[shawmutt]

Hey guys, I'm a little late to this thread, but here's what a couple cop buddies of mine wrote about the issue:

The Policer Officer's problems: 1. He had a laxidasical attitude, which was evidenced by his casual approaches to, and departures from, the vehicle. 2. He seemed arrogant and had poor communication skills. The Driver's problems: 1. He was argumentative right from the start. 2. He refused to provide his driver's license upon request. 3. He refused to sign the ticket. 4. He refused to put his hands behind his back. 5. He resisted further verbally and by walking away. 6. He was reaching into his pocket while walking away. 7. He showed no signs of complying. Legally, the Officer did NOTHING wrong. The officer is required to advise the person that they are under arrest, unless the person is resisting. This guy was clearly resisting/ obstructing. The TASER was used in accordance with training. There was no abuse of it. The TASER is very low on the Use Of Force scale. Anyone who is actively resisting (this guy was) can legally be TASERed. The use of the TASER in this case prevented more serious injuries. Everyone agrees that this guy would have fought the officer had the officer attempted to grab him, right? The officer avoided a physical confrontation by using the TASER. Thats what its for. Also, a person does not have the right to be read their Rights upon demand or under every occasion. There is no requirement for a person to be read their Rights immediately after they are arrested. TV shows can be blamed for this. Miranda Rights apply to a person in custody AND subjected to questioning whether they are read to him or not. In this case, Miranda rights were not required to be read, as the guy was not being questioned. If the officer wanted to question the guy while he was in custody, Rights would have had to been advised AND waived. Basically, if there is no interrogation while the person is in custody, then there is no requirement for Rights to be read. This whole thing could have been avoided by the guy just signing his ticket and driving away. He could have contested the ticket in court. Just as the officer told him, the roadside is not the place to contest what happened. In Michigan, the driver is not required by law to sign their ticket. They are however, required to be "served" with it. If they refuse to physically accept it, they can be arrested for obstructing. I've had drivers over the years refuse to take their tickets, and I just place it on the dashboard in front of them and walk away. There's really no need to push a situation like that. Bottom line, the driver is going to lose in court.

When I became a police officer in 1988, the only weapon we had was our sidearm, a .38 Special revolver. So, anything short of a deadly force situation required us to grab people with our hands. There was nothing in between. We got into A LOT of fights and wrestling matches. Some were easy, some were not. We got injured, so did suspects. When in hands-on proximity to a suspect, having your gun grabbed is not only a fear, but a reality. I've seen numerous videos of officers who've had their guns grabbed, scary. Many prisoners train for this, there are videos of that as well. A few years later, my department issued nightsticks. I've used that weapon once. Not a very effective tool in my opinion. Too much risk for serious injury. Shortly after that, my department issued mace (pepper spray, OC, CS..). That was the best thing since the LT1 Caprice. I can't remember the number of times I have used it. Not a single injury resulted from the use of mace, and instances of fights and wrestling matches went down drastically. However, mace does not affect the central nervous system, just vision and breathing. The desired reaction is for the suspect's eyes to close from the burning sensation, and while he's dealing with his own pain, the officer has the opportunity to take him down. But it doesn't always take the fight out of the person. And it doesn't always affect just the suspect. Most times I've still had to follow-up with taking the suspect down, as they've still be able to punch, kick, spit, run. And when used indoors, normally everybody in that same room breathes the mace vapor. That's my short version on mace. Now the TASER. I've only had it since this summer. It's biggest advantage over all other weapons is that, given a two-prong hit, will incapacitate the suspect immediately (in most cases). This will give the officer the opportunity to close in on the suspect and apply restraints. The biggest risk in using the TASER is on a standing suspect, who will fall the the ground and probably sustain some type of injury. But I've foot chased people who have run into things and also tripped over their own feet and gone face first into the dirt or pavement. Back to the TASER, the problem I see in a lot of the videos on youtube is that multiple officers will stand there while the suspect gets zapped repeatedly. I was trained to restrain the suspect WHILE the TASER was delivering the jolt, not after its done. The only thing that the officer has to worry about at that time is coming into contact with both wires, then he can be incapacitated as well. I do not agree with multiple officers standing around while one officer delivers multiple zaps to a person who is simply rolling around on the ground. With use of force come risk of injury. I've never caused injury to someone who was cooperative. Police work is risky business.

I think the misunderstanding is that nowadays cops are NOT trained to wrestle. I for one do not like scrumming about with some idiot who at a moments notice could go for anything on my belt.... You want to see a situation escalate? Grab a baton or OC from an officer.... and be prepared for deadly force response. Sure we get DT training.. takedowns, blocks, parrys, etc. But those are just some of the tools. As police- we are authorized to meet force with force. You stand idle and do nothing, I can apply hand control techniques and pressure points. You resist, and I can do arm-bar takedowns and other moves. You swing, expect to be sprayed or batoned or shocked. There are two types of resistance- active and passive. Passive is sitting in the middle of the road, ignoring everything, not moving. (like a protester) Active is walking away, putting your hand in your pockets, tensings, pulling away, swinging, hitting, kicking, biting, etc etc. Ask yourself this- what would have happened if the officer ran up and went hands on to the guy, when his hand was in the pocket. What if that guy pulled out a knife or gun? The officer is at a disadvantage- hands on on the bad guy, and the bad guy has a weapon out. Sheep will attest to this- I go home every night, and will never put myself in that situation. In our world of debate and controversy, there is no room for such tactics on the roadside. Like Sheepdog has said, if he had complied, there would have been no issue. Take it up at the court house. Now- if it had been me, and he had refused my orders to stop or turn around, he would have been sprayed... since we don't have tasers. I have no idea what he or his wife had for weapons in the car. What if he was returning to get one?

And a follow up of how exactly the video got on youtube:

Deseret Morning News | Taser victim says UHP is 'stonewalling'