This just in - people with mental illness unable to distinguish proper etiquette in public, get tased.
Why is this news? Did Captain Obvious waste all the $ for this study?
Are you seriously trying to push the allegation police purposefully ~target~ the mentally ill?

Poor journalism. Implies intention, which seems fabricated at best. There is nothing in the data to show anything besides the fact that crazy people require more tazing than non-crazy people. How is this evidence of any type of bias?

I think you mean the "mentally diverse"

"Having a Taser pointed is a particularly traumatizing experience for someone with a mental illness,"

I find it interesting that no one seems to care that having a 200 lb man cranked out on meth charging a police officer can also be a traumatizing experience. What percentage of these "mentally ill" individuals who were tazed were also under the influence of substances?

Spartacus,

Good point.

Since the police officers are paid employees of the city and have both chosen their work and are both fully informed about the dangers and compensated with a reasonable salary, almost infinite overtime, an excellent pension and an ironclad union contract, our pity for their circumstance is nil. If officers are developing a mental illness caused by their inability to perform the tasks set before them, perhaps post traumatic stress disorder, they can join us as advocates for more and better services. Trauma is treatable - but you have to accept help.

As for what percentage of those who were shot with a Taser ("tazed" is not a word) were drunk or loaded or insane, it's hard to tell from the limited data released by the Bureau. Who made these medical assessments? Cops? Is this self-disclosed information? EMTs? Is it defined by jail nurses or ERs admit records? The data is unclear and this would be worthwhile information to know.

pdx97217, "tazed" certainly comes up with a lot of google hits with nearly identical usage. You'd have to be a hell of a prescriptivist (or just loaded down with agenda) to honestly say it's not a word.

Tased is as much of a word as 'Tweeted'
And pdx97217, your compassion for those protecting your a$$ is inversely comparable to their compassion for someone trying to kill them while doing so.
Walk the talk, you wouldn't survive an hour outside of your sensitive bubble in the real crime jungle of the streets.

Mon ami, you leave my argument unaddressed, and reveal too much of yourself.

According to the company who makes tazers, you are not supposed to use them on people with medical or mental illness, the elderly or children, as they may cause death. Tazer's should therefore, not be used on folks with mental illness unless they are dangerous to someone and warrant possible death. If the police had proper training, they would know that.

ok, before anyone else mentions it, I spelled taser wrong. Unfortunately, taser is not in the spell-check.

I have regular contact with the police officers who work with the mentally ill. Overall, they go above and beyond in trying to avoid harming anyone. They are more likely to be hurt themselves. I know of one officer who was bite in the testicles by a mentally ill person. He was told by the DA not to bother pressing charges because the person was mentally ill. Sorry, but it's priviledged arrogance to assume that just because you get paid peanuts and have EAP that you're asking for it.

Until you've been in a situation of "it's them or me" you have no right to judge. Period.

Spartacus,

Again, good points.

I agree. In the dozens of incidents I have witnessed of officers both interacting and arresting persons with mental illness (albeit few in the past five years - so most without CIT), my observation is Portland officers are typically professional, observant, polite, restrained, and orderly.

If officers, police administrators, their representing unions, various bureaucrats and politicians, all resent being a portion of the default mental health system, why don't they come to Salem and advocate on behalf of a better, more robust, more responsive treatment system? They don't, and it undermines their credibility.

The argument, "you're not one of us therefore you can't understand / be critical of us," is juvenile and unworthy of you. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Work on this and come back next time.