- A federal appeals court this week ruled that a California police officer can be held liable for injuries suffered by an unarmed man he Tasered during a traffic stop. The decision, if allowed to stand, would set a rigorous legal precedent for when police are permitted to use the weapons and would force some law enforcement agencies throughout the state -- and presumably the nation -- to tighten their policies governing Taser use, experts said.
Michael Gennaco, an expert in police conduct issues who has conducted internal reviews of Taser use for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and other agencies, said the ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals prohibits officers from deploying Tasers in a host of scenarios and largely limits their use to situations in which a person poses an obvious danger.
If a person is an "obvious danger" to yourself or other officers, the TASER shouldn't even be on your list of options. TASERs might be effective on people in fixed locations who are mostly intent on harming only themselves. The minute they start to threaten other people, officers or become mobile thereby increasing the likelihood of injury to other citizens, your force options should be pretty limited.
This is the Ninth Circuit though, and if we aren't mistaken, they are about the most overturned court in the nation. Most of their rulings have no basis in any law known to mankind.
Daley already pays off anyone who sues, so this shouldn't have any effect on CPD in the short term.
This is the Ninth Circuit though, and if we aren't mistaken, they are about the most overturned court in the nation. Most of their rulings have no basis in any law known to mankind.
Daley already pays off anyone who sues, so this shouldn't have any effect on CPD in the short term.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire