The Tasering of a Utah man by a highway patrolman offers the Utah Highway Patrol an opportunity to update its policies and prevent a recurrence of such incidents.

On Sept. 14, trooper John Gardner reportedly pulled over an SUV on U.S. 40 near Vernal.

Driver Jared Massey, 28, vehemently denied seeing a speed limit sign and proclaimed that he wouldn't sign the ticket.

The trooper ordered him out of the vehicle. Massey did so, still arguing. Gardner pulled out a stun gun and ordered him to "turn around, put your hands behind your back."

Massey, bewildered but still debating, began ambling back toward his vehicle. The trooper reportedly fired his Taser, and Massey dropped stunned to the pavement.

Hysterical, Massey's pregnant wife, Lauren, jumped out of the SUV, and Gardner ordered her back. The trooped then handcuffed and arrested the still-puzzled and protesting Massey.

This being the 21st century, Gardner filed under open-records laws for the patrol car's video. Then he had it posted on YouTube. That spawned nationwide interest, including threats against the trooper and the Masseys. The Utah Highway Patrol is investigating.

What should be made of all thisfi

Massey plainly was argumentative, and rather dense about some obvious social mores. Here's a tip: when a uniformed man with a badge and a gun tells you to do something, shut up and do exactly what he says.

On the video, we don't see him threatening the officer or getting out of control. But still, the officer has a badge and a gun -- and also a rule book. You can cooperate with the cops and save yourself a lot of trouble, or you can make them go by the book, as Massey apparently did without introspection.

We have sympathy for law officers making traffic stops. They can turn deadly fast. Cops should not be hampered by excessive rules or second-guessing. They need the freedom to respond to each unique situation, within reason.

But with the power of a badge and a gun comes responsibility and a need for maturity. While it's true that Utah law allows an officer to arrest of a driver who refuses to sign a ticket, he doesn't have to. Officers can also choose to note on the citation that the defendant refused to sign. If Officer Gardner had done that, this would be a routine traffic case now rather than a brewing scandal.

Highway Patrol policy allows the use of the stun gun when a person presents a threat, where physically subduing the person would endanger him or another, or where other means have failed to subdue the subject. We think Gardner pulled his stun gun out too quickly.

Massey apparently had no warning. He wasn't even looking at Gardner but pointing down the highway, still arguing his case. Turning around to see the Taser pointed at him, he gets an expression that seems genuinely incredulous. He does have his right hand partially in his pants pocket, but he doesn't look like a desperado, just an indignant driver who really doesn't grasp what's going on.

If he was bull-headed and overly excitable, those aren't crimes. "You should have followed my instructions," Gardner told Massey in several different ways.

True, but the Taser policy isn't carte blanche to stun everyone who doesn't respond instantly to commands any more than a dead lawn is reason for an Orem cop to slam an old woman to the ground.

While the case is being reviewed, the rest of the nation is talking. And we have to line up with those who think that the trooper probably overreacted.

This is not the only Taser in the news. In October, a 40-year-old Polish man died after being Tasered by Canadian police at an airport in Vancouver, British Columbia. The FBI is investigating a Nov. 18 incident in Trotwood, Ohio, in which police used one of the stun guns on a pregnant woman. In Maryland, police say they will soon release their conclusions in the death of a 20-year-old man when officers used a Taser to break up a fight.

These are only a few of the many incidents in which more than 11,000 law enforcement agencies use stun guns. The manufacturer, TASER International, claims that its device "saves lives every day, and the use of Taser devices dramatically reduces injury rates for police officers and suspects." Physically grappling with a suspect can be dangerous

to police, and to the suspect. And, surely, for those confronting police, it's better to be shocked than shot.

The results of this investigation should be fully aired. Doing so would show the agency's concern for the public and avoid the perception that it's closing ranks. Further discussion might also be educational for drivers. The sometimes over-the-top online reactions to the video show that many people fail to understand the role of police and citizens in such situations. More discussion may illuminate the tough situations officers must face, what is expected of them, and how citizens should react.

The Highway Patrol says it is thinking of revising its training on traffic stops and Tasers. That's a great idea if it gets beyond thinking. The devices are relatively new. Surely there's a need to fine-tune its use, based on recent experience.

That's why we call this an opportunity. Better training for troopers and better public understanding of the role of the police would benefit all.

Do you agree?