Appropriate Response To Being Threatened With A Taser

[sellersm]

Smoke: those are some cute, little threats!!

I think the grey area is the 'committing a crime' while possessing a taser... My question would be: how did he know that this guy had NOT committed a crime?

If everyone went home safe and the company's happy, well, who's to say anything else?

We all have to individually decide how much our lives are worth as compared to "following company policy".

 

[Smoke]

not call the police, u were threatened with a weapon and he was trespassing. OH its ok he was just smoking to much weed and got lost in COLorado

I wasn't threatened with anything I wasn't even in the same zipcode when it happened.

 

[Smoke]

Now, if you care to, consider the pvt security/client component. There should never be a "company rule" that violates my personal safety, common sense or the commonly held doctrines of self defense. An employer should not be asking me to "take a bullet" (or get tazed etc) or doing anything else that clearly violates my personal safety, simply for their liability or public image reasons. If you don't want me to call the police for tresspassers, that's fine. If you don't want me to call the police for tresspassers who threathen me with a taser, that's not fine. If you don't want me to present my weapon when threatened with a taser, that's not fine.


Sgt Lumpy

Let's take the not calling the police part off the table until I can reread the report. I'm pretty sure he didn't call the cops and I know we aren't supposed to for trespassers unless they refuse to leave but he may have ended up calling the cops because of the threat.

As for not presenting the handgun, in Colorado putting your hand on it is legally the same thing so if he was justified in the one he would have been justified in the other. So if he didn't present it was his choice.

I have been doing this long enough to know when I'm going to be writing a report so I think about what I'm saying. I would have put my hand on the gun and said "Sir I need you to put down that taser." and then progressed from there.

Also given a choice I wouldn't have called the cops if the guy left without doing anything else. who the Hell wants to do all that paper work ?

 

[walkin' trails]

A taser or a stun gun? As I understand it, a taser is capable of firing darts to project it's range while a stun gun requires the person wielding it to close with and make contact with the threat or victim. Distance and obsticles can be used to avoid being harmed.


Now, in regard to a threat percieved by your coworker, be familiar with your state's requirements for the lawful use of deadly force in self defense. Most are going to include something such as "a reasonable person fearing eminent threat of death or serious physical injury." A reasonable person who is lawfully where they're supposed to be and being threatened by someone who us not who is carrying a taser that can fire darts that can cause temporary incapacitation long enough for the person who Is threatening the harm to obtain the reasonable person's firearm or gain some other advantage over the reasonable person so as to inflict death or great harm is something to be considered. So is a stun gun when conditions prevent the reasonable person from getting out of range. I can't armchair as to what course of action a reasonable person should take, so that is why I say it us important to know your state's statutes for self defense. Furthermore you must be able to articulate what you did.

I am glad your friend did not have to use deadly force. He should consider this a learning experience and take stock of his skill level, tactics, and the law. Be safe.

 

[sipowicz]

I would assume the appropriate response would be one of shock.

 

[Smoke]

A taser or a stun gun? As I understand it, a taser is capable of firing darts to project it's range while a stun gun requires the person wielding it to close with and make contact with the threat or victim. Distance and obsticles can be used to avoid being harmed.

I wasn't there, the report specified taser So I will take it at its word

 

[Ranger514]

The report doesn't mention the specific manner in which the trespasser threatened the guard. If he had Taser in hand and pointed, the guard was way behind the power curve in his reaction. At close range, the guard would very likely have been tased before he could draw his handgun.

Taser models and cartridges vary in their effective range. Most handgun style Tasers have a 20' to 25' range. Like Walkin' Trails said, distance, obstacles, and weather factors can be used to lessen their threat. Create distance and use cover. If an assailant pursues you with intent to attack using a Taser, the threat would justify a lethal force response. I would have little difficulty articulating my fear of serious bodily harm or death in that situation.

Some Taser models sold to the public have a 30 second timed charge. They are meant to be deployed and then dropped at the scene to allow the intended victim ample time to escape the incapacitated BG. Consider what a BG could do to you if he had one of those Tasers and 30 seconds to inflict damage while you were helpless to defend yourself.

 

[BC38]

...client policy is that for trespassers security is not allowed to call the police unless the trespasser is causing a disturbance or refusing to leave... ...As he approaches the homeless guy threatens him with a taser...

How is threatening the guard with a taser NOT a case of "refusing to leave"?

If the client agreed that the taser justified the use of deadly, how could they not agree with a decision to call the police?

The first rule of armed self defense is avoid using your gun if you can, right? So, as soon as the guy produced the taser I would have retreated (if safe to do so) and called the police.

If retreat wasn't an option I'd have drawn down on him and if the taser didn't hit the floor pretty much immediately, I'd have put a hole in him.

Either way my next move would still be to call the police. If they wanted to say I violated policy, I'd make the argument that he refused to leave and we'd go to court if that's what it took.

 

[jlrhiner]

Every time I'm confronted by hostile vagrants with tasers I put my hand on my gun and say "Go ahead. Make my day!". Works every time.

 

[Hodgin]

At my age, and more importantly health condition, I would definitely consider it a deadly weapon. It probably wouldn't be good for my ICD. It'd be a closer call otherwise.

I probably say yes, especially if I were close to the person. I don't know the effective range of a taser but if inside it I would consider it a deadly weapon.

 

[Smoke]

I'm kind of frustrated that I can't find the report in our database at work because there are some questions that I can't answer without reading it again and some that aren't answered in it. I will look today again and try to get more detail but I want to stress that this was just an example.

My question was more in some other situation if you were threatened by a Taser (and again I specify "Taser" because that's what the report said) would you consider it to be a deadly threat?

I also want to point out that in the example above the guard initiated the encounter and I'm sure he did so at some distance where if the guy with the taser initiated the encounter I would think he'd try to get closer to you.

 

[Smoke]

Some folks have also asked why this was considered a deadly force incident. In Colorado if you so much as place your hand on your weapon or even verbally indicate that you are armed it is considered aggravated menacing unless it's justified self defense. So in the incident I used in my example the guard would have been guilty of a felony except for the Taser. That's why the company reviewed the incident.

One of the things that my employer stresses with the armed guards is that if you are in some minor confrontation at work (like a client employee forgot their ID card and is upset because you can't just let them in) is to be very aware of your body language and don't even put your hand near your gun (like how some people put their hands on their hips when they get upset) because the employee might consider it a threat.

 

[jlrhiner]

In all seriousness, yes. If confronted by someone threatening me with a Taser I would consider it a deadly threat. Once I'd been tasered, the aggressor has access to my CCW, wallet and whatever else I had.

Just recently, a dude playing the "Knockout Game" attempted to use a Taser on a man at a bus stop. The man felt the taser "click", but due to heavy clothes the effect was lessoned. He drew his CCW and shot the dude. After the dude was in the hospital, he admitted he had done this 7 or 8 times before.

 

[SgtLumpy]

... So in the incident I used in my example the guard would have been guilty of a felony except for the Taser. That's why the company reviewed the incident.

Actually, he wouldn't "have been guilty" of anything until arrested, tried and found guilty. And of course, that's not an issue here because he's being threatened by a person committing what I suspect is a felony in Colorado (unlawful entry plus dangerous weapon threatening [taser]).

Sounds to me like this security company has had a bad history of hiring too many gung-ho employees that put the company at risk. So now they're over-emphasizing the "Don't touch your gun butt or you're guilty of a felony" stuff.

I spent just a little time on LexisNexis this morning trying to find that Colorado "touch your gun" law and didn't find it. If anyone knows the specific title:section, please post the reference so I can look at it in more detail.

I don't like this idea, Smoke, of your employer calling you on the carpet every time you touch your gun. We don't need to be pulling guns on employees who forgot their ID cards, of course. But I'd sure rather see them empower you to use common sense and human intelligence when reacting to things in the field instead of treating you like cannon fodder to keep their liability exposure reduced.


Sgt Lumpy

 

[SgtLumpy]

I spent just a little time on LexisNexis this morning trying to find that Colorado "touch your gun" law and didn't find it. If anyone knows the specific title:section, please post the reference so I can look at it in more detail.

Answering my own question -

I suppose "Menacing" CRS - 18-3-206 would apply to the "touch your gun" as well as something similar but verbal. A class 5 felony. -

(b)"By the person representing verbally or otherwise that he or she is armed with a deadly weapon."

All of which would, of course, clearly be an affirmative defense when confronted by an intruder with a taser. I haven't found specific case law declaring a taser a deadly weapon in CO, but there is CO case law declaring a BB gun a deadly weapon.

In any case, Smoke, get a job that treats you as an intelligent adult.


Sgt Lumpy

 

[ColbyBruce]

Looking at your photos, I have to wonder what a homeless vagrant was doing way out in the middle of nowhere? How did he get there?

 

[feralmerril]

A person would have to be stupid to charge a armed man with a taser when armed man has a pistol pointed at him. If that ever happened to me I would think you would be justified to shoot as such a fool no doubt once he tased you he will take your gun and probley shoot you and ultimately others. I believe a jury would believe that too. Would be the same if it was a knife instead of a taser. I never had similar done in 35 years as a guard.

 

[Smoke]

Looking at your photos, I have to wonder what a homeless vagrant was doing way out in the middle of nowhere? How did he get there?

Different facilty.

Having said that you would be surpried at how far homeless people travel a lot of them head south in the winter

 

[Smoke]

In any case, Smoke, get a job that treats you as an intelligent adult.


Sgt Lumpy

I preffer keeping the job where they leave me the cow flops alone. Today makes 3 days this week that there is no one here but me and the foxes.

I understand what you're saying but I feel like I have pretty good gig for security most of the time I don't have to deal with the company politics, they don't want to drive all the way out here to check on me so the leave me (us ) alone. all the guys I supervise like it that way and we go don't draw attention to ourselves.

 

[feralmerril]

I read a few of the posts above after I posted. I would like to say, maybe legally a taser aint lethal but I would also think that most normal people would assume that if someone is nuts enough to charge a armed guard with a taser, we would also assume the nut is going to take the incapacitated guards gun when he is down and helpless. On my guard job I also had assignments far out in the desert working all night by myself guarding stuff. On those assignments I was in civilian cloths. It was a different world though as my outfit didnt want to be identified with what I was guarding plus indirectly the federal government paid my company to pay me.
I cant think of another business that could have more potential libel problems than owning a contract security company. I had a friend years ago that wanted me to start up one with him. I wouldnt touch it. Its one thing working inhouse security for a major defense plant that will back you than working for a small contract outfit. I have done both but did 35 years for my company with no legal problems for anything I got involved in. For people that dont know what I mean, there are two types of guard or security jobs. "In house and contract". "In house" is guards that are paid directly by the company that they guard like Ford, Boeing, or whatever. Contract security is a guard company that will send you to everything from a topless bar to maybe stores or whatever. In my experience if your going to be a guard, go with a large company with in house security. They typically pay the same benifits, holidays, retirement, vacations, 401K`s etc as their regular employees. I doubt any contract outfit can began to match In House.