Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Good guidance on using Tasers

When St. Petersburg police Chief Chuck Harmon recently revised department policy on the authorized use of Tasers, he said his intention was to clarify. "We want officers to use (a Taser) when they have to use it, not just when they want to use it," he said. Some officers have been critical of the revised policy. "I think what it's done is limited the ability to use the Taser," said Officer Mark Deasaro, president of the local Police Benevolent Association.

We think Harmon got it right.

While Tasers can be a useful law enforcement tool, they should be used judiciously. There are dozens of reports from around the country of individuals who died after being shot with a Taser. So a responsible policy should give officers guidance on when to use a Taser and when to attempt a less extreme means of restraint.

Both the former and revised St. Petersburg policies authorize Taser use when someone being arrested responds with "aggressive resistance," meaning the suspect could injure the officer or someone else. That doesn't mean that anyone who fails to cooperate with an officer's commands automatically deserves to be shot with a Taser, however, and the revised policy attempts to draw that line. Short of such violent resistance, the new policy says, an officer should first attempt "hands on" restraint before using a Taser. To further clarify, the policy prohibits the Taser's use on someone "who has no apparent ability to physically threaten the officers or others."

Admittedly, a police officer's job isn't easy and often requires an instantaneous decision on the use of force. But the revised policy would seem to be clear enough. While officers shouldn't put themselves or others at risk unnecessarily, neither should they use a Taser without sufficient cause. It looks as though Harmon has found the right balance.

[Last modified September 27, 2006, 01:58:23]