The kid was fleeing arrest. The cop was well within his legal rights to use it. Cops are supposed to use the minimum amount of force necessary to end a conflict. Who knows how long the kid would have ran. The cop used a tazer and ended the situation as quickly as possible with as little force possible. I applaud him. i'd like to see you get tazed and tell us all how that's "little force". If I'm fleeing an arresting officer, (a) I would deserve to get tazed, (b) I would pray that I'd only get tazed instead of, you know, shot, and © I didn't say "little force", I said "as little possible." There's a difference. I have an uncle who's a cop and I know that every single interaction a cop has during his or her shift could be a dangerous one. Sure, we know now that the kid was unarmed. But he was resisting arrest in the form of running away-- he clearly was going to have no part of being arrested. Had the officers caught up to the kid and tackled him, they had no way of knowing at the time if the kid had a gun or a knife or some other sort of weapon on him to cause the officer harm. Using the tazer ended the conflict as quickly and as safely as possible for the officers and the players on the field, just like they're trained to do. Geez, there would be people on here complaining if the kid was tackled and got a broken leg or something because of it. Then the cops would have been too rough with the precious little snowflake. I find the overall lack of personal accountability in today's society deeply disturbing. He made a choice and he suffered the consequences. The cop wouldn't have used the tazer if the kid had stayed off of the field like he was supposed to. The kid is at fault here, not the cop.