by frog
The shocking footage which emerged after last Thursday night’s Fight for Life showing a police officer spraying a handcuffed man with pepper spray has caused understandable concern and alarm about police behaviour. The Green Party has called for the inquiry into the incident to be broadened to include all pepper spray use, but this looks unlikely at this stage.
This is particularly concerning, as more victims of this kind of behaviour are now coming forward. It is also concerning, given the apparent evidence that police are using pepper spray inappropriately, that they are soon to be trusted with 50,000-volt Taser guns, a concern which is evidently shared by other groups.
Keith, as well as Maori Party MP Hone Harawira, asked the Minister of Police about these issues in the House yesterday, producing the following exchange:
Keith Locke: [...] does the Minister think that a police force that, on the evidence of the 2,000 cases, cannot be trusted to use pepper spray according to police general instructions can be trusted to go ahead with a trial of the 50,000-volt Taser gun, and will she be deferring that Taser gun trial until we are sure that the police do act according to instructions?
Hon ANNETTE KING: I repeat that I have no evidence to show that the New Zealand Police have a problem in terms of the use of pepper spray. That is not to say there are not individual officers who may inappropriately use pepper spray, but I have no reason to believe that the police do not, in the majority of cases, act responsibly.
Hone Harawira: What response has the Minister to reports from Amnesty International that within the last few years at least nine people in Canada and over 60 in the United States have died after being shocked with a Taser stun gun, which causes the instant incapacitation of the target by delivering a 50,000-volt electric shock; and will police be given the same freedom to use Taser guns as they have to use pepper spray as been highlighted by the media over the past few days?
Hon ANNETTE KING: In response to the second part of the member’s question, no. In response to the first part of the question, yes, I have seen those reports, but I am also aware of the assessments of Tasers by other jurisdictions similar to New Zealand that show that the operational and public safety of Tasers outweighs the potential medical risks. That is for both the people being apprehended and the public.
Published in Justice & Democracy | Parliament by frog on Wed, May 10th, 2006
Tags: environment
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Frog.
As a mother with a policeman son I will point out that the police do NEED something in their defence. Would you prefer all police persons be armed with pistols/rifles? No? Then be reasonable and allow some self defence weapons, to be used under strict guidlines.
A ‘P’ fueled criminal came with in an inch of battering my son to death. Of course I shall support a proposal that police on the beat, especially those that work alone in rural areas, should have spray or tasers. Joy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thanks for your comment Joy. It must be very scary having a son who is a police officer when he is often at risk like that. Pepper spray may well be a useful tool for police who, of course, do need to protect themselves from violence at times. The problem the Greens see is that it was clearly used inappropriately in this case – the handcuffed man was obviously no threat to the officer concerned. I think the request for a broader inquiry is to make sure that this is not happening regularly.
As for Tasers, I think there are serious concerns about the health risks they pose that would suggest that they are an inappropriate form of protection at any time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Tazers are a useful tool when used as intended, ie as an alternative to lethal force, in other words as an alternative to a firearm. There are risks to the tazed person, but those risks are generally lower than that of being shot.
Unfortunately, experience shows that tazers are not used as an alternative to firearms, but as a general purpose quelling tool. Under these usage patterns, people die who shouldn’t. Thats wrong.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s about time the Greens got behind our police force – please present a balanced argument and show the statistics for assault on police. I can assure you that’s only the tip of the iceburg as minor assualts often aren’t recorded. Unfortunately you get people who abuse their position in all walks of life and the police are no different – what is different is that it will be investigated and that officer, if found guilty, will lose his job, unlike alot of people in many walks of life – rugby players who beat their pregnant wives and politicians who drink and drive as minor examples. I too have a family member who is a police officer – try explaing to kids why Dad’s in hospital again or why he’s quite tonight (oh, he’s just been piecing some body parts back together). Police don’t support police brutality any more than the general public and if the Greens are going to start sensationalising this sort of thing, they’ll lose my vote.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
fwog, fwog,, i rather an eye irritation than a bullet,
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It seems to me that police have enough tools in their arsenals that there should seldom be need to use a taser. There is no disputing its effectiveness, but the risks are substantial. Is an occasional death an acceptable trade off for the convenience and effectiveness of the taser?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
My brother is a member of the NYPD and Tasers are only given to the supervisors, Sgt’s and above. He has told me that after 12 years on the force, he has never used his pepper spray. But I think it is a good idea that police have a non-leathal form of defense.
Pepper Spray
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)