Interesting story from Wired on how the Police now overuse tasers, showing more than ever that “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”:
The use of Tasers has become increasingly controversial over the last year, following high-profile cases such as the Tasering of a ten-tear old girl who had refused to take a shower and video of a 72-year old great-grandmother Tasered after a driving offense. Now a federal appeals court in San Francisco has set down new rules for when police officers may use Tasers. In particular, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Tasers can’t be used simply to force a non-violent person to bend to an officer’s will. Their reason was that Taser’s X26 stun gun inflicts more pain than other “non-lethal” options:
The physiological effects, the high levels of pain, and foreseeable risk of physical injury lead us to conclude that the X26 and similar devices are a greater intrusion than other non-lethal methods of force we have confronted.
The ruling followed a case where an officer Tasered one Carl Bryan after pulling him over for driving with an unbuckled seat belt. Bryan was verbally abusive, but obviously unarmed and non-violent.
The use of Tasers as compliance tools — means for compelling behavior — has generated a huge amount of protest. For many the famous “Don’t Tase me, bro” incident, in which student Andrew Meyer was Tasered at a political debate signaled an alarming new form of oppression. (Others have accusedMeyer of setting the whole thing up as a stunt.) Perhaps the distinguishing feature of the Taser, compared to other forms of enforcing compliance, is that is can be used with one finger. Police have always been able enforce their wishes using batons or manual force, but a Taser is a much easier option, and perhaps this makes it more prone to abuse. Whether it’s zapping an unruly student protester, an uncooperative 11-year-old or an abusive driver, the trite observation that power corrupts may have some truth here.
Continue reading here.
