Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Virginia Cop's Taser Set This Man on Fire—How Much Does the County Owe Him?

The man, who led police on high-speed chase while driving drunk on a suspended license, is suing for $95 million.

family photofamily photoLet's get one thing clear at the outset: Miles November acted like an idiot.

November could have killed someone the night of February 7, 2015, when—driving on a suspended license, with a blood-alcohol level more than twice the legal limit—he led police officers on a high-speed chase in Chesterfield that ended when he rolled his car several times and crashed. A few months ago he pleaded guilty to drunken driving, running away from the cops, and driving on a suspended license.

For such behavior, he deserved a long stretch in a hard cell—especially given his long record of prior offenses for DUI and assaulting officers. Rosa Parks he ain't. Few people would dispute that. But only a demented sadist would contend that, for his crime, November should have been burned alive.

Yet that's what happened. November's car was leaking fluids when Chesterfield police officers caught up to him. They dragged him away from the vehicle because, as one of them allegedly said later, there was gasoline "all over the road and the vehicle was smoking." November's lawyers claim other officers present said they, too, could smell gasoline. County attorneys deny that any of the officers noticed signs of leaking fuel.

According to a $95 million lawsuit November's lawyers have filed, November was lying on the ground when fire trucks rolled up and startled him, and he tried to stand. The police say November resisted arrest and struggled with them, and he recently was convicted on that charge. Either way, several officers evidently swarmed him. At about that moment, another officer—Ryan Swope—ran up. The lawsuit alleges that Swope gave November no command or warning before he yelled, "Taser! Taser! Taser!" and fired his stun gun.

Soaked in gasoline, November went up in flames. He apparently burned for half a minute before firefighters put out the fire. By then he had third-degree burns over nearly 90 percent of his body. He spent the next six months in the hospital, and in agony.

At this point, some people might be inclined to say that November brought his suffering on himself. If he hadn't been drinking and driving—if he hadn't run from the cops—he would be a happier man today. Those things are true, but they are not the whole truth.

For one thing, those things also would be true if Swope had drawn his sidearm and shot November in the head, killing him. November acted stupidly, but stupidity doesn't justify anything and everything in response. Yet a review found Swope acted in accordance with department policy.

For another, there's apparently more to the story. And if the complaint filed by November's lawsuit is to be believed, a lot more. Example: The complaint says Swope had only recently returned to duty and was on disciplinary probation for several incidents of misconduct. Chesterfield Police Chief Thierry Dupuis later fired Swope for his connections to an outlaw biker gang. And, the complaint adds, Swope was one of the most prolific taser users in the department.

The complaint also makes some broader claims—e.g., that Chesterfield officers often have used tasers simply to make people comply with orders more quickly, and even on people who were handcuffed at the time. In one instance, the complaint says, the very officer in charge of taser training "himself tased an unarmed suspect who sat on a toilet in a small bathroom, with no means of escape. The man initially complied with (the officer's) command to stand up and show his hands. However, (the officer) tased the suspect because the suspect did not immediately exit the bathroom, but requested to first complete going to the bathroom."

Whatever the extent to which such allegations are true in Chesterfield, they are certainly true nationwide. Police officers have used tasers on teenagers, the elderly, the mentally ill, and pregnant young women. Roughly one person a week in America dies after being tasered; the dead include a Richmond man tasered outside a South Boston hospital even after he was secured in a squad car. Indeed, officers often taser individuals who have been handcuffed, even (in one instance) a woman who was wheelchair-bound. Individuals have been tasered for jaywalking, for panhandling, and for even less. Those who get tased usually are unarmed.

In many such instances, officers would never dream of drawing their sidearms and shooting the individuals they taser. That would be a grossly excessive use of force. And therein lies the irony of the proliferation of tasers: They are supposed to be a step toward more humane policing. Yet because they are (usually) non-lethal, tasers might actually make excessive force more likely rather than less.

Granted: When tasers are used properly they can make a huge improvement over other means of compelling compliance, such as billy clubs. Temporary incapacitation is better than the permanent kind. The question is whether tasers are being used properly or wantonly. We'll get some more insight into that question when Miles November's case goes to trial.

This column originally appeared in the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • SQRLSY One||

    Offender wants to finish pooping before complying with Our Masters?

    TAZE HIM, bro! Taze the shit out of 'im, THAT will help him finish pooping!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Obviously they owe him a bill for a new taser.

  • sarcasmic||

    In many such instances, officers would never dream of drawing their sidearms and shooting the individuals they taser.

    That made me laugh.

  • Rich||

    third-degree burns over nearly 90 percent of his body

    "Don't tase me, Bro!"

    Seriously, Good Lord. 8-(

  • Mickey Rat||

    Stupidity is a capital offense in the world, there seems to have been a lot of it in this case on both sides.

    You can argue thst the officer was negligent, or tbat the circumstances were beyond reasonsble kbiwledge ro identify the outcome, but unless yoy are arguong that the officer intended to set him on fire, what hsppened was not punishment for his crime.

  • Mr. Dyslexic||

    Dude, did someone switch the keys around on your keyboard? Or are you posting from a mobile device? Or are you just Dyslexic like me? lol/sarc

  • Presskh||

    Agree. It was unfortunate, but the officer did not intend to set him on fire. When you repeatedly act stupid, endanger others, and fail to exactly follow officer's orders, your odds of something really bad happening to you go up exponentially. T

  • Jury Nullification||

    FFS the cop set his tazer to the "Burn that M'fer" setting instead of "Stun." Could happen to anyone. I think Capt. Kirk even did it once.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    The lawsuit alleges that Swope gave November no command or warning before he yelled, "Taser! Taser! Taser!" and fired his stun gun.

    I would say if this is accurate, they certainly owe him something. The whole scene is royally screwed up. I'd have to wonder... pretend that in the process, several officers were also covered in gasoline and the fire spread to them. Would the city have to pay them anything for the taser-induced fire?

  • sarcasmic||

    pretend that in the process, several officers were also covered in gasoline and the fire spread to them. Would the city have to pay them anything for the taser-induced fire?

    You kidding? They would have held November responsible!

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Good point.

  • croaker||

    Attempted murder of a police officer.

  • SomeGuy||

    Yep just like in new york. I forgot about that one. The guy in the street made me miss! He was moving!

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    While I certainly don't approve of what happened to November, I'm wondering what an appropriate response by the cops would be. They had a fellow who was drunk and had just concluded a high speed pursuit by wrecking his car. Individual tries to get up after being dragged out of his car, but before he was restrained in cuffs or anything. How should the police have stopped him? I think a Kelly Thomas-esque dogpile-beatdown would be looked at harshly around here, as would an Eric Garner chokehold.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    There are many other options depending on the circumstances. Unfortunately, the tackle-with-overwhelming-force is something that's now trained into all cops. So if the perp wiggles a toe, it's tasers, clubs and fists until you quit moving. And yes, putting up a hand in a natural defensive reaction to someone hitting you with tasers, clubs and fists is considered 'still moving'.

  • sarcasmic||

    Defensive reactions are a threat to officer safety. Only cop-killers defend themselves.

  • SomeGuy||

    sadly i know people who believe this.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    There are many other options depending on the circumstances.

    Given the circumstances written about in the article, what options might they be?

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    One can wrestle someone to the ground and cuff them without jeopardizing life and limb, suffocating them to death or beating them unrecognizable.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Re: wrestling people to the ground: Cops will generally not engage in such a thing on a one-on-one basis, because there's no real need to subject themselves to the risk that they're going up against someone stronger, well trained, etc. Cops will 'wrestle people to the ground' under weight of numbers, which increases the odds of injuries or death. Generally, using a taser is a safer option because there's no risk of injuries to anyone as a result of hand-to-hand groundfighting.

    If they had broken the guy's legs or something while trying to subdue him people would be bitching just as loud.

    I'm not saying the guy deserved what happened, I just don't see a realistic alternative that wouldn't likely have resulted in injury.

  • Presskh||

    Agree. Policemen have the right to go home to their families at the end of the day, just like every one on this board. If there is a chance that they could be killed or injured trying to subdue someone who is not complying with their orders, they will overcome and put this person down with overwhelming force. Putting myself in their place, I don't blame them.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Or they could have just sat one him, although given the fitness level of the average cop that might have resulted in him being crushed to death.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    It actually has. You have to be careful when you do that, you can restrict someone's ability to breathe entirely. But yeah, "fuck your breath" is I think the trained response to that.

  • Rational Exuberance||

    Unfortunately, the tackle-with-overwhelming-force is something that's now trained into all cops.

    Well, how much money would they have to pay you before you approach a smelly, violent drunkard? I don't think they could pay me enough.

  • Jury Nullification||

    Change the currency of compensation to violence and domination and many would be over paid.

  • Rhywun||

    How should the police have stopped him?

    It is their job to restrain perps in a safe manner. The fact that the profession attracts sociopathic apes means there is no easy answer to your question.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Yes, but you cannot just assume cops can cuddle people into submission simply because you want them to.

  • ||

    Yes, but you cannot just assume cops can cuddle people into submission simply because you want them to.

    The assumption is that somewhere in their training they were taught and subsequently demonstrated they had mastered how to appropriately address the described situation without resorting to unnecessary force.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Yeah, I wonder how many hours of training was spent covering proper techniques to harmlessly subdue an individual with a record of violent crime who also happens to be soaked in gasoline. I'll bet it was, like, a million hours!

    I don't think using a taser was unnecessary force. The result was certainly unfortunate because November's clothing was soaked in gasoline. But if he'd been completely dry there's nothing to suggest that the taser use was out of line of normal use of force. He wasn't cuffed and he wasn't tased repeatedly.

  • Diane Merriam||

    Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows that electricity and gasoline are not a good mix. How does a person with only one brain cell become a cop, authorized to use force, deadly force if needed?

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Then I invite you and your brain cells, as I've invited others, to come up with a solution that wouldn't have incurred a high risk of injury to anyone.

  • Presskh||

    Get to, it looks like you and I are the only ones on the side of the officers in this situation. I bet we would have a few more converts if some of these on this board were faced with having to subdue this good for nothing POS like the officers were.

  • Heddin_South||

    They could have tried talking

  • Lord_at_War||

    Because "talking" is very effective at subduing a drunken violent criminal who has a record of assaulting police and is likely concussed after rolling his car multiple times while fleeing police in a high-speed chase.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    With respect Presskh, it seems that you're attempting to bolster your position by denigrating the person they were trying to apprehend. I am not.

  • Jury Nullification||

    "It is their job to restrain perps in a safe manner."

    The operative word being "safe." Whose safety; the cops, perp or public. Creating a human torch would not fit either of those ends in any event.

  • MikeP2||

    No one should expect police to act calmly and gentle on some drunken asshole who just led them on a high-speed chase, endangering multiple lives.

    A taser does not seem out of the question. Probably better than a nightstick to the head or knee to the back and a dislocated shoulder. Unless of course you are covered in gasoline.

    Sucks to be him, but that's about the end of it. He was an idiot. And even as a chemical engineer, its a surprise to me that a taser would ignite gasoline like that.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    And even as a chemical engineer, its a surprise to me that a taser would ignite gasoline like that.

    Really? You get gasoline in clothing and it's going to be fuming off something fierce. I'd think an open spark from a taser would light that right up.

  • MikeP2||

    Yes, really. Tasers don't usually spark. Stun guns, yes, but Tasers are supposed to embed and directly apply the jolt. Maybe if the probes were too close and gapped.

    Surprising.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Dashcam video of taser igniting gas fumes inside a car, killing driver.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHb7fUt1BKY

    I'm trying to find other video where I have actually seen the blue sparks of the taser zipping around a perps body when taken at night. I know I've seen them, I just need to find the video.

    Taser lights gas-soaked Albuquerque man on fire.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbZMTJIX98E

    I'm sorry, but if the area I'm in is covered in gas and fumes and a retard pulls out the taser, I'm un-assing the area.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Here's a BBC documentary about the dangers of using the taser in combination with CS gas.

    Turns out that there have seven cases in the UK of people catching fire when a taser is used in combination with CS gas.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzVgK6RhzhM

  • Desdecardo||

    Tasers don't have an open spark. I'm guessing you don't understand how they work.

    They have barbs that shoot out from a gun that when they make contact with your flesh it triggers the battery in the gun to power the barbs with an electric current through insulated wires into the flex to cause an involuntary convulsion. It's like when you stick your tongue to a 9v battery except all over your body. No open arcs or Sparks like a downed electrical line, as you probably are imagining.

    Even if he has gas evaporating off of him the flash point is really high. Higher than what the barbs are going to give off when they strike.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I fully understand how they work. If those barbs hit anything but bare skin, they can arc. If your perp isn't naked, there's a very good chance of an open spark when it hits belt buckles or other metal objects on the body.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    The barbs don't always embed completely, for one thing. In fact more often not they don't.

    Even if he has gas evaporating off of him the flash point is really high. Higher than what the barbs are going to give off when they strike.

    The empirical evidence would seem to suggest otherwise.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    First thing your ass learns when working in a shop with gasoline present is that the fumes crawl across the floor and can make their way to an innocent piece of equipment like a drill or an air compressor, the tiny spark that occurs when the device cuts on has caused many a fire. I always recommend people cast their eyes over Youtube way to watch idiots and gasoline lest they forget just how volatile that shit is. My favorite is dumbasses pouring gasoline on a fire to try to get it going and watching the flames go up the spout- lighting the container on fire, then watching the dude shake the container in an attempt to 'blow' the flames out, spreading flaming gasoline all over the area.

    But yeah, if you didn't, watch that dashcam video. I can't imagine how awful that must have been just standing by unable to do anything after the entire interior of the car lit up when that BP agent fired that taser.

  • Rhywun||

    No one should expect police to act calmly and gentle on some drunken asshole who just led them on a high-speed chase, endangering multiple lives.

    Yes, we should. That is the fucking job they are trained to do. I don't get to go bezerk when I'm pissed at work; why should they?

  • MikeP2||

    Stupid strawman.

    They are not trained to be robots. Application of the law involves force. Force is never calm or gentle. Sometimes people need to be shot, sometimes people need a nightstick to the head, and sometimes people need to be tasered.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    They are not trained to be robots. Application of the law involves force. Force is never calm or gentle.

    Force should be minimal.

    On May 10, 2009, Harris paid someone $60 to drive him to Seattle after finishing work at an Edmonds restaurant, although it remains unclear why he came into the city. While walking through Belltown, he was wrongly identified by a witness as a suspect in a bloody bar fight that re-erupted inside a nearby convenience store. The witness pointed Harris out to Paul and another deputy, working as King County Metro Transit officers.


    Harris led the deputies on a roughly 2 ½-block foot chase as the deputies yelled for him to stop. The two sides disputed exactly when the deputies identified themselves as officers.

    According to testimony during the civil trial, Paul and fellow Deputy Joseph Eshom were wearing black tactical uniforms, not traditional deputy uniforms. Attorneys for Sarah Harris argued that Chris Harris likely didn't realize Paul and Eshom were officers.

    As Harris slowed to a stop, Paul delivered a hit to Harris' chest, slamming him into the concrete wall outside the Cinerama theater at Fourth Avenue and Lenora Street.

    This guy finally died a couple of years later.

    If you can't subdue someone without killing them, you shouldn't be a cop.

  • BYODB||

    No one was fully in the right, but the guy who risked many people's lives was more wrong than those trying to stop him in this case. There is no way that the guy firing the tazer had the time or wherewithal to notice that the guy was covered in gasoline and, even if he did, had good reason to believe that a tazer would not cause it to combust.

    Taking away tazers and non-lethal options for the police just means they'll be using the lethal option that much more often. If you want that to change, go ahead and point me at a fully ethical police department here on Earth and I'll point you at a model to emulate. It's always a problem of who watches the watchers.

  • Diane Merriam||

    As an electrical and mechanical engineer, it doesn't surprise me at all. It's exactly the result I would expect.

  • MikeP2||

    Then you are a poor engineer, or do not understand how a taser works.

  • Jury Nullification||

    "And even as a chemical engineer, its a surprise to me that a taser would ignite gasoline like that."

    Your engineering skills appear to be on par with your opinion and humanity. Worthless.

    Did your engineering education prepare you for what the taste of licking shit of a jack booted thugs sole would be like or did you just act with reckless abandon.

    The civilian complaint board just called and they have an opening for you.

  • Jerryskids||

    No one should expect police to act calmly and gentle on some drunken asshole who just led them on a high-speed chase, endangering multiple lives.

    No one should expect a man confronted by a snarling lion to refrain from shooting the lion in the face. At least that's my argument against the circus that fired me from my job as a lion tamer. They absurdly claim that refraining from shooting snarling lions in the face is exactly my job description.

  • MikeP2||

    Ah, I see. You are one of those who doesn't understand the purpose of law enforcement.

    Their sole purpose in society is to inhibit vigilantism. Their actions and use of force is solely to prevent people from taking the law into their own hands.
    Hence, if the average person would kick the ass of some idiot, they don't blink an eye when the police do it for them. Typically they smile at the job well done.
    The issue is only when the police go beyond what the average person thinks is proportional to the alleged offense....like choking out a guy over cigarettes. Or shooting someone in the back walking away. Or shooting a family pet because it snarled.

    So, yeh, if some drunken idiot flies past me on the road running from police, endangering the life of me and mine, I have no issue with the use of a taser to arrest his stupid ass. I the absence of police, as a vigilante, I would happily taser that ahole myself, as I expect a majority of the populace would as well.
    The combustion is unfortunate. But, difficult to see that was intentional. Perhaps if the dumbass had not flipped his car spilling gasoline all over himself, he wouldn't be in that horrid mess.

  • Diane Merriam||

    Perhaps if the cop thought two seconds about what the combination of gasoline and electricity might do ...

  • Lord_at_War||

    Diane-

    So if the cop testifies "I chose not to deploy my taser due to the threat of fire, so I put two shots center mass in a person who had a previous history of assaulting police", you'd feel better about it?

  • Uncle Jay||

    RE: Virginia Cop's Taser Set This Man on Fire—How Much Does the County Owe Him?
    The man, who led police on high-speed chase while driving drunk on a suspended license, is suing for $95 million.

    Cops lawyer: "Your Honor, this is all just a big misunderstanding. The plaintiff was about to start smoking when he discovered he didn't have any matches. So the plaintiff asked my client for a light. Sadly, my client, a real gentlemen, doesn't smoke, so he used his taser to light the cigarette. Unfortunately, the manufacturer of said taser gave our police for a malfunctioning taser resulting in the unfortunate mishap."
    Judge: The Court doesn't buy the sad story of a malfunctioning taser because you have not produced any evidence of it. However, I'm going to let you client off because, as we all know, we live in a socialist police state where the law enforcement community can do no wrong, and the unenlightened masses can do no right. Case dismissed."

  • croaker||

    Pretty much how the lawsuit over the guy getting shot in his own home by cops with no warrant, no probable cause, and no identification went.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Sure, let's just issue electrocution torture devices to people with poor impulse control. What could go wrong?

    -jcr

  • Desdecardo||

    They don't electrocute. They shock. Big difference in definition and use.

  • Heddin_South||

    If the current hits the heart nerves, the effect is the same.

  • BYODB||

    So they should just use the bullets instead?

  • buybuydandavis||

    They don't electrocute. They shock. Big difference in definition and use.

    e·lec·tro·cute
    əˈlektrəˌkyo͞ot/
    verb
    past tense: electrocuted; past participle: electrocuted
    injure or kill someone by electric shock.

  • Theseus||

    Stungun ≠ Taser please make a correction.

    if the officer yelled "TASER" he probably fired his Taser not his Stungun.

  • NoVaNick||

    I think the root of the problem is that there are simply too many cops now. There was a big effort in the 90s to hire more to help bring crime down-perhaps it was the key factor that worked or, more likely, it was something else. Anyway, you now have a lot of cops who are bored and have too many toys, including tasers, at their disposal. I know though we will NEVER hear any politician request a hiring freeze or budget cut for the police, so the problem will only get worse.

  • Longtobefree||

    Not mentioned, but logical if procedure was followed, is that all the officers in the county knew about the chase, and the fact that the "suspect" had several violent priors.
    Also not clear from the article is whether the "suspect" was cuffed yet or not; and that would make a big difference.
    After all, the officers had just (probably) saved his life.
    What would the lawsuit look like if the officers had smelled gasoline, stepped back and ordered the drunk to get himself out and come over to get cuffed?

    "The question is whether tasers are being used properly or wantonly. We'll get some more insight into that question when Miles November's case goes to trial."
    Not likely. If this gets to trial, the lawyers will have messed up. Negotiated settlement with non-disclosure. I would bet your next paycheck on that.

  • croaker||

    There are similarities between a TASER and a defibrillator. I wouldn't use a defibrillator in a puddle of gasoline, cops shouldn't use a TASER. They knew, or should have known, the consequences of their actions.

  • Frank Thorn||

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    The proper response to a finding of "the officer follwed department policy" in a case of horriffic injury through officer idiocy is "then fire the imbecile who promulgated the policy".

  • AD-RtR/OS!||

    He should thank them for not letting him kill himself (and possibly others), and let it go at that.

  • Incredulous||

    Seriously? I feel absolutely horrible for this guy's suffering BUT he alone is responsible for the situation that resulted in his injuries. He didn't act like just an idiot but a fucking lunatic. It was extremely fortunately somebody else wasn't horribly injured or killed due to his actions. This is yet another example of how fucked up our civil legal system is. Cops should be suing his ass for putting them and possibly others in danger. And from a practical perspective, his injuries might prevent this fucking lunatic from killing or maiming others in the future.

  • Jima||

    ^ This absolutely. It sucks the guy got set on fire accidentally, but if he wasn't a fucking idiot to begin with, it never would have happened. It's completely the drunk's fault he's fucked up. I'm not going to second guess the cops when they're dealing with a confirmed idiot who has already endangered everyone on the scene by his previous dumb shit actions. Karma can be a bitch.

  • Dace Highlander||

    So police shouldn't have tasered the man because what he did ~before~ the tasering had no rational impact on what he was going to do after he got up.

    But SJW should riot because what a public speaker said ~before~ coming to campus does have a rational impact on what the speaker will say once he is on campus.

    Police should act calmly and with perfect insight at all times even though they will be recriminated no matter what the outcome while BLM activists should act with abandon and disregard since they will be celebrated no matter what happens.

    All police should be blamed for what a few bad officers do because they all stick together but protestors should never be held accountable for the fires and property damage done by hordes of protestors because they don't ~really~ represent our cause.

    Come on everyone, join in. Or debate in the negative. Just don't close your eyes.

  • Malvolio||

    Simplest solution in the world: when an officer is forced to taser a suspect, he himself should be tased the next day.

    If the situation is such that he would hesitate to use a taser because of the discomfort it causes, it isn't dire enough to justify use of the taser.

  • Heddin_South||

    Tasers should be treated like lethal-force weapons, which they too often are. I see too many quotes, often from supposedly trained law enforcement officers, equating them to non-lethal force. This is why people die unnecessarily.

  • MikeP2||

    I prefer the Dirty Harry approach to law enforcement.

    Walk around grumbling all the time, ignoring everyone. If someone commits a violent crime, shoot to kill. Screw tasers, screw batons. A nice large caliber round is the low cost solution and frankly reckless drunks kill far too many innocent people.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    The only reason the police department in the Dirty Harry films doesn't get torn down like th Bastille is that the author is on Harry's side, and so he somehow never shoots somebody even remotely innocent.

  • Longtobefree||

    "A man has got to know his limitations"

  • Lord_at_War||

    "Buzzards gotta eat, same as worms".

  • buybuydandavis||

    Yet a review found Swope acted in accordance with department policy.

    Policies followed. Good shoot.

    Gas soaked prisoners are always set ablaze with a taser. Policy BFYTW.

  • inoyu||

    This article is loaded with sensational allegations and provocative descriptions. Don't read this sort of cr=p before bedtime.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online