The TASER Show

The TASER Show

On Tuesday March 13, 2007 the Cambridge Police Department with the support of the TASER Corporation presented a slide show with actual live demonstration of an officer getting TASEd. The audience was mostly police officers about 15 of them. No City Councilor was present. This is fitting with the current de facto policy of the City Manager making policy decisions and deferring to the police department to run itself.
A sprinkling of civilians appeared along with ACLU representatives who no longer protect civilians, but lobby for police interests. One member of the moribund Police Review and Advisory Board was present. Deputy City Manager Richard Rossi was there. The TASER District Distributor, Mark Tucker was also present.
John Roberts was there and announced that the ACLU has always been concerned about the use of deadly force. John Reinstein, ACLU retired, once boasted how close he was with Boston Police Commissioner Evans, who attended his retirement party. I am amazed at how the ACLU can keep a straight face and attend meetings promoting the interests of the police. I said that the ACLU position on TASERs is the same as the police position.
During the presentation Lt. Robert Ames often made the statement there was no other option, than to TASE the suspect. If a civilian is threatened and attacked, he must legally try to retreat. If the attacker follows then he may retaliate for the attacks on him. Why is that not an option for police? I know that a civilian must obey a police officer’s command. But if a person does not know that and does not obey that is what gives rise to the police beginning to use force.
I raised the issue that if a corrections officer or a police officer takes a hostage the police do not attack him. Instead they wait him out sometimes taking two days instead of using deadly force. The TASER-produced video showed a man with a gun, and one video where his wife videotaped the police TASER use. She admonished her husband after the TASER attack. Another suspect had a gun. In all of the situations shown it was a reasonable response for the police to use TASERs.
There were no incidents when young people 6 or 12 years old were TASEd as in Florida. One slide show was of a dog attacking an officer. The dog was TASEd and ran away. One man was TASEd for 30 minutes until backup arrived. One scene was of a 350-pound man who struggled with police. Lt. Ames again made a negative statement about persons with disabilities.
He said in one case the person “was obviously emotionally disturbed.” That is the police term for a person they perceive as mentally ill, EDP. And what if a person is “obviously emotionally disturbed?” Then he is a person with a disability, and the police need to make reasonable accommodations. But they never do. What they do is attack more fiercely due to their hatred of persons with disabilities. Ames also made an irrational statement that they often encounter a person “off his meds.” Here is another misguided opinion by police that if a person stops taking psychiatric medication that they are dangerous. The police and Ames in particular do not know that it is the medications that cause the violence. When people stop taking the drugs their body reacts and makes the person irrational. Whether knowingly or unwittingly Lt. Ames is a lobbyist for drug companies.
It must have taken Lt. Ames some time to view and to be prepared for his presentation. This was an effort to persuade the City Council to approve the use of TASERs. But no City Councilor was present. Who paid for the time that Lt. Ames spent preparing for this presentation? When I entered the Senior Center for the meeting at about 6:30 PM there was a table set up with literature.
Holly Levins the police PR flack was sitting there. I asked if I could leave some of my handouts. She looked at the police officer. One said no. The Police Commissioner was there too. He said it was OK. Then he said to me, “Just don’t disturb the meeting. I said I was going to video it too.
The Police Commissioner said that each TASER gun casts $1,000. He said they wanted yellow guns so everyone knows what it is. He said, “We want compliance.” He said only about 10 percent of the city’s officers would carry TASERs including the Special Response Team, and Firearms officers. He said there are about 272 officers at present with the force being about 15 under full count.
He said there were 15 new officers being ready to go into training. He boasted that about 15 officers were lateral transfers, Cambridge getting the best officers from other departments. He said there would be a review of the use of TASERs after one year. He said that 27 of the 351 cities and towns in Massachusetts use TASERs. The Commissioner explained that New Jersey and Massachusetts were the last states to approve the use of TASERs.
The TASER distributor said that there were 160 studies, and 90 independent studies. There was no proof of any deaths by TASER. He did not say, but I did, that the United Kingdom and Canada did not approve the use of TASERs. He said that TASERs do what they are supposed to do. He said there was 100 percent accountability. He meant that when a TASER was fired, the TASER itself makes records of the gun being fired. He gave me two CDs and a book about the TASERs.
The bulletin board in the window of the Senior Center announces the meetings each week. This meeting on TASERs was not on the bulletin board. It did appear on the e-line announcement list of the city.
The Commissioner frequently mentioned the Police Review Board. When I said it was a useless board he tried to silence me. He said that the PRAB meets monthly with Lt. Chris Burke. I realized that here were more examples of the City violating the Open Meetings Law. The Commissioner also said that Internal Affairs division would regulate the use of the TASERs. I suggested that the department could purchase net guns, which are less lethal and do not cause deaths as TASERs do. The Commissioner said “ We don’t have net guns.” I did not ask him, “Are you sure?” Or why the City doesn’t purchase those weapons.
The Commissioner said there was only one death by guns in Cambridge since 1950. I asked about the shooting in 2002 of Daniel Furtado. The Commissioner said I shouldn’t use his name. I said, “He’s dead. He can’t be slandered.” When I said that the police entered his home in violation of the US Constitution and state law, the Commissioner interrupted me and said he would not discuss that issue and called on another person.
Mo Barboza thanked the Commissioner for having the meeting. He asked what other weapons can be used instead of lethal force. He also asked about discrimination by police, who might be tempted to use the TASERs on persons of color. No one thought that Ames' statement that an "obviously emotionally disturbed" person was a likely target for a TASER shot unusual.
Mark Tucker said that the TASER mimics how the brain works telling the muscles what to do. The TASER interferes with that communication. He revealed that a pepper spray capsule costs about $13. But there are additional costs. The officers must clean up the suspect after he sprays him or her. He said that the Town of Green Bay, Wisconsin did a report on the use of TASERs. The Police Commissioner said that the objective is to prevent harm to officers and to civilians. The Police Commissioner emphasized that the officers are repeatedly told to be reasonable.
After my third round of questions the Commissioner asked me if I wanted to volunteer for a test. I declined his invitation and suggested that the Mayor preferred that the Cambridge Chronicle reporter be the target. As he described the weapon, the Commissioner pointed it at Dawn Witlin. I said she should duck now. She was already bending over in her seat.
There was little opposition expressed to the use of TASERs. These meetings are dominated by police. Few persons who have been harmed by police are willing or interested in attending meetings with police officers.


--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA
http://www.enoughroom.blogspot.com