It must have been the mothers decision to take the child into custody. I'm pretty sure on domestic disturbance calls and there's a fight that's how it works. They see what the problem is and try and resolve it on scene. Normally it involves fighting spouses though and the female will say that they want to press charges or not as well they might just say the want them removed.
So him being called for this wasn't his fault... and taking her into custody that's not his fault either (I don't think at least.) He did get kicked in the groin apparently and maybe that aggravted him into using the taser. I do not think that it was necessary at
all it would be like he spray pepper spray into her eyes or put her into a police hold (like the one with your arm behind your back... hurts A LOT).
I mean like this man is trained to be able to take down criminals who sometimes may be larger than himself and he couldn't subdue a 10 year old child? Really... seems far fetched. I don't think he should be held solely responsible however they should review their training of use of tasers and when is proper times to use them. Possibly even add min/max ages that they can be used against.
A friend of mine who just finished police foundations said to me that the use of tasers is only like 1 step away from lethal force on the force continuum. I looked it up and it seems he was correct.
Less-lethal weapons are valuable when: Lethal force is not appropriate. Lethal force is justified and available for backup but lesser force may subdue the aggressor. Lethal force is justified but its use could cause collateral effects, such as injury to bystanders or life-threatening damage to property and environment.
A taser can be classified as a 'less lethal' use of force. What this means is that the officer is using this
instead of pulling out their gun and shooting.
This definition of a taser comes from:
http://www.less-lethal.org/web/definitions.aspx
All police officers in Ontario must have basic training in use of force. The Ontario Use of Force Model (2004) directs that officers shall continuously assess each encounter and select the most reasonable option for action, relative to the circumstance.8 The use of force continuum provides guidelines to incremental increases in use of force. The five stages of the continuum are: officer presence, verbal communication, physical control, intermediate weapons (using non-lethal chemical, electronic or impact weapons on an individual) and lethal force (using any force likely to cause permanent injury or death).
Comes from:http://www.ontario.cmha.ca/policy_positions.asp?cID=25628
Yes I understand Ontario is different than the states but the use of force continuum used in most states is the same as the one in Ontario.