I’m confused. Downright confused. In fact, there is not an adjective that I’m familiar with that can sufficiently explain how confused I am.

So to understand just how confused I am, let’s examine what I am not confused about.

I am not confused, for example, about how a Philadelphia Phillies fan could think it a good idea to jump onto the field of play during the eighth inning and run around as police officers and security guards tried to bring him to a halt. This is Philadelphia after all.

I am not confused, for example, about how a police officer, after chasing the boy around for a while to try and get him to stop, pulled out a taser to subdue him. The boy was breaking the law, after all.

And finally, I am not confused, for example, about how police cannot release the name of the boy, who was 17 years old, because he is a juvenile. Who cares that he committed all of his crimes out in public in front of 40,000 confused fans? We must protect the boy.

But what I am more than confused about is the backlash.

No, not against the boy, but against the officer, for using a taser.

Did I miss something? Did I?

Did the boy not illegally jump over a fence, a fence he must have known he was not allowed to jump over? Did the boy not see police officers and security personnel come after him from all sides of the stadium? Did the boy not keep running as they closed in on him time after time?

No, he did. Knowingly. And he got tasered. Deservingly.

And we respond not by condemning the boy’s actions? We condemn the police officer?

That is why I am more than just confused. That is why I am trying desperately to find an adjective that could possibly be paired with confused to explain just how confused I am. Because I have never seen such an adjective.

Yet basically everyone, from David Brown of Yahoo! Sports to almost every post on the Phillies’ official message board, seems to find the use of the taser, as Brown called it, “juuuuuust a bit excessive.”

Which leaves me as the lone voice of reason.

The kid broke the law by his own choice. According to his father, he was neither drunk nor on any drugs. He clearly dodged multiple attempts by security to subdue him long before the officer brandished the taser.

Just because some boy is an idiot, the use of a taser is not justified? That’s what confuses me.

What if the officers got to him and he had a knife hidden under the white flag he was waving? Was it worth risking someone’s life to prevent the use of the taser?

What if someone in the stands suffered a stroke or a heart attack around where the security personnel was stationed before jumping onto the field to subdue the boy? Suddenly, instead of an ordered evacuation of the individual, there would be more chaos.

What if another idiot, after a minute of the boy dodging officers, decided to join in the fun? Before you know it, we might have Disco Demolition Night all over again.

Now, before someone calls me an idiot, because no matter what I write, someone will call me an idiot for one reason or another, let me state that all three of those scenarios are unlikely. But they are possible.

And from the officer’s point of view, he needs to get this boy off the field as quickly and safely as possible to prevent more chaos.

But the boy was not cooperating.

So the officer did his duty as a law enforcement agent and tased the boy down.

Was it pretty? Was it desirable?

No, of course not. I would much rather he not have to tase the boy.

But was it necessary?

Yes, because the boy needed to be stopped. Immediately.

And because we don’t like to see police use force against anyone, let alone a 17-year-old “boy,” we throw up our arms in outrage and demand stronger regulations against the use of tasers.

Heck, I’m sure there are some of you who want us to deny police the right to have firearms of any kind, even if they only fire an electronic shock. And trust me, I understand where you are coming from. But I also understand I will never convince you to accept tasers, just like you will never convince me to ban them. So at this point in the article, you may leave, because we’re just never going to accept each other’s positions.

But for those of you who can accept police having tasers, you are the ones I am speaking to.

Unless I am missing something, there is nothing wrong with what an officer at the Phillies game did Monday night to subdue a boy who was trespassing onto the field during the middle of a game.

The boy evaded arrest for a prolonged period of time and refused to vacate the field, while multiple security personnel were taken from their normal posts to try and stop the boy, leaving parts of the stadium under-protected.

He had to be stopped for the added safety of 40,000 other people, and the quickest and safest way to bring everything back to normalcy was to tase him.

The officer tased him, and now everyone is upset.

Put yourself in the stadium. Put yourself in the front row where the security personnel just leaped from to subdue the kid.

Do you feel safer now than you did a minute ago before the officer jumped onto the field?

No, you don’t, because you are in more danger without security around than you would be if that officer was still there. Sure, the level of danger is still low, but it has increased substantially.

By jumping onto the field, by evading arrest, the boy put 40,000 people in more danger than they would have been if he stayed in his seat. And all the police officer did when he tased the boy was quicken the return to normalcy for the entire stadium.

For the sake of 40,000 people in attendance, the officer did the right thing, and we have lambasted him for doing so.

That’s why I need a word to describe just how confused I am.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com