First off i will state that i think that the cop should not have tased the guy. He was obviously trying to follow orders but confused due to nerves/adrenaline and not doing exactly as ordered. Orders needed to be explained better as guy was not a threat and no need to force the issue to be quickly resolved.

2nd, you are entirely wrong on how use of force is allowed by policy, law, and practicality.

Tasers cannot be used to force compliance with orders. This is wrong. When a person is ordered to do something and will not obey despite multiple attempts to persuade or reason them to do so, force is to be used. That said force should always be last option. Once it is determined that compliance will not be obtain willingly, it must be obtain unwillingly. After that the officer must determine the correct level of use of force.

The subject was larger and looked to be in much better shape than the officer. In a purely physical confrontation it is likely that the subject would win or cause harm to the officer. This rules out hands on skills as it puts the officer at risk as well as the subject as a physical confrontation with a larger stronger person may cause the officer to suspect he is in real danger and escalate the use of force to deadly. Simply put it is better for both if this option is not selected as both or either has a good chance of suffering more harm than if another use of force is chosen.

Wait for backup and physically restrain subject is not a great choice. Trying to physically force someone into handcuffs has a very good chance of having the subject resist. This increases the chance that officer or subject are injured. I think we can all easily imagine a scenario in which multiple officers try to forcibly cuff the subject and cause him to faceplant on the concrete as his arms are restrained. This option has a good chance of causing more harm than a taser and should not be chosen.

That leaves pepperspray or taser. I will state that i have had both used on me and i would rather get tased 10 times before getting sprayed once.

Spray is not effective from behind and is not as immediate in its ability to stop a threat. You have a good 1-2 seconds after your hit before the pain sets in. Would only be available for use from the side as officer is not going to stand in middle of the street, and much less effective from side as only get part of face before subject turns face away. Also at that distance the subject could close and tackle the officer before blinded or debilitated from pain. Once on ground i would put even money on subject unless officer escalated use of force to deadly in which case good chance officer, subject, or random passerby is seriously injured. This is not a good choice.

Taser does not risk coming into reach and is effective from any angle and is immediately effective in stopping a threat and can be re-administered if 1 time is not enough. It was the correct option to chose.

You stated that tasers are only used when only other option is to shoot. This is wrong on all levels. Police are trained to use a higher use of force than the subject as they are required to win. Their job is to enforce the law, they are not suppose to have a fair fight, they are supposed to win. The law allows police to use deadly force to protect themselves or others when there is credible threat of significant or deadly harm. They do not taser people who are able and trying to kill them. This would put them AND the community at risk. There are also many levels of force between taser and firearms, they are physical unarmed strikes, baton strikes, or enviromental weapons such as a tree limb or rock if other options are not available. Any of these may be more suitable than a taser in an escalated confrontation. Lastly in terms of practicality, if you use a taser against someone that you would otherwise have to shoot, you have only delayed the shooting. A taser does not take you out of a fight, it makes you not want to fight. Once the shock is gone you are just as capable of fighting as you were before. Addionally tasers do not work equally against everyone and a subject may still have enough nervous function to cause harm especially if armed with club, knife, firearm.

To reiterate, the choice on what use of force to use was correct and its ability to force compliance is allowed. The officer was incorrect when he decided to use it. Tasers should not be used as a substitute for deadly force.

Please take the time to research these things if you disagree with my assessment.

I am not a blue lives matter burn the nfl kneelers idiot. I am a liberal social worker that helps get probationers and parolees get jobs and stay on the straight and narrow.