Minnesota, here we go again. I'm betting ammo/gun sales are brisk

[Dinglenutz]

My understanding is the Taser should be covered by an officer with a firearm.

My expectation would be that they train a very specific way, and that the phrase "TASER" repeated 3 times is not some random thing but rather a very specific signal of SOMETHING. Whether it's asking for or informing of or something else is probably not in doubt by those around her, who would have been trained the same way.

I would hope.

But I don't know which thing it was, whether a signal she was intending to taser, or a request for a team mate to use their taser. But it had the feel of a very specific, trained behavior to me.

 

[Dinglenutz]

A couple of questions.. Are there any jurisdictions that require tasers be carried in a chest rig? What do LEO'S think about that alternative?

Taser makes products (or used to at least) that deploy like a star trek TNG phaser type thing almost. The C2 (IIRC) and another civ unit didn't look very firearm-like at all, but they were not marketed to LEOs.

 

[Member 53328]

Calling out taser is not asking for someone to use it. You call out taser 3 times when you are going to deploy it yourself. In the video it is very obvious she was calling out taser and you see the other officers involved specifically move their bodies out of the way to allow a clean spread from the taser without interfering with its trajectory or the probability of both prongs making contact.

 

[Dinglenutz]

Calling out taser is not asking for someone to use it. You call out taser 3 times when you are going to deploy it yourself. In the video it is very obvious she was calling out taser and you see the other officers involved specifically move their bodies out of the way to allow a clean spread from the taser without interfering with its trajectory or the probability of both prongs making contact.

I believe this is probably true, and it is what I thought I was seeing initially. Having said that and established that we agree, what is your source for asserting this as fact?

 

[Member 53328]

A couple of questions.. Are there any jurisdictions that require tasers be carried in a chest rig? What do LEO'S think about that alternative?

It shouldn't be up to a department SOP to dictate how you set up your gear. Everyone is different and should be allowed to carry their gear in a way that best serves them. It all comes down to training and practicing deploying your gear. In both static and high stress situations.

 

[kempoguy70]

Had similar when I was in Italy - the Carabinieri.

Australia with me - the AFP

 

[American123]

Looks like cross draw. But that's just my assumption from video. Hopefully each agency stipulates uniform carry position for all officers. That's unknown.
I've seen strong side drop leg rigs for taser, with sidearm riding high above in 3 o'clock.

It doesn't matter where you keep your gear if you are competent. That woman's incompetence is the only issue here, not policy on where things are kept.

If anything, this video also showed that women just are not viewed by criminals as worth respect from an adversarial standpoint. The suspect didn't try to escape until the woman was holding him.

We can acknowledge the fact that the suspect would have survived this had he not resisted arrest. Seemingly, had the woman intended to shoot him because she thought he was trying to grab a gun, that would have been at least reasonable, but because she intended to taze him, voiced she was going to tase him, but in fact shot him, negligently, that's the problem.

 

[Dinglenutz]

It was the restricted ability to breath from the cuffs, the restraint, and the massive amount of ingested drugs.

Fun fact: George Floyd was at one point cuffed and in the police car. He ASKED to be outside because "he couldn't breathe" and the officers kindly accommodated him. Then he started trying to kick them, and they rolled him over to restrain him outside until paramedics could come. The gathering crowd slowed the arrival of the paramedics, reportedly.

If they'd just let him succumb to his OD in the back of the car it would have been better for everyone.


EDIT: Except the family, which leeched a big payday out of this worthless turd of a human.

 

[Dinglenutz]

If anything, this video also showed that women just are not viewed by criminals as worth respect from an adversarial standpoint.

Well, I guess she disabused him of THAT notion at least.

 

[American123]

Well, I guess she disabused him of THAT notion at least.

Ha, well, women can pull a trigger, but any physical confrontation without resulting to shooting the suspect, physics matters.

 

[CRBMoA]

Ha, well, women can pull a trigger, but any physical confrontation without resulting to shooting the suspect, physics matters.

Racist!

 

[WillametteWill]

I believe this is probably true, and it is what I thought I was seeing initially. Having said that and established that we agree, what is your source for asserting this as fact?

Calling out Taser 3x is my old department's policy as well and what we teach (we are a regional training facility)...it is pretty standard, if that helps. It is a warning for officers like @1775usmc noted.

It doesn't matter where you keep your gear if you are competent. That woman's incompetence is the only issue here, not policy on where things are kept.

We agree 100% that you need to be competent and that this is the most important factor. But I'll diverge on the theory that equipment can be set up better for success in some cases. Given an option, some officers will set up their gear for comfort, not effectiveness. To expand on a Clint Smith phrase, wearing firearms (and safety equipment) should be comforting, not comfortable. Been there, wearing a vest, bat-belt with 12+ pounds of gear for 12 hours on a blazing hot day sucks. My department said wear your mags in pouches on your weak side near the front and train that way. If they didn't, I have no doubt that some would have found a more comfortable and difficult to access location.

Departments (good ones that are large enough) have folks research this stuff, go to conferences, talk with others about best practice...individual officers, most anyway, cannot or will not do this. I'm not saying there cannot be some variance but you know the saying, give an inch...

I think overall we are very much on the same page.

 

[Dinglenutz]

Calling out Taser 3x is my old department's policy as well and what we teach (we are a regional training facility)...it is pretty standard, if that helps. It is a warning for officers like @1775usmc noted.

I suspected this was the case but until now had no basis to support that suspicion. Thanks a lot for the confirmation. I also suspect that what you teach is likely distributed widely as what we call in my industry a "best practice" or similar.

 

[American123]

Calling out Taser 3x is my old department's policy as well and what we teach (we are a regional training facility)...it is pretty standard, if that helps. It is a warning for officers like @1775usmc noted.

We agree 100% that you need to be competent and that this is the most important factor. But I'll diverge on the theory that equipment can be set up better for success in some cases. Given an option, some officers will set up their gear for comfort, not effectiveness. To expand on a Clint Smith phrase, wearing firearms (and safety equipment) should be comforting, not comfortable. Been there, wearing a vest, bat-belt with 12+ pounds of gear for 12 hours on a blazing hot day sucks. My department said wear your mags in pouches on your weak side near the front and train that way. If they didn't, I have no doubt that some would have found a more comfortable and difficult to access location.

Departments (good ones that are large enough) have folks research this stuff, go to conferences, talk with others about best practice...individual officers, most anyway, cannot or will not do this. I'm not saying there cannot be some variance but you know the saying, give an inch...

I think overall we are very much on the same page.

I agree that some set ups are better for economy of motion, or for versatility, or weight distribution, etc, but my point was for those that may have been trying to blame the gear layout, that the blame for why she shot him with a gun and not with a taser was 100% a competence issue and not a "had she set up her gear a certain way she wouldn't have done that" issue.

 

[Member 53328]

I agree that some set ups are better for economy of motion, or for versatility, or weight distribution, etc, but my point was for those that may have been trying to blame the gear layout, that the blame for why she shot him with a gun and not with a taser was 100% a competence issue and not a "had she set up her gear a certain way she wouldn't have done that" issue.

Agreed. There are definitely specific reasons to do things or set up gear a certain way. For example I was always taught not to place hard items on the back of my duty belt (radio, baton, ect) cause if slammed on your back it could easily do major damage and leave you hindered. Like @WillametteWill said. I saw a lot of junior individuals allowed to set up their gear for comfort rather than proficiency and accessibility as well as being able to retain and defend gear in a hands on altercation. That is an issue. And when actually training. Real training. Comfort goes out the window.

 

[Ura-Ki]

How much longer are you guys gonna keep beating this dead horse?

Come on, lets move along now, i'm sure there are more important things then to spend 139 pages discussing a tazer on one side of the duty belt!

 

[Member 53328]

How much longer are you guys gonna keep beating this dead horse?

Come on, lets move along now, i'm sure there are more important things then to spend 139 pages discussing a tazer on one side of the duty belt!

I guess we will talk about it until people have their questions answered. Or until people get another "hot" topic to talk about when it comes to policing and the majority who have never done the job or worn the gear want to continue to weigh in on the topic. Or people simply have questions about the job and why things are done the way they are done. Break it down Barney style..... we will talk until people are satisfied or loose interest. But once the next LEO shoots someone when the intention is to use less lethal the thread will start all over again from post number 1.

 

[WillametteWill]

How much longer are you guys gonna keep beating this dead horse?

But there is soooo much meat on dead horses. My goal is to beat the original COVID thread.

To your point, there have been several threads that have wandered into some nuanced territory lately where light bulbs have come on for many of us being able to listen to and understand different perspectives. it's been very civil in most cases and, IMHO, healthy. Sorry people are getting pinged with notifications because of us.


. . . .

 

[Member 53328]

But there is soooo much meat on dead horses. My goal is to beat the original COVID thread.

To your point, there have been several threads that have wandered into some nuanced territory lately where light bulbs have come on for many of us being able to listen to and understand different perspectives. it's been very civil in most cases and, IMHO, healthy. Sorry people are getting pinged with notifications because of us.


. . . .

If they are worried about getting pinged there is this cool feature at the top of the page.... it reads "unwatch." Haha. I know this cause I use it regularly.

 

[Kruel J]

Why isn't the POTUS being investigated for his comments BEFORE the trial outcome? Since when does the "most powerful man in the world" get to comment about what he wants or wishes for or expects in a case he isn't part of?

I agree that Chauvin is guilty. I don't agree that everyone from celebrities to the POTUS should be allowed to make such comments. Last I heard a jury trial is supposed to be unbiased. Maybe I'm wrong. I don't know. The whole thing reeks.