Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Hampshire Cops Use Taser On Woman Buying Too Many iPhones

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the it's-for-your-own-good-lady dept.

Iphone 936

turbosaab writes "A woman who said she was asked to leave New Hampshire's Pheasant Lane Mall because she wanted to buy too many iPhones was pinned down by Nashua police and zapped by a Taser (video) as she shrieked in front of crowds of shoppers Tuesday. The Chinese woman from Newton, Mass blamed a language barrier for the confrontation outside the Apple Store in the Pheasant Lane Mall Tuesday afternoon. Police say Li knew exactly what they were telling her and simply refused to comply. Police said Li had $16,000 in cash in her purse at the time of her arrest and may have been purchasing the phones for unauthorized export resale."

cancel ×

936 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Unauthorized export resale? (5, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#42273117)

You mean selling her own property for a profit? God forbid.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (5, Insightful)

ZombieBraintrust (1685608) | about 2 years ago | (#42273201)

Not really relevant. A store doesn't have to sell you multiple copies of something. You can't take the store hostage to force them to sell you more.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (-1, Troll)

jkrise (535370) | about 2 years ago | (#42273455)

A store doesn't have to sell you multiple copies of something.

Multiple copies of iPhones? First time I'm hearing of such a thing. Oh, you mean, like Android phones being copycats of iThings?

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273251)

No, they mean violating US law by purchasing export-restricted devices within the US for the sole purpose of taking them outside the US to resell.

Certain cryptography software is legally blocked from export, and as a result any software that includes those crypto features is also restricted. PuTTY is a great example.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (4, Insightful)

Z00L00K (682162) | about 2 years ago | (#42273397)

And the reality is that the law is obsolete - cryptography isn't best just because it's built in the US.

What this proves is that Apple is jacking up the price and availability more on some markets than other.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273595)

And the reality is that the law is obsolete - cryptography isn't best just because it's built in the US.

What this proves is that Apple is jacking up the price and availability more on some markets than other.

How does this "prove" anything? Apple still has to comply with the law, even if it's stupidly out-of-date. Jesus, I generally dislike Apple these days, and even I think this sort of kneejerk reaction is laughable.

At any rate, from the story, it comes across as more like Apple asked her to leave the store, and the police were called because she refused to do this- not because she was trying to buy the iPhones in themselves. Whether this was a reasonable response is still open to question, but it's not really the story as being presented here.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (4, Informative)

Wansu (846) | about 2 years ago | (#42273599)

"What this proves is that Apple is jacking up the price and availability more on some markets than other."

Exactly. Whenever something doesn't make sense, ask who benefits.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (3, Informative)

Vintermann (400722) | about 2 years ago | (#42273415)

That is totally irrelevant here. Only a few nations are on the list of "rogue states" that you can't export cryptography tools to, and China is obviously not one of them.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273483)

This is BS. Yes, it is technically illegal, but the US gov't does not enforce it. And they won't. They tried with the creator of PGP but gave up and dropped the charges.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273581)

No, they didn't. Not until the law changed. Encryption no longer counts as munitions.

iPhone IS MADE in China (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273623)

That's dumb, the iPhone is MADE in China, it's also SOLD in China. There's no such export restriction and no such law (just think how dumb what you said is, in effect a product made in China can't be inside China... the mind boggles).

The rule is an Apple arbitrary sale limit rule. The article mentions Apple uses police officers to enforce it because they've had trouble in the past with people buying too many for unauthorized export. As if they get to tazer customers based on some EULA or something!

ALL SHE WANTED TO DO WAS BUY A LOT OF IPHONES AT FULL PRICE! (BTW they're the same price in China).

Right now I'm going to go to an Apple store and diss the products in front of other customers, complain they're overpriced, underpowered, not as good as the Android ones, maybe bring my Android quad core tablet and do visual compares. Until they ask me to leave. Then I'm not going to leave, I'm going to kick up one hell of a stink. Maybe do a bit of shouting about how they tazered a woman in an Apple store. f*** Apple. Really f*** em, corporate scum.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#42273675)

There are no such restrictions on the iPhone.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273253)

Damn right! Who needs stupid things like laws, anyway? Keep raging against the machine, brah!

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (3, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | about 2 years ago | (#42273441)

> Damn right! Who needs stupid things like laws, anyway? Keep raging against the machine, brah!

Yes. Joining "subversives" like John Hancock, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams.

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (2)

alen (225700) | about 2 years ago | (#42273549)

JOhn Adams

the president who gave us the Sedition Act of 1798, one of the repressive attacks on free speech in US history

Re:Unauthorized export resale? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273605)

> Damn right! Who needs stupid things like laws, anyway? Keep raging against the machine, brah!

Yes. Joining "subversives" like John Hancock, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams.

You heard it here, folks: Reselling iPhones == John Hancock, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams.

Boycott Apple (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273267)

WTF, that's what I thought. Since when is it a crime in the USA to buy TOO MANY of something! Yet Apple impose a limit, and hire officers to enforce it. Those officers taze if you don't leave the store when asked.

Just don't buy Apple. Seriously, they have some nasty attitude there.

Re:Boycott Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273319)

Yes, because clearly, Apple was the sole inventor of the "Limit X per customer" method of retail sales and there is absolutely NO prior art from any other store in the history of the world. Nevermind every sale during Black Friday. It's so far-fetched for Apple to do this, because, well, they're Apple and they're bastards. Clearly.

Do you stop to read what you write, or do you just herpderp, roll your face on the keyboard, and press Submit?

This just in... (5, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | about 2 years ago | (#42273133)

Police are now so badly trained and so out of shape they can't even handle a 44 year-old, 80 pound Chinese woman, they have to resort to high tech weaponry.

Re:This just in... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273161)

I still would.

Re:This just in... (5, Interesting)

Sprouticus (1503545) | about 2 years ago | (#42273197)

This.

Seriously, I dont care how irritate she was, how on earth could she be a risk. I do love the export comment, like it mitigates their actions...I mean tasering an illegal exporter is totally justified, right?

Re:This just in... (2)

hjf (703092) | about 2 years ago | (#42273233)

Why is it illegal to "export" iphones anyway?

Re:This just in... (1)

Revotron (1115029) | about 2 years ago | (#42273365)

Certain cryptography functions and related software packages are export-restricted by some governments for National Security(tm). As a result, products that contain export-restricted software is also export-restricted. Go read the PuTTY webpage, you'll see what I mean.

Re:This just in... (0)

FatAlb3rt (533682) | about 2 years ago | (#42273613)

You don't know their departmental protocols, so why are you picking apart their actions? When you see the tazer pulled out, that means that the officer is prepared to use it. Set the iPhones down, start talking rationally, and things won't escalate. Let's not assume there was no adequate warning given.

Re:This just in... (1)

CajunArson (465943) | about 2 years ago | (#42273275)

Uh.. I don't think it's because the police were out of shape. They sure could have tackled and pinned her to the ground, which likely would have caused a hell of a lot more long-term injury to her than simply getting tazed would.

Re:This just in... (5, Funny)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#42273349)

Uh.. I don't think it's because the police were out of shape. They sure could have tackled and pinned her to the ground, which likely would have caused a hell of a lot more long-term injury to her than simply getting tazed would.

They did; for fuck's sake, man, it says so right in the damn summary!

I mean, shit! I see why nobody RTFA's anymore, it seems some folks can't even make it through the

Re:This just in... (1)

FatAlb3rt (533682) | about 2 years ago | (#42273663)

The tackling is where the injury typically happens. The tazer put her on the ground and they restrained her. Get excited much?

Re:This just in... (5, Interesting)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 2 years ago | (#42273425)

Uh.. I don't think it's because the police were out of shape. They sure could have tackled and pinned her to the ground, which likely would have caused a hell of a lot more long-term injury to her than simply getting tazed would.

Perhaps you should try observing the police in more civilised places. The solution to an unruly 44 year old 80lb woman does not genreally require police brutality like you suggest (which was actually done as well).

If two fit policemen can't cope with a situation like that without a taser or excessive force, then they should be stripped of their badge.

Re:This just in... (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 2 years ago | (#42273395)

Police are now so badly trained and so out of shape they can't even handle a 44 year-old, 80 pound Chinese woman, they have to resort to high tech weaponry.

You seem to be operating under the assumption that using 'pain compliance' tools on people weaker than they are, with minimal chances of any significant personal consequences, is something that cops are trying to avoid...

Re:This just in... (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#42273601)

That or the war between Apple fanboys and all other reasonable human beings is really escalating, lol.

Re:This just in... (2)

dsmann (2751439) | about 2 years ago | (#42273611)

I am sure they were under the impression that like all people who look vaguely Asian she was secretly a Kung Fu master turned rogue.

Probably Would Have Been Better off in China (5, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | about 2 years ago | (#42273147)

These sorts of events are similar to what I would have expected in countries like China, not the United States. LEOs do not need to taser most people, especially a female who appears much less powerful than the officers holding her down in the video. The tool is used as a second-to-last resort, not as as way to make an arrest easier on the officers.

Sheesh.

Re:Probably Would Have Been Better off in China (4, Funny)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#42273629)

Don't taze me, iBro!

Success! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273149)

It's about time we punished people for making bad decisions.

Won't someone think of the poor corporations! (3, Funny)

CodeheadUK (2717911) | about 2 years ago | (#42273151)

How are they supposed to make obscene profits if people 'illegally export' things?

Re:Won't someone think of the poor corporations! (1)

Joce640k (829181) | about 2 years ago | (#42273323)

Um, don't they make exactly the same profit...?

Re:Won't someone think of the poor corporations! (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 years ago | (#42273589)

It is simply unfair to expect a corporation to compete against a price determined by the market.

Excessive use of force? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273165)

There's an app for that.

2 arrested in plot to castrate and murder Justin B (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273169)

Maybe we should get a kickstarter going? http://www.nme.com/news/justin-bieber/67705 [nme.com]

$16,000 dollars in cash ... (4, Funny)

OneSmartFellow (716217) | about 2 years ago | (#42273187)

... you mean she had enough to buy a few iPhones ?

Oh my god, arrest her, she has money, she must be doing something illegal !

$16,000 dollars in cash ...must be DRUG MONEY! (5, Funny)

Ellis D. Tripp (755736) | about 2 years ago | (#42273447)

Cash transactions at banks over $10,000 are subject to special reporting requirements, thanks largely to the War on Drugs. It wouldn't surprise me if trying to make any kind of cash transaction for $16K draws unwanted attention in the current police state environment.

Obviously, she was taking the money she earned selling drugs, and laundering it by buying iPhones for cash, then reselling them. Makes perfect sense to a cop, who has been trained to assume that EVERYBODY is a criminal....

Re:$16,000 dollars in cash ...must be DRUG MONEY! (4, Insightful)

jkrise (535370) | about 2 years ago | (#42273609)

buying iPhones for cash, then reselling them.

Hmmm.. makes perfect sense. Addiction to iThings very similar to addiction to drugs. Both are equally craved; largely empty and useless... they give you a 'kick' for a while, and then you feel wistful and want something slightly better for which you are ready to part with loads of cash for no reason in particular.She must be sent to a de-addiction center to help recover from the fruity company craze.

You mean... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273211)

New Hampshire Apple Cops, or it's all the same now?

Re:You mean... (1)

Z00L00K (682162) | about 2 years ago | (#42273421)

They were probably just extra pi$$ed because they were called from a nice lunch at Dunkin Donuts or so...

The taser was excessive (1, Insightful)

bondsbw (888959) | about 2 years ago | (#42273213)

But the lady clearly knew what was going on:

Jay said her mother bought two iPhones last Friday, and was told that was the limit. When she took video of others she claimed were buying more, the store manager asked her to leave.

And she was asked to leave and refused:

"The management of the store asked us to have her removed. The officer approached her, told her she wasn't welcome in the store, and she refused to leave," Nashua Police Capt. Bruce Hansen said.

Re:The taser was excessive (2, Insightful)

bondsbw (888959) | about 2 years ago | (#42273339)

Wait, I take that back. I didn't notice there were more pages to the story.

The taser wasn't excessive. She clearly resisted arrest for several minutes, and she had been told not to come back to the store on a previous occasion. Department policy allowed for the taser in that situation.

But of course:

"She was scared, she didn't understand," said John Hugo, who said he was Li's fiance'. "I was outraged. You go into a store, and you end up getting brutalized by the police.

Re:The taser was excessive (5, Insightful)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 2 years ago | (#42273501)

She clearly resisted arrest for several minutes,

So a small, middle aged woman managed to resist arrest for several minutes? Wow. Those cops should be ashamed of themselves. Really, how did cops survive 10 years ago? Did they all get sound ass kickings from tiny middle aged women?

Seriously, if you can't arrest someone like that without a taser, then you're so badly trained that you should not be allowed out on the street.

Re:The taser was excessive (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273585)

Disagree.

The article describes how, in effect, if there were less people around they would have pepper sprayed her. Police are increasingly using violence as "compliance tools". It is the equivalent of beating someone with a club, but because it is less visual, people don't catch on to how brutal it is.

I don't care if she was surly or not. It's trespassing at best, some federal offense that local townie cops have no business enforcing at worst. When did we go from being a country that asked "who the F are you to tell me to do X" of cops, to kowtowing to their every demand.

Re:The taser was excessive (1)

Inda (580031) | about 2 years ago | (#42273615)

Make a list of all the things that could have been done. Sort them in order of preference, taking into account ease, compassion, effectiveness

e.g.

Handcuff her
Sit on her
Lock her up in a tiny room
Taser her
Shoot her in the face

On my overly short list of methods, tasering is listed near the bottom. I consider my list, while incomplete, to be a better list than the cops made.

Tasering is excessive.

Then again, I'm not from the good old USA.

Re:The taser was excessive (1)

Vintermann (400722) | about 2 years ago | (#42273621)

See squiggleslash's comment below. Simply because you have a badge and someone don't do as you say doesn't mean you're entitled to use electrotorture weapons on someone. No, not even if your department policy says so.

It's alarming that, like prison rape, use of these weapons have become something Americans just snigger at.

Re:The taser was excessive (3, Interesting)

SleazyRidr (1563649) | about 2 years ago | (#42273661)

Giving tasers to the police was supposed to be a way for them to protect themselves from violent people without using guns. If this old lady was really threatening them then they need to be kicked off the force for being too unfit to serve as a police officer.

Re:The taser was excessive (5, Informative)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#42273555)

But the lady clearly knew what was going on:

Jay said her mother bought two iPhones last Friday, and was told that was the limit. When she took video of others she claimed were buying more, the store manager asked her to leave.

And she was asked to leave and refused:

"The management of the store asked us to have her removed. The officer approached her, told her she wasn't welcome in the store, and she refused to leave," Nashua Police Capt. Bruce Hansen said.

Important part you left out:

The confrontation involving the Taser happened when Li went to the store on Monday to pick up two iPhones she ordered online.

So, here's how it appears the situation played out (Cliff's Notes for those too dumb or lazy to RTFA):
Incident 1 - Chinese lady goes to the store, tries to buy more than 2 iPhones, is told 2 is the limit. She pre-orders 2 iPhones, and begins to video the other customers, as she is convinced that the store has sold/is selling more than 2 iPhones to other people. Store manager asks her to leave, presumably for filming other customers. No charges files.

Incident 2 - Chinese lady goes back to the store to pick up the 2 iPhones she paid for. Store management tells her she must leave (no mention as to whether or not she had picked up the items she paid for, or if there was a new incident that prompted the request for removal). Confrontation ensues, cops attempt to confiscate the woman's cell phone and purse, then pin down and taze the 80 lb Chinese lady; some kid films it and posts on Youtube. Cops claim she was "resisting," because they always do.

Buy what you want (1)

halfkoreanamerican (2566687) | about 2 years ago | (#42273239)

You can't use your money for that, sorry. I don't care what she does with those phones, she should buy as many as she has money for and that should be the end of it. If she gets caught selling them then she has broken a law, until then nothing.

Re:Buy what you want (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273335)

Well, no. Any retailer, wholesaler, etc can limit the number of items you can buy from them. It is their prerogative. Her refusal to leave was her real problem. Tazing her wasn't necessary to control her, but they probably did it so she would feel right at home.

Re:Buy what you want (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273659)

Who said she was breaking the law by buying phones? They didn't taze her for buying too many iPhones, they tazed her for committing the crime of trespassing. If I snuck into your house at night and you told me to leave and refused to, don't you think police involvement is appropriate?

And a store has every right to refuse the sale of 16 items to someone when they'd rather make 15 other customers besides you.

Cue the apologists (5, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 2 years ago | (#42273245)

There are times to use painful, potentially fatal, means of coercion. This isn't one of them.

Unfortunately, we're going to get a lot of people posting here claiming that simply because the police demanded she do something, and she didn't, that they were justified. The simple truth is, no, they weren't. You don't get to do anything you like to someone simply because you have a badge and they didn't do what you told them to.

We do not live in a police state.

Re:Cue the apologists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273311)

There are times to use painful, potentially fatal, means of coercion. This isn't one of them.

Unfortunately, we're going to get a lot of people posting here claiming that simply because the police demanded she do something, and she didn't, that they were justified. The simple truth is, no, they weren't. You don't get to do anything you like to someone simply because you have a badge and they didn't do what you told them to.

We do not live in a police state.

...Yet.

Re:Cue the apologists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273327)

You didn't read the article.

Re:Cue the apologists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273639)

You didn't read the article.

Yeah I did. She came back and tried to buy them again. Clearly this required tazing by a couple of pantyweight officers who couldn't drag her away without dropping their donut?

Re:Cue the apologists (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273393)

Agreed completely. There have been deaths from Tazers, and the officers are actually TRAINED not to use them unless LEATHAL FORCE might also be necessary. It's an alternative to a bullet in the head, and should never be considered any less dangerous by officers.

The iphone angle is a distraction from what is clearly an abuse of power situation, and I wish she would do something about it. This is a prime example of excessive force, and she could get these guys suspended, but the immigrant community is usually too timid around authorities to raise this to the level of attention it needs (Though making popular news sites is a good beginning)

Re:Cue the apologists (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 2 years ago | (#42273559)

Unfortunately, we're going to get a lot of people posting here claiming that simply because the police demanded she do something, and she didn't, that they were justified. The simple truth is, no, they weren't.

But - and I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here - who gets to decide what's justified and what isn't? The police obviously have to have guidelines, which may or may not have been followed in this case, but there will always be people who disagree with those anyway.

You don't get to do anything you like to someone simply because you have a badge and they didn't do what you told them to.

But you do get to taser someone if they're resisting arrest:

The video shows two Nashua police officers holding down and struggling with Xiaojie.

It takes two (or sometimes three) to struggle. Note that the video also doesn't show what occured immediately before.

Re:Cue the apologists (5, Funny)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 2 years ago | (#42273689)

>We do not live in a police state.

Let me guess...
We live in a police planet?

iPhones being rationed? (1)

jkrise (535370) | about 2 years ago | (#42273247)

Jay said her mother bought two iPhones last Friday, and was told that was the limit.

Has Samsung caused acute shortages of component supplies leading to this rationing of iThings?

Title Is stupid (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273255)

She wasn't Tazed for buying too many iphones, she was tazed for failure to comply with authorities... Whoever made the title is a simpleton. What an Idiot..

Re:Title Is stupid (4, Insightful)

Half-pint HAL (718102) | about 2 years ago | (#42273511)

The "authorities"? I thought the police department's motto was "to protect and to serve". They are not authorities. They are certainly not judge, jury and executioner. Visiting multi-volt torture on someone already under their control who hasn't even committed any criminal act is just not cricket....

Re:Title Is stupid (2)

SleazyRidr (1563649) | about 2 years ago | (#42273705)

Because now we live in a totalitarian regime, where the "authorities" must be obeyed?

Set Phasers to stun (1)

rainer_d (115765) | about 2 years ago | (#42273269)

;-)
I had to say it.

Re:Set Phasers to stun (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#42273637)

Except they would have universal translators then

Increasingly typical police behavior (5, Insightful)

Hagaric (2591241) | about 2 years ago | (#42273293)

It seems the concept that violence is a last resort has disappeared from policing.. Increasingly, even quiet, cooperative people are pinned down, handcuffed and manhandled as a matter of course. Violence has become one of the "perks" of policework, and the evil cycle of abuse and intimidation means fewer and fewer people object. Can anyone see any reason whatsoever for the violent treatment of this woman, who at worst is guilty of conspiracy to illegally export some telephones?

Re:Increasingly typical police behavior (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273373)

You are a simpleton.

Re:Increasingly typical police behavior (3)

jedidiah (1196) | about 2 years ago | (#42273497)

No. He's merely a civilized person and you are a fascist.

Re:Increasingly typical police behavior (1)

penix1 (722987) | about 2 years ago | (#42273513)

It isn't the iPhone that got her into trouble (bad summary as usual) but the fact that she refused to leave private property when asked several times I'm sure with each time becoming more belligerent on her part. You know, "you can't tell me where to go..." type stuff. That still only makes her guilty of trespass which I'm sure is not an excuse for tasering her unless she also resisted the attempt to arrest her for the said trespass.

Re:Increasingly typical police behavior (2)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 2 years ago | (#42273687)

Increasingly, even quiet, cooperative people are pinned down

Who says she was cooperative?

Police, however, say the incident isn't that clear cut.

Oh, but of course they would, wouldn't they? Obviously this woman, on the other hand, wouldn't have any reason to bend the truth in her favour.

There are two sides to every story, and, next to word-of-mouth, reading about an incident on the internet is probably the worst way of coming to a safe conclusion on what happened.

who at worst is guilty of conspiracy to illegally export some telephones?

What about trespass (she refused to leave private property on request), refusing to follow the instruction of a police officer with regard to said request, and subsequently resisting arrest?

Taser mania (5, Interesting)

Lucas123 (935744) | about 2 years ago | (#42273331)

Something needs to change in police training. Too often cops resort to BBQing people with 50,000 volts at the least sign of resistance, and, in some instances, no resistance at all. Yet, too often when you see a mall shooting or hostage situation, you don't see the police putting their lives on the line to save people. They often seem far too concerned with their own safety than the public's, and all these taser incidents seem like a part of that mentality. That's just my observation. I'm sure there are also plenty of good cops out there too, but the bad ones seem to make the headlines far too often.

It doesn't add up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273333)

Theres something thats not being said here. Theres no law against buying large numbers of iPhones...and she wouldn't be asked to leave for trying to buy them.. only if she didn't want to accept no for an answer... or maybe she said the word 'export'... Something doesn't add up.

Re:It doesn't add up (1)

Revotron (1115029) | about 2 years ago | (#42273673)

Any facts reported in the original account of the event have been conveniently stripped from the article and summary to make this submission Slashdot-appropriate. That is to say, to avoid potential injury to the precious egos of Slashdot-reading fanboys, articles should contain none of the following:

1. Sound justification for any Apple-sanctioned activities or strategies
2. Market research or information which would suggest any kind of commercial success of Apple products in the marketplace despite repeated claims that "Apple doesn't know what consumers want"
3. Evidence of wrongdoing of anyone other than Apple or its affiliates

Clearly, the submitter was just doing their part to keep Slashdot safe-to-read for Apple haters and fandroids. We applaud your efforts, good sir!

prevent taser effectiveness (1)

anjrober (150253) | about 2 years ago | (#42273385)

Is there a way to prevent the effectiveness of a taser? i really don't know.

Re:prevent taser effectiveness (1)

will_die (586523) | about 2 years ago | (#42273533)

a leather jacket or any thick clothing would be enough. A taser has to attach the prongs to you so anything that prevents contact and does not conduct electricity would work.

Inflammatory Title (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273409)

She wasn't tased for trying to buy too many iPhones. She was tased for resisting arrest after refusing to leave private property. I'm pretty sure "get out!" with a finger pointed to the door is near universal language. When it's suggested by men in uniforms carrying badges and guns, you'd have to be a full-on nitwit to miss the picture.

You can claim it was the result of "failure to communicate", but you can't expect officers in Nashua, NH to speak Mandarin. If you can't figure out that resisting arrest isn't a good idea, that's on you. Tasing her likely prevented further serious injury of the woman and/or the officers.

two observations. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273451)

1. Officer was on a paid police detail, so I'd assume that there is enough liability on Apple that a lawsuit and associated settlement is forthcoming.
2. Without excusing the tasering whatsoever, the woman clearly knows enough English to get from Newton, MA to Nashua, NH. Since she was alone at the time, I'm guessing that she has a driving license. I wasn't aware that MA allowed you to take the exam in Chinese.

Taser (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273465)

Just wait until some police department gets sued for tasing someone with a heart condition. Tasers should be considered semi-lethal force and only be used in situations that a gun would be used in. In other words, cops are being lazy when they tase people.

Don't jump to violence, Apple (2, Interesting)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 2 years ago | (#42273479)

Here's a crazy idea: instead of starting to shout "private property" and having the hired guns tackle a woman and break out their weapons - just ignore her. Don't take her money, don't ring up her sale. She'll either give up and go away or try to steal the phones and then it's cut-and-dry. Plus no news stories with bad publicity during the Christmas shopping season.This would also save two Nashua cops from the public humiliation of not being able to handcuff a middle-aged asian woman (I saw the video - there's no fear that she's a kung-fu master).

"Live Free or Die!" -State motto of New Hampshire. (1)

technomom (444378) | about 2 years ago | (#42273491)

"Live Free or Die!" -State motto of New Hampshire. ....unless you're buying too many iPhones.

Fixed that for you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273495)

"Woman seeking to purchase many iPhones tasered when she refused to leave the store upon manager's and police requests to do so."

"may have been" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273519)

Right. That's just cause.

Live Free or Die! (3)

Ellis D. Tripp (755736) | about 2 years ago | (#42273523)

Didn't some state have that as their motto?

Re:Live Free or Die! (1)

Westwood0720 (2688917) | about 2 years ago | (#42273757)

Yep. I live in NH and I have that slogan painted on the tailgate of my truck. *insert banjo sound here*

Watch the tazing videos on YouTube (1)

Ancient_Hacker (751168) | about 2 years ago | (#42273539)

Get a bit better perspective on this by watching the tazing videos on YouTube.

Basically, it seems, if you repeatedly refuse to follow a simple police command, like "get out of the vehicle" or "lay down on the ground", after 10 or 20 repetitions, the cops have the option of tazing you. Apparently this is SOP. The old-school way was to chicken choke or baton-choke you. You decide which is better.

What would the police have done before tasers? (1)

netbuzz (955038) | about 2 years ago | (#42273543)

That's what they should have done here.

sold her cow? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273577)

such is the demand for magic beans ;-p

Reminder (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273607)

If you do get arrested, and the cop says "Anything you say can be held against you." DON'T say "Tits!"

Crazy police behavior (1)

prefec2 (875483) | about 2 years ago | (#42273633)

In any situation if the opponent is unarmed (or only armed with too many smart phones and a credit card), the police should apply talking first. If the person freaks out, there are plenty of options to constrain her without using a taser. I've seen those options on demonstrations in Germany, it works without any pepper spray or taser or gun or sticks of some sort. However, in a totally controlled situation like that, it would most likely have sufficed to just talk. If communication had not worked out, a translater could have been organized.

Looks like, in the USA they first shot and then ask. Just like the guy with a knife on times square followed by a dozen of policemen. The only solution to that situation was to shot him a couple of times. If shooting would have been the last option, a shoot in the knee or foot would have sufficed. Or they could have used a taser. But what shall I expect when they use a taser on a customer. Really! Get relaxed.

Read more into the story (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273647)

This wasn't the first time the woman was kicked out of the store. She's not welcome there. After being asked multiple times on multiple days to respect her trespass warnings and her refusing to leave, she was tasered.

Frankly, if I were the owner, I have pushed her out of the store and kicked her ass on the way out the second time. My store, my decision who stays. Of course, I'd be facing battery charges for that. Better to let the police tase her.

Line Jumpers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273681)

I was in the huge line at this store on iPhone 5 launch day. Multiple groups of people were line cutting in an attempt to buy as many phones as possible for the gray market. I assume these people were payed a percentage of each phone they bought.

We had the cops deal with it and except for lying right to our and the cops faces, the cutters were escorted to the back without violence or incident.
Lots of MA people come to NH for the 0% sales tax.

So that's what all the comotion was about. (1)

Westwood0720 (2688917) | about 2 years ago | (#42273697)

I was there when that happened. Man, the two of them were PISSED when they were leaving. Several people were causing drama saying there might be someone with a firearm. It was dumb. It really wasn't anything that spectacular. 5m later everything was back to normal. Never crossed my mind this would make this big of a headline. Huh, small world.

cause and effect (0)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#42273699)

1. Come to America
2. Don't learn English
3. Do something stupid
4. Can't understand police so...
5. Tased
Seems pretty cause and effect to me. If I went to go live in France, I'd probably want to learn French so that when a pack of French police are barking something at me, I know what they're telling me to do so I don't get tased. Lesson learned? Probably not, seeing as how all evidence points to her being here in the US solely to illegally export things for a profit.

It's not illegal to buy the phones, just to export (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42273721)

I don't understand why it would be illegal for her to buy the phones, I guess if they can prove she did this with the intention of exporting them, but I'm not sure that's possible. Also if what others have said that she paid for the phones, and it was only two phones from what I've read, and was at the store just to pick them up, it would seem that she had a right to be there, but I'm sure that all the details about this story are not being presented. The use of force by the police seems a little over the top, how hard can it be for a couple of policemen to restrain and arrest a fairly petite woman?

Tasering for passive resistance? Really? (5, Interesting)

dirk (87083) | about 2 years ago | (#42273739)

The policy continues, "The weapon is a level of force normally required to overcome passive, defensive, or offensive resistance that is intended as an act of overt aggression toward the officer where an individual refuses to comply with verbal instructions."

How exactly can "passive resistance" be an act of overt aggression? So basically, do whatever the cops say, or they will tase you. If you do not follow their orders, you are being "overtly aggressive" , the same as if you were throwing punches at them. Tasers being being overused in this country.

selective listening (1)

TTL0 (546351) | about 2 years ago | (#42273743)

So it seems from the article when she was told by the store manager on *Friday* to leave she understood that. Yet when she is asked by the manager on *Monday* to leave the store all of a sudden she doesn't understand english ? Pah-leese.

I hate this culture of victim-hood where instead of owing up to doing something wrong the wrong-doer becomes the focus of grievence theater and every *else* is to blame.

And yeah, unless there is a Lexus parked outside or a mortgage banker waiting for a down payment (assuming it was legal to search her purse and ask) I would be very curious to know what she was doing with 16k in her purse on a plain old monday morning when she had bought phones *online*

Statements like this piss me off.... (2)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#42273749)

âoeIt was very clear to the officers that she knew exactly what was going onâ

I absolutely abhor it when somebody, *ANYBODY* can somehow claim to know what another person is thinking when they have absolutely no real evidence to back up their claim beyond personal supposition.

Yeah, it's plausible that the language barrier was just a ploy, but I didn't see any obvious indication that such an issue was actually not really plausible. Just because she understood one sentence somehow means she's fluent enough in english to understand anything said to her once, without explanation?

The followup line also got me a bit hot under the collar:

âoeThe officer didnâ(TM)t think for a second that she was having difficulty understanding what she was being asked to do.â

No... what happened is that the officer didn't think for a second.

Tasers should not *EVER* be used by the police as a means of forcing compliance unless the police officer has some real cause to assume that the situation is about to escalate to physical violence. What indication did the officer have that she was going to assault anyone? Hmmm?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>