Utah High Patrol is quickly joining the ranks of police at UCLA and the University of Florida for being forced into the realm of trial by YouTube.
While not as popular as the “Don’t Tase me bro” video depicting a Florida student being Tased at a John Kerry speech, the recent Utah Tasering is gaining sympathy because of the general public simple relatability to the man being shot with a Taser gun.
Many of us will not persist in shouting at a U.S. Senator after being told by the police to leave, but most of us have been pulled over for a traffic violation. We know what it feels like be angry over a ticket, plead our case to no avail and even think that the whole situation was ridiculous.
We know what its like to be know without a doubt (or at least convince ourselves) that we really weren’t doing anything wrong. This is what is so striking about the video showing Utah Highway Patrol trooper Jon Gardner Tasering Jared Massey. This time the bad guy was someone just like most of us.
When the UHP Tasing video became an instant YouTube classic, the majority of the viewers sympathized with Massey. Several were so angered by the incident they contacted UHP threatening to kill Gardner. More moderate complaints called for him to be fired. Worried about the trooper’s safety, UHP gave him at least a week’s leave to allow some of the anger over the situation to blow over.
The common thread in outrage is that, for the most part, has been from the average citizens’ perspective of rights and freedom from the abuse of authority and force. This is a valuable and necessary in a healthy debate, but if we want to understand why the trooper did what he did, we must look at the situation from his point of view.
Reducing the trooper to a trigger-happy egomaniac on a power trip does not help understand what happend. For most officers, the routine pullover is the most dangerous part of the job. Officers never know what they are dealing with when they walk up to a car’s window. Is this driver mentally stable? Does he have a gun? All of this is compounded by the fact the trooper often has to stand in or near the lane of traffic. The officer is not ready to debate in this situation – especially with a guy who has a chip on his shoulder. That’s a discussion better had with the judge.
The decisive moment in the pullover comes when Massey refuses to sign his speeding ticket and Gardner orders him out of the car and places him under arrest. Ignoring the trooper and refusing to cooperate, Massey walks away from the officer down the road toward the speed limit sign. Instead of getting into a physical altercation that could have spilled into traffic, Gardner pulled out his Taser gun, telling Massey to place his hands above his head or he would Tase him. Instead of cooperating, Massey places right hand behind his back and begins fidgeting and then says “What the heck’s wrong with you.”
At that moment, Gardner didn’t know if Gardner was going for a weapon or if he really was just fidgeting, which the video shows he was doing. He shot him with the Taser.
“The Taser was used because because Mr. Massey did some things that indicated to trooper that there may be some danger out there,” Department of Public Safety Commissioner Scott Duncan said after releasing a report calling Gardner’s actions “lawful and reasonable.”
Gardner had to make split-second decision. It may not have been the best decision, but given Massey’s combative temperament during the situation and the officer not knowing what Massey was doing behind his back, the trooper made a decision based on his own safety.
The public can argue about the officer’s professionalism after the arrest (He told another officer that Massey “took a ride with the Taser,”) whether Massey should have been pulled over and even whether the state should repeal the statute giving officers the option of arresting someone for not signing a ticket. These are all legitimate questions and should be addressed. In the case of whether the Gardner was right to use the Taser on Massey, however, they aren’t relevant. The officer perceived danger and took an action that was “lawful and reasonable.”
As the law stands, Gardner’s actions were appropriate. He may have brazen in his words, but he was still within his authority. Massey may have been right about not speeding, but he should have presented that case to the judge, not the officer.
This editorial represents the opinion of The Daily Universe editorial board. Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of BYU, its administration or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Copyright Brigham Young University 6 Dec 2007
