
Just as Vermont cuts the budget at the expense of our Vets, Teachers, Seniors, the less fortunate and especially the middle class (corporations get away tax-free), they’re sinking a lot of money into tasers, drones, surveillance cameras and vans, and two new armories. Why?
Are they expecting massive civil disobedience, or unrest? Are they mishandling Vermont’s finances so badly up in Montpelier, that they need to set the police on unarmed, peaceful demonstrators in Burlington?
What do they know, that they’re not telling us?
What can you do? Contact your State rep and senator and demand to know why! Contact them and demand a moratorium on police taser usage in Vermont. Contact your Selectmen and demand an ordinance against police taser usage in your town.
And sign the petition for a statewide moratorium.
A question that I’m asking, is WHY my elected representatives stood idly by, did and said NOTHING. Fire them in November: there are anti-corporate candidates for Liberty in Vermont. Candidates such as Dick Tracy, Paul Dame, Dexter Lefavour, Tim Ryan & Tom Burditt. They will be featured in these pages as the 2012 election progresses.
I bring you an article by Morgan Brown who publishes Vermont Watch and has led the fight against tasers and for Vermont’s disabled & homeless people. The original may be found here.
Taser Myths and a False Dichotomy
Over the course of the weeks that have past since the Tasering of MacAdam Mason by Vermont State Police officers and his death having occurred immediately afterwards (Wednesday, June 20, 2012), I have engaged in plenty of deep reflection while pondering about communicating with Governor Peter Shumlin and members of his administration regarding serious problems and major concerns in relation to statements or positions he and others within his administration have made or taken as well as then repeated over and over in one form or another regarding these and related matters.
Among these problems and concerns regard certain stock myths heard elsewhere before and that are being regurgitated (read: echoed) and fostered by Governor Shumlin and some members of his administration as if these were indeed true, including that somehow Tasers result in the lessening of the use of lethal force or so goes particular arguments or positions being offered, as well as the false dichotomy constantly hyped of there being only a choice between Tasers or guns and bullets.
As I understand it, the myth that Tasers equals less use of lethal force by police has been both refuted as well as documented, including within the 2011 Montpelier Taser Committee report (pages to read include: iii, 13 & 14), here.
It should also be noted about how Tasers are not a substitute for the use of other means or forms of lethal force, nor have they ever been, either.
Then, there is the problem of what in truth is nothing more than a false dichotomy being cited by Governor Shumlin and members of his administration that this is somehow only a choice between using guns and bullets or Tasers, when it is not. There are indeed many other viable options and alternatives available than either he appears to believe or would have the citizens of the state believe.
The fact is, and this gets to what appears to be the main justification along the lines of what Governor Shumlin has most often cited as the apparent reasoning behind his stated belief for police officers needing and using these potentially lethal weapons (and the following point is also documented elsewhere within the above mentioned and linked to report as well), rather than being used by police instead of employing other weapons or forms of lethal force, Tasers are more often used against certain populations, groups or types of persons in instances and circumstances when using firearms or even other potentially lethal weapons, tactics or means would not otherwise be justifiable.
This should not be acceptable or allowed to be tolerated, by either the citizens of state or by its governor. To do otherwise not only gives the appearance of being an act of deliberate indifference, but as one person who posted a comment to an earlier vtdigger article on the subject had suggested (here), this could also easily be considered — in effect — as “green-lighting the casual use of tasers” (emphasis mine: i.e., as posed in its intended or proper context; screenshot):

In addition, as the Tasering of MacAdam Mason as well as numbers of other persons across the nation tragically illustrate, depending on various factors including these potentially lethal weapons not being used according to Taser International’s own guidelines (which also then leaves the municipality, county or state wide open to face an ever growing liability on its own), deaths occur after Taser use and, therefore, are among those weapons, tactics and means used by police with the potential of resulting in lethal force.
Despite what Governor Shumlin appears to have argued before the press to the contrary (during his regular press conference held on June 27th; view below embedded video clip), albeit without having said such in so many words — yet the meaning was clear enough, I am certainly not alone in my belief that the death of MacAdam Mason was both needless and preventable.
Vermont as a state can and must do better and differently as well as sooner rather than later.
The 2011 Montpelier Taser Committee report also includes certain more viable options, alternatives and approaches worth considering as well as employing, some of which are called for within the Taser Moratorium statement signed onto and issued by various civil rights and disability/mental health advocates as well as concerned citizens, here.
View related video:
Although there is much more that could be stated along these and related lines, one final point I am compelled to make is about how one of the many other pathetic arguments used in a rather dismissive fashion by some within the administration is that the call for the moratorium was a “knee-jerk reaction”. Not only are dismissive arguments and tactics like these highly insulting, including to one’s intelligence, but they are also conveniently self-serving as well as being blatantly false. It is quite disappointing and disturbing to consider about how Governor Shumlin’s administration would stoop to this level of callous and defensive tactics and strategy, particularly when people’s quality of life and actual lives are at stake.
The fact is, as is usual when either such letters or statements are developed and later issued by those of us who chose to be involved, this one was well thought out and very carefully crafted by those who were involved as part of the core group prior to the usual process of agreeing to sign onto the Taser moratorium statement of June 27th (2012).
However, rather than argue these points and matters with Governor Shumlin or his administration any further if it is at all possible to do so, it has been hoped and continues to be hoped that meetings can be arranged to work these matters through much better than has been the case thus far and that any such meetings occur in the manner as is needed with all stakeholders at the table and not simply a token few of those of us who had not been well represented enough in other meetings or forums concerning these matters that might have been held previously.
Having stated the aforementioned grievances, it is also worth noting about how under Governor Peter Shumlin’s astute leadership the administration has done what had been sorely needed along these sort of lines concerning homelessness and providing essential housing (here and, here) as well as, when it was even more uncertain how things might evolve, addressing the problems and unmet needs that had long existed for decades within the mental health system and the state hospital. Governor Shumlin set the standard for what his administration could continue to follow upon those earlier examples and also actions he had undertaken when other problems as well as relating urgent needs had previously arisen.
In terms of establishing an agreeable process and then attempting to find a mutual resolution with which to help the entire state move forward from here on out, and even if it might not be simple or easy to accomplish, there is no reason to believe that what now appears to be an expanding impasse concerning Tasers and related matters can not likewise be surmounted.
That said however, prior to doing so, it might be good to consider having a smaller meeting held that includes certain members of the administration (as well as others who should also be there) and those who have been calling for a moratorium on the use of Tasers by police across the state until certain statewide policies and procedures as well as more extensive training of police than is currently available is put in place.
All that said, it should be kept in mind that — as always — I am merely speaking for myself as a concerned citizen and for none other.
If you have not already signed onto the online petition urging the following, please consider doing so (read the petition as well as the description found on the page and, if you are so inclined, sign on, here):
The undersigned petitioners urge Governor Peter Shumlin to call for an immediate moratorium on the use of Tasers by the Vermont State Police as well as all other law enforcement agencies across the state. This moratorium should remain in place until standardized statewide policies are put into practice that will reduce the risks posed by the use of Tasers, as well as, until all officers across the state whom are armed with Tasers receive standardized, state-approved, training in the use of Tasers, including more extensive, standardized, state-wide and state-approved training for dealing with people in a mental health crisis than is already currently available to police officers.
Posted by Morgan W. Brown. “Although I blog about many things in general, because my life experiences include having lived homeless off and on over several years in many of its various forms, as well as formerly having been on the receiving end of the public mental health system, these and related matters *sometimes* find their way into certain blog posts in one fashion or another. My online access is gained via public sites, computers of friends and allies, as well as a donated laptop with wireless Internet capability.”

Print
Digg
Facebook
StumbleUpon
Twitter
email
RSS
Blogosphere
http://freeroger.org/node/18
While visiting the Pion Family, and waiting for Roger in Court, each family waiting had tales of police corruption and abuse. I did not have enough time to document all of the stories, this might be a job for teams of investigators from a Human and Civil Rights organization, it seems so rampant and widespread.
Haley Luce, daughter of the victim, Russel Luce shared this story with us, she very well may suffer retribution from the Police, but is brave and wants her fathers story to be told.
“On May 5th, 2012, my father Russell Luce of Hardwick, VT called the police to enforce a no trespass order. when the police officer, Officer Lehoe of Hardwick police came, he flew up the driveway at a high rate of speed, jumped out of the cruiser, threw his glasses down on his seat as if he was initiating a fight, pushed my dad backwards and said “back the fuck out of my space” and then my father said “your space? this is my space. I called you to ask the trespasser to leave and now I’m asking you to leave, you fucking coward.” then my dad started walking toward the house when officer Lehoe said “hey Russell”, (the officer already has the taser gun pointed at his back) as my dad turned around Lehoe shot my father with the taser twice in the chest. my father dropped down to one knee and said “are you trying to kill me? I’m on about twelve different medications, I just had back surgery.” officer Lehoe got a huge smile on his face and pulled the trigger two more times. as he did, my father ripped the wires out of the gun and walked back into the house and called 911. he told the dispatcher “this is Russell Luce, I called for help. you didn’t send help. the officer you sent has just shot me with a taser. I NEED HELP” then hung up the phone. several more officers came and talked with officer Lehoe, meanwhile the trespasser was still watching everything and was never asked to leave by the police. also, officer Lehoe asked the trespasser and his two family members for incident reports. they were parked on the other side of the road, behind a hedge and definitely couldn’t hear or see what was going on. The officer failed to ask two other witnesses who were within spitting distance of the incident”.
“After the incident, my dad called the town manager, John Jewett and asked him for the policy and procedure for taser use, and also sent a certified letter asking for the same. John Jewett failed to respond. Since the incident there was an article in the paper saying that they had just adopted a policy and procedure to use the taser guns. from what I understand, if they didn’t have a policy and procedure in place they shouldn’t of even been carrying them.”
Taser stun guns were once marketed as both nonlethal as well as safe, then said to be “less-than-lethal” and, now, they are termed as being a “less lethal” weapon.
The problem with this tortuous logic and its convenient rationalizations is when death occurs after someone has been hit by a Taser, the person is not any “less dead.”
In case it is of interest, everything one ever wanted to know about Tasers, but had been afraid to ask, fyi:
The definitive guide to civil rights litigation involving ECDs (source: John Burton Law; 2010)
Jet fighters daily screeching across the Vermont sky? Northrup-Grumman vying for control and influence? Burlington policemen shooting at unarmed citizens? I am shocked by the militarism in this state! I recently moved here from the Baltimore-Washington DC area to escape the military-industrial complex and endless talk of wars, military contracts, bases, Guard, etc.
Vermont is known throughout the rest of the country for its natural beauty, outdoor recreation, peacefulness, small town life and independent-minded citizens. This is Vermont’s BRAND. This is what makes the state unique. So imagine my surprise as a new subscriber to the Free Press when I almost daily read key stories, editorials and citizen comments on various results of militarism.
I ask the citizens of Vermont to step back and analyze where things have gotten to and whether this is the Vermont they envision. Debates should not be about particular noise levels of fighter jets but whether we should even have fighter jets in our midst? Is that part of Vermont’s BRAND? A brand that has been carefully and successfully developed for decades? Vermont has a strong, varied and resilient economy compared to other states. Any discussion about job creation and sustainable economic activities should center around and support the Vermont BRAND. And new directions coming from city, state and federal levels should be evaluated by the same – does this support the brand and image Vermonters aspire to? Or, conversely, does that new direction or initiative take away from who we want to be?
I came to Vermont to live out my remaining years in a better way. I came with an idyllic image looking from the outside in. Now that I am an insider, I receive almost daily shocks to that image. Will we end up like the rest of the country or will we preserve and nurture a better way of living? I, for one, will pull for the latter. And I ask all fellow citizens to prioritize and hold high our unique, attractive and successful Vermont BRAND.
Greg Paradiso