Tasered man dies 2nd (SF) Bay Area stun gun fatality in week

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/08/05/BAtaser05.DTL

An Alameda man has died after Fremont police shocked him with a Taser a week ago, sparking new concern from civil-rights advocates after the second Bay Area death related to the use of stun guns in a week.

Eric Mahoney, 33, who has a history of drug use, was shot numerous times with a Taser on July 29 as he tried to escape from Fremont police by scaling a wall near the ExtendedStay America motel, police said.

Mahoney was taken by police car to Washington Hospital in Fremont, where he was able to walk inside on his own power, said Fremont police Det. Bill Veteran.

About 20 to 25 minutes later, however, Mahoney fell unconscious, authorities said. He died at the hospital at 6:25 p.m. Wednesday. Two days earlier, Brian Patrick O’Neil, 33, of San Jose died after San Jose police used a Taser on him during a confrontation.

[merh]

1. When are they going to figure out that tasers can be lethal.

Hell, they are more problematic that weapons. If you shot someone, you have physical evidence that you have wounded them, you see blood. With tasers, they wound folks, but they have no physical evidence of the damage to the body, so they just keep tasering! :argh:

[liberalnurse]

2. Shooting them with a 9 mm. is

so messy. I prefer the Taser. I'm interested in what research studies will show regarding odds of a fatality when they are hopped-up junkies on cocaine, crack or methanphetamine and/or with an active addiction history being Tasered. Maybe they will have to limit the Taser frequency, then just use the 9 mm.if they do not comply.

[merh]

4. Hell, at least you know you hurt them with a 9mm and that is why

folks aren't real quick 'em on others. There are no outward signs of damage with these tasers, just keep shocking and shocking and shocking.

[liberalnurse]

5. There is definitely an unidentified procedure

glitch.......I defend the use of the Taser because, overall, Officers and suspects are not injured. I don't deny the noted occurrence of raging drug addicts dying after being Tased. Why is that? This issue needs addressed and resolved.

[merh]

6. You and I both know that it is not just raging drug addicts that are

killed by tasers.

The use of tasers is not properly regulated and the officers not properly trained. Officers were able to subdue suspects and make arrests before tasers, they have become lazy and too reliant on "weapons", imho.

[liberalnurse]

7. Officers were way to often injured

by 1 on 1 restraint. Most of the incidents became career busters. The culture of the streets has evolved into a raging combat zone and 1 to 1 restraint is too dangerous. Immediate containment is the safest method for all involved. The days of a bouncer-like Officer has seen better days. It's not feasible anymore.

[merh]

9. I disagree with you - that is the same mindset that has us in

Iraq - the "us against them" - the "good guys versus bad guys" - the "it's hell on the streets".

The domestic terrorism scare used to corrupt folks thinking today is as dangerous and as harmful as the international terrorism scare that made folks cheer the fake war.

The key is adequate funding, proper manpower, proper and continuous training. Not brute force, not whatever it takes to get the job done. The mindset should be "how do I do my job without harming anyone or violating anyone's civil rights?" The money spent on those tasers (and the lawsuits that will come from their use) should go to manpower and training concerns.

And please, do not lecture me on the dangers of the streets or the dangers of the jails. I was in law enforcement and I worked in a jail that was meant to house 900 inmates but that often housed 1200. I know the inside of the system, I know how twisted mindsets pose greater harm to the officers and the inmates than does proper training and acknowledging the basic human principle - threat others as you would want to be treated.

[AX10]

28. Thank you for the insight Merh. It's people like you who will..

help us. I agree with your assesment. Police are peace officers. They need to enforce laws in a peaceful and free society. They need to be trained properly to do so. Thank you.

[Gyre]

17. What evidence do you have for this claim

".just keep shocking and shocking and shocking."

which is a slanderous generalization implicating every cop in the country?

Gyre

[October]

25. "numerous times" according to the article

?...Eric Mahoney, 33, who has a history of drug use, was shot numerous times with a Taser on July 29..."

[LivingInTheBubble]

18. whatever the odds

dead is dead.

[RamboLiberal]

19. BTW a lot of cops now carry 40 caliber

9mm was not lethal enough. Lacked stopping power. Sometimes would not even penetrate the skull.

[RamboLiberal]

20. Taser Company is now warning about repeated shocks

check out thie LBN DU Thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1681245

[NickB79]

27. They shot him while he was running away

Are you suggesting they would or should have shot him in the back with handguns had they not had Tasers?

To even make the analogy between Taser use and firearms use is illogical to begin with. They are not interchangable in almost any policing situation.

[slaveplanet]

11. Just ask ,& ye shall receive

very odd...a medical examiner that actually tells the truth

Medical Examiner Confirms First Electrocution by Taser
http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=2173


Chicago Tribune: "Medical Examiner Ties Death to Taser" News Article http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/nearnorthwest/chi-0507300246jul30,1,4403715,print.story?coll=chi-newslocalnearnorthwest-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true


Arizona Republic: "Taser shocks ruled cause of death "http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0730taser30.html

[merh]

14. Thank you for the links.

:hi:

[HawkerHurricane]

3. Maybe if they used smaller batteries...

just saying.

[PassingFair]

8. I couldn't get past this sentence...

"...shocked him with a Taser a week ago, "SPARKING" new concern from civil-rights advocates..."

[Conservativesux]

10. When you live in a police state such things are a common occurance..

just as people being "disappeared" or falsely charged with crimes they didnt commit is.

BushAmerika: Fascism with a smile :(

[SouthernDem2004]

12. Problems with Tasers:

There are definitely problems with Taser use and training. However, this has nothing to do with Bush or any other Republican. By spouting "Bush's America" and other anti-Republican slogans whenever an abuse occurs you are cheapening it and destroying the stories effectiveness when it comes to reforms. If you make Tasers a political issue you will seriously delay needed reforms. Police abuses should not be made into political commentaries or battles. The current administration has absolutely nothing to do with Tasers or Law Enforcement training. Taser abuses are not politically motivated nor are they caused by a political party. People will delay reforms if people continue the rhetoric.

[merh]

13. Are you saying the BFEE has had no impact on law enforcement?

What about funding? Is law enforcement adequately funded?
What about the changes to the overtime laws? Hasn't that negatively impacted law enforcement?
What about manpower? Aren't the majority of forces struggling with a shortage of manpower because of so many are serving in Iraq?

And there has been a perversion of attitude. That same mindset that has us in Iraq - the "us against them" - the "good guys versus bad guys" - the "it's hell on the streets". The domestic terrorism scare used to corrupt folks thinking today is as dangerous and as harmful as the international terrorism scare that made folks cheer the illegal and unethical war.

[SouthernDem2004]

21. Answers:

1) State, county and local Law Enforcement are not funded by the Federal government. We receive minor grants from the Feds from time to time but those are usual equipment related. I can say the Feds have not paid for a single Officer at my Department or any surrounding agencies.

2) Adequately funded? Of course not. We never will be.

3) I am unsure what you are referring to with the changes in overtime laws. My overtime has not changed in the years I have worked LE.

4) Manpower shortages are due to budgeting. Deployments do have some effect but limited in medium to large Departments. Of course if you only have 20 Officers and 5 are deployed you are going to have some problems for a little while. Still, it really has not had all that much effect.

The post you are replying to is about that attitude to which you speak. People here are making it an us vs. them issue involving Tasers. Of course your reply really had nothing to do with my OP.

[merh]

22. Reply to your answers

1) State, county and Local Law Enforcement agencies are not directly funded by the federal government, but, and this is a huge but, the federal grants that once were given to the state, county and local entities have been cut and those entities are not able to adequately budget or increase the budgets for law enforcement. Additionally, the federal grants law enforcement agencies do get for training and equipment have been cut and that leaves the law enforcement agencies in a position where they have to use budgeted funds to provide the equipment and training, thus less money is available to provide adequate manpower.

2) Adequately funded, no, but more federal monies via grants were available to law enforcement agencies under Clinton. Those grants have been cut. Actually, during Clinton's admin, they provided matching grants that funded actual positions. As we are concerned about "homeland" security, you would think the first responders would be funded and we wouldn't be wasting it fighting in another land.

3) Overtime is no longer available to workers in management positions, thus those in management positions are not willing to work the extra hours for no pay. This leads to the agencies having to have more folks in the supervisory positions given the 24/7 operations of the job. (Thus more money is spent paying the higher ranking officers instead of being in a position to hire more workers.)

4) Any shortage in manpower to law enforcement is harmful to the department. As federal funds have been cut to the agencies and to the funding entities, the impact adversely impacts the departments. Any budgetary cut adversely impacts the manpower to any work force. Whether it be 1 officer or 5 or 50 that are on the force, but serving in Iraq or Afghanistan, those missing officers adversely impact the department. Shortage of manpower causes departments to search for answers to handle situations that provide quick fixes, such as arming the officers with tasers when back ups are not available. Budget cuts hurt the manpower, the training and the moral of the department. Inadequate manpower adversely impacts the operations of the department as well as endangers the public. How odd it is you blame the shortage of manpower to budgeting, yet you deny that the BFEE has had a negative impact on budgeting.

If we were not a war and if the BFEE really cared about homeland security, the monies being wasted in Iraq should go to funding law enforcement. That is homeland security. With proper training, adequate manpower and supervision, tasers would not be considered a weapon of last resort, second only to the gun. You appear to be young, these debates were had about the use of guns 20, 30, 40 years ago. Cops shot first and asked questions later. Better to shot the bad guy than let the bad guy get away, hurt someone else or get away. Fortunately, that mindset is in the past. However, it appears that the taser is replacing the gun.

Additionally, if we were not at war, the departments would only be missing their employees one weekend out of the month and one week out of the year.

And the attitude. Your response clearly reflects the attitude. The majority of folks here are not against law enforcement, we are against the misuse of weapons by law enforcement and the lack of proper training and policies and procedures that govern the use of the weapons. It is "us" against tasers, not use against cops. And yes, a good many cops have the attitude "us" against "them" - any they suspect is bad and they are the only ones that "really appreciate" the dangers in the community. That attitude sucks. They are not the judges, they are enforcement. They should begin every day with that in mind. They should be there to regulate, not to judge, not to condemn and definitely, not to harm.

[SouthernDem2004]

24. Answers to your reply to answers:

Fed monies have not been cut. They are now issued under the Homeland Defense grants. Basicly they just renamed the programs. Try looking at HS grants and compare them to the loss of programs like COPS. You will notice no real monetary difference.

The overtime laws you mentioned only apply to salaried employees if I am not mistaken. Only the very top at most Agencies are salaried. Heck, at my Department only the Chief is salary.

I think you misunderstood my original post. Oh well.

[merh]

26. Yes, they have. They did not just rename the programs, they

limited their use. I stand by the statement that grants have been cut. COPS grants provided funding for positions and manpower, not equipment only (you know like gas masks, tasers, HAZMAT clothing, communication systems, etc.) and not equipment that most forces do not need. Grants are available for BUYING TASERS and the other equipment from their token vendors. (To enrich their friends.)

From your replies I can tell that you work on a small force, thus your answers are limited to your limited or small experiences. You need to try a little research on that overtime topic. It is no long just salaried employees that are exempt from overtime. It is a matter of how much money is earned. Realize that many, many departments have shift supervisors and other "management" positions that are no longer entitled to overtime.

Under the new FairPay rules, workers earning less than $23,660 per year — or $455 per week — are guaranteed overtime protection. This will strengthen overtime rights for 6.7 million American workers, including 1.3 million low-wage workers who were denied overtime under the old rules.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/fairpay/main.htm

First responders generally do not qualify as exempt executives because their primary duty is not management. They are not exempt administrative employees because their primary duty is not the performance of office or non-manual work directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer or the employer’s customers. Similarly, they are not exempt learned professionals because their primary duty is not the performance of work requiring knowledge of an advanced type in a field or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction. Although some first responders have college degrees, a specialized academic degree is not a standard prerequisite for employment.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/fairpay/fs17j_first_responders.htm

And I stand by my position that the "us" against "them" mentality has been fostered by the BFEE, as if kool aid is served at the seminar and conferences that first responders attend. The fear of domestic terrorism is fanned and the officers are not given classes on their obligations to protect civil rights but on how to manage mobs, how to deal with terrorist strikes, how to wear the HAZMAT uniforms, etc.

[BiggJawn]

15. Every Time the Taser Stings....

Bernie Kerik's Cash Register Rings...

"Buy my Product?"

[merh]

16. That's enough right there to convince me that the products

are flawed and should be banned! :puke:

[SlavesandBulldozers]

23. hehehe

"buy my product."

"these arent just good skills to have, these are essential!"