no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics

Child Abusers in Uniform

May 16th, 2009

Bad: 43 children being shot with stun guns by police/penal system employees for no good reason.

A total of 43 children were blasted with stun guns as part of an “educational” program during visits at three state corrections facilities during “Take Your Sons and Daughters to Work Day,” a state investigation revealed Friday.

Worse: The children were not accused or suspected of any crimes.

Worser: The parents knew about it.

Worst: The parents “consented” to it, which is just slightly worse than the fact that the police/prison system employs the sort of person who is happy to shoot a stun gun at a child on a field trip for no good reason.  This wasn’t education, it was sadism. It’s child-abuse.

None of the children were seriously harmed by the stun guns, which is hard to believe considering the electric charge that is sent through the target’s body is enough to make a grown man have to change his pants.

And they’ve been known to kill grown men in the past, too. But since nobody was hurt, the officers will be “disciplined” and everything is OK.

…The officers apparently don’t get much of a chance to use the stun guns and probably had an itchy trigger finger…. [T]he guns have not been used on any of the 100,000 inmates so far this year.

A hundred thousand inmates so far this year haven’t warranted a single stun-gunning, yet somehow, the parents of 43 children decided that it would be OK to allow some sadist to zap their kids. I wonder if any of the correctional employees even questioned why they were being asked to stun-gun children? Somehow, I doubt it. This is not the behavior of normal, well-adjusted members of society. This is the behavior of drones.

I don’t think it’s inappropriate to suggest that these parents should lose their children, no questions asked. And I don’t think it’s inapproprite to suggest that every single accomplice-employee to this incident should be summarily fired: do not pass go, do not collect $200, no pension, no severance, nothing. If you’re lucky, you don’t end up in the clink yourself.

Although I’d certainly be willing to impose a much more severe form of punishment on anyone so willing to abuse a child in that manner.

I’m out of words. All out of words…

via reddit | wtf

Comments

8 Comments

RSS
  • RWW says on: May 16, 2009 at 5:18 pm

     

    I don’t think it’s inappropriate to suggest that these parents should lose their children, no questions asked.

    If the children wish to leave their parents, then certainly. Otherwise, that would be a disgusting initiation of force. Not as viscerally sickening as what the children went through, but still lacking principle.

  • RWW says on: May 16, 2009 at 6:03 pm

     

    This article seems to indicate that the children held hands in circles while being shocked:

    http://www.freep.com/article/20090515/NEWS07/9051

    If so, the experience would have been harmless, and has been blown completely out of proportion, thanks to typical public ignorance of basic science.

    • nothirdsolution says on: May 17, 2009 at 8:45 pm

       

      Yeah… that's what I get for opining on the news. Which is why I don't do it very often, half the time it turns out that the "story" isn't what was first reported. Oh well…

  • What about Liberty? says on: May 17, 2009 at 7:03 am

     

    I fail to see anywhere in that story where it said the children were held down and forced to be tazed. If the parents were OK with it and the children were game… I fail to see the problem.

    Be careful you don’t supersede your beliefs and values over those of others. If they made the choice, that is their choice and I struggle to understand why you should have the right to question the decision of a parent.

    It surprises me to hear someone blogging about “liberty” sound exactly like the nanny state we should both be fighting against. Freedom doesn’t always mean intelligent choices, nor should it imply it. People learn through mistakes. Young trouble-making children can also be turned the right direction by being exposed to a generally harmless encounter with some electricity…. Read More

    Before you start freaking out about the deadly nature of a stun gun, try looking at some figures around how many uses there are a year and how many related deaths there are. Hospitals are more deadly.

    • David Z says on: May 18, 2009 at 10:04 am

       

      I understand the “children’s rights” arena is a pretty murky one.

      Young trouble-making children can also be turned the right direction by being exposed to a generally harmless encounter with some electricity

      There’s no indication that these children were troublemakers.

      Hospitals are more deadly.

      Yes yes, and so are automobiles. That’s a straw man, and you know it.

  • What about Liberty? says on: May 18, 2009 at 1:50 pm

     

    David,

    You’re right, the article did not say the children were troublemakers, I was just using that as an example.

    The quip about hospitals was also not a very solid argument, but it wasn’t the foundation of my comment anyhow. Since you didn’t question the remainder of my comment, I assume you accept the rest of my logic to be sound.

    The truth about stun weapons, such as tazers, is that they are not dangerous. If you want some research material to read see this report by the Potomac Institute:
    http://www.potomacinstitute.org/research/Stun%20Devices%20Report_FINAL.pdf

    The 72 stun-weapon related deaths in 2004 were all found to have been caused by some complication of circumstances. Not a single of these deaths they reviewed listed the shock from the weapon as the cause of death, but pre-existing health issues, large quantities of illegal drugs, and trauma from wrestling with officers or falls were the cause of death.

    It is my belief that stun-weapons are safe, and as such I see no reason to punish people for taking part in a safe and consensual activity.

    I do not mean to beat a dead horse, as I am sure this was clear in my original post, but I simply wished to clarify my stance and, perhaps, to redeem a bit of the weakness in the evidence previously presented. David was correct that my previous comment did put forth a bit of a strawman argument, but this should hold a little more water.

  • Barbara Stark says on: May 20, 2009 at 10:55 am

     

    if pre existing health issues can cause death when stunned by these weapons, also accident such as falling from being stunned; the weapon is not "safe." How can the official know that the target does not have a condition or will not hit their head on the floor and die?

no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics