual methods on the citizens of my city without first having it used on me. I will not have myself held above the people I protect.
>2. You stated that the taser must be used appropriately, and made reference to drugs and
>unnamed medical issues. Could you define more specifically what that means? Having read the
>TFA, do you think there is a possibilty that the taser is being used inappropriately either
>by accident or on purpose?
When I reference drugs, I specifically mean cocaine, methamphetamine, LSD, and "multi-vector intoxication", which is a "cocktail" of multiple drugs both prescription and "street". In my experience, any stimulant is the most agitating factor in death or serious harm when dealing with police vs. suspect use of force, Taser or otherwise. When assessing the situation, we often have seconds to react, but in ideal circumstances we watch for rapid eye movement, heavy and rapid breathing, and someone taking off their clothes for no apparent reason. If these signs are present, I try to find an alternative to the Taser, such as a lot more officers to subdue for medical assistance. This has only happened to me once, and unfortunately even six of us could not subdue the suspect without the Taser. He threw me off of him, and I'm 6'5" tall and built large.
There is always the possibility that the Taser is accidently misused. Careful training and an honest, open assesment of the data will lead to reducing or eliminating these accidents. Deliberate misuse almost certainly happens. I've never seen it in my agency, but not all officers are idealists. There are thugs who wear a badge.
>3. As a police officer, you and your coworkers are obviously constantly in situations where
>you're subjected to serious bodily harm, and let me be the first to say that as a citizen I
>deeply appreciate it and think the police are not supported as well as they should be from
>a financial and operational perspective. That being said, do you believe that the
>mitigation of serious injury is worth the death of a suspect? Put another way, would you
>forego the use of the taser and accept increased risk of bodily harm if you thought there
>was a heightened risk of the suspect's death?
To say that we are *constantly* in dangerous situations would be an exaggeration. While the "supercop" ideal is appealing, the job is really hours of boredom or tedium, punctuated by heart-pounding terror. I'd also like to say that the citizens of Florida reward us very handsomely for our service, maybe 5% to 10% less than the private sector for equivalent experience and education. I'm very grateful to the people of Florida for my salary; I'm not wealthy, but with a sensible budget I can live quite comfortably.
To answer the question, I definitely believe in forgoing the Taser as often as possible. The Taser as designed isn't capa
Disclaimer: I am a police officer in Florida. I use the Taser. I do not own stock in Taser International.
To say that a Taser didn't *contribute* to the deaths is probably wrong. To say that a Taser *caused* the deaths is almost certainly wrong.
The amperage on a Taser is too low by a few orders of magnitude to cause death by electrocution. It will cause central nervous system disruption, which is very uncomfortable, and causes some unusual side effects.
I've been shot with a Taser. Not a stun-gun, a full-fledged Taser with the barbed prongs and ranged shot. I took a five second burst of 50,000 volts. It isn't fun, but I'd prefer it to pepper spray (which I've also been hit with). At least it's over in five seconds, instead of three hours.
During the shot, the Taser causes you to literally scream out all the air in your body in about two seconds. You spend three seconds trying to force out air that isn't there. In someone full of drugs or with pre-existing medical problems, this can definitely pose a risk.
As a police officer, I've had six situations where using the Taser has saved me from serious bodily injury. In all but one case, the defendant was immediately back on his feet after I helped him up, and quickly back in good spirits. In two cases, they spent the ride to jail joking with me. In one case, the defendant had to go to the hospital due to a cocaine overdose. He lived due to timely medical intervention, but we expected him to be in bad shape and had an ambulance standing by to assist the minute we had him secure.
As for calling the Taser torture, let me put it this way: I would willingly be shot with a Taser again in a training exercise. I've willingly subjected other people to it after feeling its effects. I would *not* willingly be shot with pepper spray/mace again. I have not and will not willingly subject other people to it after feeling its effects. The Taser is a valuable, but dangerous weapon that must be treated with caution and only used appropriately. Pepper spray is torture.
Pre-post info: I am a police officer with three years of work experience. I work in Florida.
Having a site like this is a great idea. As long as it doesn't show any protected or privaledged information (such as address, phone number, marital status, date of birth, etc), people should be able to see their police officer's and rate them.
I'd be proud to be rated by the citizens in the city where I work. If I'm doing a bad job as an officer, I want to know.
The term "deathalyzer"'s similarity to the breathalyzer reminded me of a very funny situation I came across in my career as a police officer.
While running a driver's license on a normal traffic stop, the computer came back with the message "Deceased." The photo on the license was obviously the driver, and our computers return the license photo with the records request, so I knew it wasn't a fake ID. So I went back and told him "Sir, I really don't know how to tell you this, but according to your license, you're dead."
He looked at me, then looked at the license in my hand, then he checked his pulse! Then he laughed and told me he knew all about the problem and had been fighting with the DMV for months over the error. We shared a good laugh and he got a "please drive a little slower" instead of a speeding ticket.
I suppose with the deathalyzer I would say "your license says you're dead, please blow into this so we can make sure."
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, but I am a police officer and have testified as a witness in many trials. I am also well-versed in most criminal and constitutional case law, and with Florida criminal statutes.
Typically, trial and appeals courts don't examine whether or not you had a *right* to privacy. They usually examine whether "under identical circumstances, would a reasonable person expect privacy?"
In other words, if you're doing something in your un-fenced back yard, you have no "reasonable" expectation of privacy, even though you are on private property. On the other hand, if you are in your home, you do have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Tasers have their proper use and proper place. Calling them torture is alarmist and absurd. They don't really hurt. I've been shot by my own Taser (in training), and while I would call it very unpleasant, I would not call it painful. It's like being sat on by a very heavy person and having all the air forcefully expelled out of your lungs. The itching afterwards is also very unpleasant.
First, a Taser is not a non-lethal weapon. It's a less-lethal weapon, and should be treated as such. It cannot kill a normal person under normal circumstances, but people under the extreme influence of drugs (a state of excited delerium) can have their status exacerbated into one known as "aggravated delerium", which is almost 100% fatal.
Using Tasers for "acting suspicious" is also absurd. They are designed and should be used as a weapon to stop imminent violence or flight. I have used mine three times in the line of duty.
The first was a fighting suspect who had jabbed another officer in the stomach, and only had one handcuff on and was about to break loose. In this case, the wires broke and I had to chase him four blocks.
The second was a 6'4" tall, very well built person, who had already broken my hold when I tried a non-violent handcuffing technique and took a swing at me. He promptly surrendered afterwards.
The third bit me, kicked another officer, and broke the nose of my sergeant, a 24-year-veteran who has seen more street fights in real life than I've seen in movies. We tried everything before the use of the Taser, because of fears that the Taser could react with the drugs in his system. The only reason I used the Taser in this case is because if I had not, I would have had to shoot him. He successfully fought of six officers at once and was *attacking*, not trying to escape.
If misused, the Taser can be torture. Properly used, it is a life-saver.
Pepper spray, on the other hand, *is* torture. I flatly refuse to use it for any reason. It hurts like hell for hours, continues to burn for days, and lacks the stopping power of a less-lethal weapons like punching, using a baton weapon, or using a Taser.
I have a better idea. Instead of conforming to the sun, let's define a time system we like, then alter the orbit and rotation of the Earth to match the time system.
Global ecological disaster is nothing compared to the nuisance of changing the calendar every four years!
I blame the paramilitary and militaristic mentality in most police forces. In fact, I would go so far as to say I don't even like the term "police force."
I'm a police officer in Florida. There are several principles I follow which have resulted in my getting only two complaints against me in the past two years.
1. I'm a peace officer, not a law enforcement officer. My goal is the peaceful resolution of conflict, using the law to do so.
2. You cannot insult me. I take offense at nothing while on the job.
3. I will never threaten to arrest someone: I will only warn them that they can be arrested for their actions and will give them several options for peacefully resolving the issue.
4. I will always explain my reasons behind my actions to anyone who asks, so long as safety permits.
5. I will never blindly follow the rules.
6. When in doubt, ask myself if I could talk with my family about what I was about to do to someone without feeling ashamed.
The military mindset is POISON to the civilian police service. If I could do only one thing to improve police relations with the community and performance levels, I would eliminate everything remotely resembling the military. No sergeants, no lieutenants, no military-looking uniforms. Cops should look, think, and act like the civilians they are.
These are obvious fakes! Everyone knows the moon doesn't exist and was just made as a fake destination so America could fake a landing on its surface to beat the Soviets!
Top that crazy conspiracy theory!
Considering she hasn't killed anyone in the time she's been out, I think they should consider the possibility that she is not a danger to society and change the conviction to manslaughter with credit for time served.
Good job. We caught her. Now let it drop.
Assuming the writer is telling the truth, this is a very bad arrest. You are only required to provide your full name, date of birth, and (in some cases, but not often) an address and phone number.
Showing a photo ID is a good idea, so the officer can see that you aren't lying about any of those things, but it simply can't be compulsory in a street-level encounter!
I usually back up the police as much as I can. I am a police officer, and I don't like seeing us look bad.
This time, the cop was wrong. I doubt it was maliciously done, but it was wrong.
Disclaimer: I am a police officer in the US state of Florida. I make a lot of DUI arrests and specialize in traffic-related crimes.
If this works as advertised, it would be a wonderful way to deter the dangerous and all-to-common crime of DUI.
Of all these ideas, the eye movement cameras are the strongest indicators of impairment, but sound difficult to implement correctly. Sluggish, jerky eye movement and poor tracking is the single strongest indicator of impairment I look for when evaluating whether a driver might be impaired or not. If people with these signs were told by their vehicles not to drive, it would be one of the best things that could happen to traffic.
I'd be interested to see how the sweat sensors work out. That's not something we can conclusively detect with human senses for the purposes of courtroom testimony. No judge will allow a jury to hear an officer saying "he reeked of booze and was sweating alcohol right out of his pores."
Making it mandatory rubs me the wrong way, but mandatory for people *convicted* of alcohol-related crimes (DUI and under-21 alcohol use might be a good step) and minor drug possession crimes could have this mandatory on their vehicles in lieu of jail time.
People who cry fascism, just remember that DUIs don't involve police coming into your life and telling you what to do. It involves drunk people going out into the public, and recklessly endangering, maiming, and killing innocent people. Alcohol-related vehicular homicide is far, far more common than murder, but people keep acting like DUIs are "victimless crimes."
I'll be sure to tell that to the next family of a pedestrian I scrape off the road.