I work private security, and in all honesty these things scare the crap out of me.  I manage a Public Safety Department, and while I feel I have a good staff that are basically decent people, I know that if I gave them access to something like this it would be a matter of months if not weeks before they were misused.

The pressure in any law enforcement or security job can be pretty intense, and there can be a tendency to de-humanize those that we deal with.  Adding a supposedly safe and “always” non-lethal notch on the use-of-force continuum onto a job like law enforcement or security is like throwing kerosene on a fire to put it out.  Good people snap under the best of circumstances - minimizing the damage they can do is basic common sense in crisis prevention.

The truly scary part?  A fellow security manager pointed me to the military’s Active Denial System (the pain ray).  He estimates that within 5 years it will be small enough and inexpensive enough to be used in pretty much any security environment.

It is unfortunate that false allegations based on scientifically flawed data can create such uncertainty,” Steve Tuttle, a Taser vice president, told The Arizona Republic.

I’d like to post for the record that most observers have called the CBC study solid and empirically legitimate.  I personally don’t know (I can only go by reports), but it’s telling that, so far, the only agency I’ve heard decrying the CBC method is, well, the one with the most to lose. 

Thanks for commenting on the issue, Pam.  It’s a biggie up here.

I’m surprised that they were able to get any response at all out of that guy when his blood sugar was at 11 (aren’t you supposed to be in a coma at that point?), but I can personally attest to how uncooperative and irrational low blood sugar people can be. My cousin is the sweetest person normally, but when she hits about 45 her personality totally changes and she becomes a real asshole. She usually refuses to eat/drink whatever sugar you are giving to her even though she medically needs it, so you basically have to force her. When she recovers she always apologizes and thanks you for taking care of her, but really, she can’t help it. Her belligerent behavior is as much a symptom that she needs help as much as anything else.

One of the items in the study suggests that in addition to being dishonest jerks the taser people are really kinda lousy at building tasers.  A biggish percentage of the tasers tested delivered either way higher or way lower than the voltage specified. It’s like they were supplying nightsticks and a few out of every order were made of balsa wood, and another few had poisoned spikes invisibly embedded in them.

Which of course doesn’t really address the police use of tasers in situations where even a “safe” torture weapon would be unwanted.

A fellow security manager pointed me to the military’s Active Denial System (the pain ray).

I’ve read that the nation’s biggest purchaser of “non-lethal” weapons is the military, not police departments.

We just had another Taser death in Minneapolis last week (http://www.startribune.com/local/35815244.html?elr=KArksUUUU). May a US ban be close behind the Canadian one.

” Law enforcement agencies in Canada are banning the shock device “

This is not correct.

There has been an inquiry set up, and there is testing being done on older pre-2006 devices in two provinces, but there has been no general move to ban them.

Well… even at 50%, they’re still less likely to kill you than bullets. You’re much more likely to be hit with the Taser, though. :(

Love him? Hate him? How do YOU feel about our soon to be former President?  Take part in a chance to immortalize your views in book form by visiting http://goodbyegeorgew.com/ and letting your opinion be read!

Check out the following article about http://goodbyegeorgew.com/:

A Movement for Participatory Democracy Sends Honest Goodbye to George W. Bush

Time and again the U.S. Constitution has been trampled since 9/11 under the jackboots of the George W. Bush Administration and an all too complacent U.S. Congress.  In the wake of the landslide election results nearly routing the Republican Party from Washington, the time has come to take back our rights.  One place to start is at with the momentum being built by http://www.goodbyegeorgew.com.

A veritable national movement is being facilitated by Kate Wheeler and her daughter Ashley who came up with the idea for this site as a way to speak out and release the frustration so much of America has felt after 8 years living under Son-of-Bush.  The Goodbye to George W. Movement, as Wheeler calls it seems to be picking up speed rapidly.

“We just started the site and dozens of people have already written their letters.  We think that the American People and the world need this.  It’s a chance to tell Bush what they really think, a catharsis after so many years of a White House that promoted hatred and fear,” Wheeler said.

Wheeler pointed to the concept of homeland security as the ideological militarization of U.S. mentality.  With the U.S.A. Patriot Act and subsequent legislation, Constitutional limits were taken off of federal law enforcement. 

For example, the FBI has been requesting reading lists from libraries and bookstores; librarians and booksellers are prohibited from even speaking with a lawyer regarding the unconstitutional FBI requests.

According to the American Civil Liberties Union, by early 2008 more than one hundred anti-war protests had been attacked by authorities in recent years.

“Freedom of expression and democracy are among the values that the founding father amended to the U.S. Constitution and they are what has motivated us to launch the site,” Wheeler said by phone from her home in Georgia.

The Goodbye George Movement that Wheeler and her daughter initiated with http://www.goodbyegeorgew.com sets a challenge, in a real sense, to put participation back into U.S. politics.  In the United States people may turn out to vote but beyond that are infrequently given forums for the ongoing voicing of their opinion to policy makers.

“We see the Goodbye George Movement as the beginning of the end to politics-as-usual in our country.  Today people are writing what the really think to President Bush.  We are going to keep on top of Obama as well to see that the change this country needs really happens,” Wheeler concluded.

The letters written at http://www.goodbyegeorgew.com  are not only a historic undertaking as a step toward making American politics more democratic, they will also be preserved as part of history in the form of a book that Wheeler plans to publish.  Copies will be awarded to the first 100 letter writers.

“—It is unfortunate that false allegations based on scientifically flawed data can create such uncertainty,” Steve Tuttle, a Taser vice president, told The Arizona Republic. —”

Someone’s been taking lessons from Nick Naylor.
“Repeat after me - Cell Phones don’t cause brain cancer”.

Seriously, did the smoking execs loss this guy or is he just out on loan?

Don’t opine until both sides of the story have been evaluated..

1. TASER® devices are safe.  More than 140 major medical and scientific studies, including numerous medical studies on human subjects, affirm that TASER devices are generally safe and effective and are incapable of causing death on humans. 

2. Conclusions drawn by Pierre Savard and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) regarding safety are only opinions based on flawed data.

3. Pierre Savard, the CBC and the Arizona Republic are claiming that there is a potential five percent VF rate in normal TASER devices and maybe as high as 50 percent VF rate for the “abnormal” measured devices.  If so, then this should be consistent across all persons exposed to the TASER X26.

4. Approximately 1.5 million people have been exposed to the TASER discharges with approximately half being volunteers or law enforcement officers exposed in training and the other half from field uses or in studies.

5. There has NEVER been a death nor VF associated with a TASER device in the approximately 750,000 volunteers who have been exposed to a TASER device.  Pierre Savard’s conclusion expounded by the CBC and the Arizona Republic would mean that there should have been approximately 37,500 deaths or instances of VF in the volunteers.  There have been ZERO.

6. Laws of science are not selective

7. FACT: National Technical Systems (NTS) tested 41 TASER® X26™ devices at the request of CBC

8. FACT: Each device was fired six times through various levels of resistance

9. FACT: All 41 devices tested produced energy outputs consistent with the expected outputs published by TASER (acknowledged by Savard in his report)

10. FACT: Four devices produced what can only be explained as an anomaly in current on one of the six firings - the first firing of each device at 250 ohms.  The protocol for replicating human resistance for the X26 is 400 ohms or above. TASER uses 600 ohms as an equivalent load for the X26.  Note that all four of the devices were consistent with the expected outputs when tested above the 250 ohm level.

11. FACT:  Regardless of whether or not the anomaly is accurate, the most important aspect of this
alleged claim is that it has no bearing on safety as the levels are still well within the known safety thresholds  

12. TASER International pointed out to the CBC that these anomalies most likely could be explained by the fact that the testers failed to spark test the TASER device before the test – a recommendation made to all officers and agencies in the training of all officer as a check for proper function and to condition electronic components.  This training is part and parcel of our certification training guidelines and protocols as well from out Training Bulletins as published on our website.

13. TASER International was told by CBC that the four devices were RETESTED using a spark test.  Three produced energy outputs consistent with expected outputs published by TASER International on all firings; one produced a slight deviation on the initial firing.  To date, despite our requests, CBC and NTS have been unwilling to share the data from the retests.

14. Pierre Savard testified in May 2008 before the Braidwood Commission in British Columbia that he believed that TASER devices were unsafe and potentially could kill but no one had done the right tests on the devices. 

15. Savard DID NOT conduct this testing.  He only offered a potential protocol and then reviewed the data to offer his opinion.

16. Savard is a scientist with a biased opinion searching for data to support his conclusion.  It is no wonder he chose to ignore the fact that the data was flawed and inconclusive.

17. TASER international has offered to provide the Factory test protocol and test specification to CBC and NTS to test these devices to see if they are performing according to factory test parameters. So far, they have declined this offer, and have made up their own test parameters and tolerances.

I’ve read that the nation’s biggest purchaser of “non-lethal” weapons is the military, not police departments.

Probably.  It’s the military that’s in the business of developing new weapons, after all.  The difference is one of goals and expectations.  When the military is in a situation, and using their weapons, the usual goal is to make sure that everyone on the other side ends up dead or maimed (and if they want to avoid it, they better run away or surrender).  Given that, using a weapon that gives a solid chance of survival and full recovery is an act of mercy.  Useful if you’re trying to pacify a civilian population - it’s easier to win hearts and minds if you didn’t kill uncle Abdul, know what I mean?

And yes, I’m sure these weapons are/will be used on prisoners.  Just one more war crime.

The police, on the other hand, have the goal of bringing everyone in alive if at all possible.  These are their own citizens, who have rights.  Swinging around potentially-lethal “non-lethal” weapons as carelessly as they have violates not only those rights, but their own mission.

Mike Lane: How much is Taser international paying to get you to whitewash those 400 deaths directly related to the company’s products? Do you actually believe the bullshit you’re pedaling, or does the money help make up for te restless sleep at night?

If you want to convince people that a Taser is better than a gun, fine. By all means. I’m just 1 degree of separation from an animator shot to death in Vancouver by the police. But by arguing that it’s _SAFE_when anyone with brain, eyes and memory can tell that it’s NOT FUCKING GUARANTEED NONLETHAL, you’re contributing to this dangerous cop culture that uses the Taser for compliance, rather than self defense.

It is possible for a police force to use the Taser responsibly. Santa Cruz PD has an average yearly use of about 5 times… not per officer, for the whole force combined. And they took it seriously when a cluster of events caused a usage spike, but yes, the situations were all ones where a gun would have been the alternative. Anyone tasered is taken for medical treatment immediately, rather than taken to jail first.

But as for less lethal than guns, if the chances are really 50%, I’m not sure I agree. Depends on the bullet and where you’re hit.

LWF - I would be happy to discuss the issue in a reasonable manner, but you don’t appear to be reasonable, so it would be a one-sided discussion.

You’re obviously set in your opinion on a device you know nothing about, and it’s been my experience that your type is best left in blissful ignorance.

My problem with the TASER is it’s not used as it was originally intended. All of these deaths are stories of the police finding, at worst, a belligerent person and tasering them rather than actually restraining them in a non-lethal non-electrocuting way. Often, they tased totally helpless or totally non-threatening people because it’s “easier” that way. If someone pulls a gun on the cop, tasing that person is a good thing, and better than shooting them. If a person doesn’t immediately get to their knees upon being ordered, ELECTROCUTING THEM is not the answer.

Come on Ashley - get your definitions right before calling it electroction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrocution

If the TASER is not being used in a manner you approve of, I hope you are doing your part to bring attention to the issue on a local level. Police will always have and will continue to abuse their power in all cultures, regardless of the weapon at hand. This is why any and all abuses of power should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

The problem in the system, not the tools of the trade.

The problem in the system, not the tools of the trade.

What are the makers of the tools doing to make the system work better?

Huh, Mike, so it is Pierre Savard who is the biased source instead of the Taser company?
A new direction for marketing! Now it is SCIENTISTS who are the are biased ones because they’re attempting to prove a hypothesis! That hypothesis being that they don’t think an electrical shock to the whole body might wreck havoc on the heart’s electric system.
Usually it is a company that has the bias when you know, they’re citing their own internal sources because they’re hardly going to release lots of information that says their product is fatal, but then this is new marketing!

Ack, *hypothesis being that they DO think an electrical shock*

Mike Lane -

So how are you affiliated with Fortress Tactical, LLC? Or are you just a really big fan of theirs?

Wow, Mike’s talking points really aren’t very good. Take, for instance, the notion that healthy non-impaired people who volunteer for testing are representative of the population on which tasers are used. Claims establishing (insofar as they do, which is questionable in its own right) that a device is nonlethal when used on healthy people with no heart problems are useful only if, y’know, the police limit their use to healthy people with no heart problems. I can see it now: “Hold on while I attach these EKG leads to make sure it’s safe to tase you.”

I’m surprised that they were able to get any response at all out of that guy when his blood sugar was at 11 (aren’t you supposed to be in a coma at that point?)

He probably was in one by the time they figured out he wasn’t drunk.  I’m sure his blood sugar was plummeting while they were Tasering and handcuffing him.

Mike Lane is spot on. The electrical effects of Taser have never killed anyone, nor likely even contributed to lethal consquenses.  He is exactly right in noting that many hundreds of thousands of volunteers have experienced what it is like to the Taser used on them.  The deaths in those cases have been ZERO (as Lane correctly noted).  Statistically, if Taser were even partially responsible for deaths, we would expect to find at least a small number in the test group.  The lack of any fatalities in the very large (control) volunteer group suggests that the probability of Taser causing death approaches ZERO.

The few deaths involving Taser have been due to secondary causes - specifically falling and striking the head.  That is a training and operational issue, not technical. If you want a cause, check out the number of small children who die balloons.  The number is greater than Taser actual Taser related deaths.  Why is there no hue and cry to stop selling balloons?

FTR There is nothing that will not have lethal consequences if used improperly. That includes air, water,and even marshmallows.  By definition, “nonlethal” means the system is designed to minimize the probability of fatality.  There are no absolutes

People will die after reading your blog. Are you prepared to accept causal responsibility?

This is nothing more than a tempest in a teapot for you bleeding heart LIEbrals to whine about.  I have a taser alarm clock that wakes me up every morning and as you can see, there’s nothing wrong with me!

Paul,

A. As I quoted, there have been 1.5 million TASER exposures to date, with 1/2 of that number being law enforcement, which puts the number of field uses at 750,000 (a conservative number).

B. For the sake of this arguement, I’ll give you each & every one of the 400 people that your side claims to have been “killed by TASER”.

C. If you do the math, you’ll see that your chances of being “killed by TASER” are .0005%.

That’s pretty darn safe, buddy.

He is exactly right in noting that many hundreds of thousands of volunteers have experienced what it is like to the Taser used on them.  The deaths in those cases have been ZERO (as Lane correctly noted).

As other people have pointed out, all of those tests have been done on healthy volunteers.  Taser has never released any statistics showing how a Taser affects someone whose heartbeat is irregular because of drug use, or how it affects someone suffering a seizure.  Since those populations are ones that would be more likely to be hit with a Taser than someone healthy, isn’t it irresponsible to claim that the Taser has been thoroughly tested because, hey, these hand-picked volunteers who were pre-screened for any conditions that could make them react adversely to the Taser did not react adversely?

C. If you do the math, you’ll see that your chances of being “killed by TASER” are .0005%.

Cylert was on the market for 30 years.  In those 30 years, it was connected to 13 deaths.  Total.  And yet the FDA yanked it from the market three years ago because 13 deaths over 30 years out of the millions who’d taken the drug was considered too many.

And you’re trying to claim that the government should ignore 400 deaths in the course of only 7 years?

Ah, the fresh plastic smell of astroturf.

The problem in the system, not the tools of the trade.

Well, you would say that, wouldn’t you?

Mnem:

As other people have pointed out, all of those tests have been done on healthy volunteers.

And in carefully controlled situations with medical personnel close at hand. But nobody with more than two brain cells to rub together gives a damn if the product works just fine in a lab on specially selected test subjects with all available precautions taken. The real world isn’t a fucking clean room.

It’s nice to see that self-serving disingenuousness is alive and well in the business world, though. I think that means we’re not really in a depression.

“The problem in the system, not the tools of the trade.”
-Mike Lane

Eh, I happen to agree here.  Although it’s the fact that tasers are advertised as near absolutely safe that has resulted in a system where abuse is so prevalent.  Also, I suspect that the good people over at Fortress Tactical, LLC probably stand to lose some business if and when the system gets an overhaul.

Take heart. You know this study is putting TASER (and their PR agency) in deep crisis mode if they have enough paid astroturf guerilla PR online posters to troll everywhere on the net down to feminist blogs.

However, 1/10 on subtlety guys. I think TASER can get better astroturf for its money, and should look for another agency.

And Mike the PR misses the fucking point: when the user base increases, the number of TaSeR®&TM;®s increases, and the number of suboptimally-configured devices and use scenarios increases. That’s to say, they get given their new toys and want to play with them. And so the TaSeR®&TM;® becomes the alternative to the basic police skill of getting people to calm the fuck down, instead of the alternative to shooting someone.

The few deaths involving Taser have been due to secondary causes - specifically falling and striking the head.  That is a training and operational issue, not technical.

Which I’m sure is a big consolation to the victim’s loved ones.

“Tasers don’t kill people… cops kill people.”

The real problem I think is the term “nonlethal”. Yes, it’s safer than a gun, but it’s still dangerous and can potentially kill. I don’t have a problem with that, but it does seem like a taser should be subject to the same rules of engagement as a definitively lethal weapon, and perhaps phased out as better, less dangerous technologies become available.

Law enforcement does need some kind of protection, and the less lethal the better. But let nobody think that “less lethal” can ever equate to “nonlethal”.

Mike, correct; I have made up my mind. I’m not interested in engaging you in discussion. I’m just interested in making your job as a professional astroturfer on the blogs a little more soul crushing.

Sincerely; Fuck off and Die.

“—Don’t opine until both sides of the story have been evaluated..—”

Why does this sound familiar?

“—
  1.  USWM smokers have a lifetime relative risk of dying from lung cancer of only 8 (not the 20 or more that is based on an annual death rate and therefore virtually useless).
  2. No study has ever shown that casual cigar smoker (<5 cigars/wk, not inhaled) has an increased incidence of lung cancer.
  3. Lung cancer is not in even in the top 5 causes of death, it is only #9.**
  4. All cancers combined account for only 13% of all annual deaths and lung cancer only 2%.**
  5. Occasional cigarette use (<1 pk/wk) has never been shown to be a risk factor in lung cancer.
  6. Certain types of pollution are more dangerous than second hand smoke.3
  7. Second hand smoke has never been shown to be a causative factor in lung cancer.
  8. A WHO study did not show that passive (second hand) smoke statistically increased the risk of getting lung cancer.
  9. No study has shown that second hand smoke exposure during childhood increases their risk of getting lung cancer.
  10. In one study they couldn’t even cause lung cancer in mice after exposing them to cigarette smoke for a long time.23
  11. If everyone in the world stopped smoking 50 years ago, the premature death rate would still be well over 80% of what it is today.1 (But I thought that smoking was the major cause of preventable death…hmmm.)
—”

http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Vol-1/e1-4.htm

Well!  I’m convinced!  Light me up a stoogie and blast away with your TAZER because someone did a study that says we’re all perfectly safe.  I mean, everyone dies eventually, right?  Who’s to say what “causes death” when there are so many mitigating factors.

Really, the problem is all those police officers.  If we just got rid of the police and invested entirely in TAZERs there’d be no problem to speak of.

:-p

>FACT
>FACT
>FACT
>FACT

well i can’t argue with this after all they are facts

brb jerking off to pictures of a helicopter

Some time ago I coined the word ergofusion and defined it as “the misidentification of causal relationships.”  Comparing the smoking data with Tasers is one example. It is specious to think that over a million volunteers were all in prime condition and had medical attention on hand when they were exposed. Again, if Taser was a contributing cause of death, those numbers are sufficiently large that some small percentage of those voluntarily exposed would have died.  None did.

Those acquainted with the continuum of force criteria that all law enforcement agencies use will know that use of Tasers do not show up until about tier four or five, depending on the scale.  Police presence and verbal commands always preceed use of nonlethal/less-lethal options. These options come just before use of deadly force.

It should be noted that there is one common factor in all deaths following the use of a Taser.  That factor is criminal behavior.  Like all tools they misapplied.  The three most important factors in use of these weapons is TRAINING, TRAINING, and TRAINING.  It is also worth noting that departments which use Tasers have reported fewer serious injuries to both suspects and police officers.

The difference between emotion and fact can readily be seen in the comments that include the F-Word for emphasis.  It proves that Einstein and Churchill were right.

Mnemosyne,

The TASER is a weapon. Any weapon has a the potential to kill, whether or not it was designed to kill. Batons have killed. Positional restraint has killed. Rubber bullets have killed. Beanbag rounds have killed. Water cannons have killed. Pepper spray has killed. None of the aforementioned was designed to kill. You need to look into the lives TASER use has saved (which are never reported), vs media-reported deaths. Do some objective research. TASER has been around since the mid-seventies, and has been blamed for death since then.

Why don’t some research into the actual causes of death in some of these “tasered dead”. If you abuse drugs (which is a normal factor in these cases), then you’re already living on the edge ready to go - it’s the risk those living that lifestyle choose to accept.

Police presence and verbal commands always preceed use of nonlethal/less-lethal options.

Always? “It is specious to think.”

There’s basically one corporation whose ass is on the line here, hence the astroturfage. If there were only one manufacturer selling GUNZ®™® to law enforcement (or rentacops) we’d have flacks from GUNZ Inc. in comments saying that police shootings are either bad TRAINING or just desserts for the victims.

Listen sudonunsuch in wherever, guns are the solution to almost every problem our society has (try facing down a rabid pelican without one, mister wise guy) so don’t be knocking “guns”.  The only thing wrong with Tazars is they don’t have a gun attached to them.

1)  Disobeying a police order is not punishable by the death penalty, even if you were on crack and certainly not if you were having a seizure at the time. Why then is it okay to use a weapon that carries any risk of death? (Even if the risk is only true for those who have underling conditions, have drugs in their system, are out of breath and taxed from running, have an elevated heart rate because they are in a stressful situation, are not in physically good shape, are not expecting to be tazed and therefore are scared/surprised by it.)

2)  I’m no expert but I seem to remember a certain head-hold restraint that every now and then would kill. Now it is illegal for law enforcement to use that type of hold. How is this different?

What gets me is that taser manufacturers are able to go around and say that their tools are totally safe, and in a result, we’re going to lose a good tool for law enforcement.

Because the odds of dying to a taser are much lower than dying to a gunshot or a tonfa to the head.

If they’d treat weapons as dangerous, we wouldn’t have these extra deaths, (we’d have some, but police will probably always have people who act dangerously).

Tasing someone who’s merely unresponsive?  Tasing someone on a roof?  Tasing someone repeatedly as a punishment?

WTF are these people thinking?

Idiots like Lane here, are what’s wrong with the weapon.

Yeah, training is part of it.  But not accepting that it’s dangerous is probably a bigger contributor to its danger.

I think “Mike Lane” must be someone pretending to be an astroturf troll. 400 out of 750K is little more than 1 in 2000, which is a little more than .05%, not .0005%. These little factors of 100 matter sometimes.

And 1 in 2000 is an awfully high chance of killing someone with a weapon that its manufacturer claims absolutely positively can’t kill someone. Do something every day that has a 1 in 2000 chance of killing you, and in less than 4 years there’s a better-than-even chance you’re dead.

Oh, and I wonder if the “they chose to take the risk when they got addicted to drugs/contracted diabetes” crowd is here because with Bush on his way out the idea that there’s no unreviewable executive determination of who’s a terrorist. So they have to settle for supporting unreviewable police determination of who’s a drug addict.

>>It should be noted that there is one common factor in all deaths following the use of a Taser.  That factor is criminal behavior.

THANK YOU! And here I thought only us far leftists considered police brutality to be criminal…

Oh wait. I’m misunderstanding the guy, aren’t I?

I’m no expert but I seem to remember a certain head-hold restraint that every now and then would kill. Now it is illegal for law enforcement to use that type of hold. How is this different?

It’s not.

This has been etc.

Wow, TASER must be paying someone good money to google any comment section with negative press and spam this shit with a bunch of obvious sockpuppets.

jumped the gun a bit there.

counterpoints to the arms of Voltron here:
Jarts.

Which produced 3 fatalities. ever. after decades of use. and all of them were caused by misuse.

400 fatalities in 6 years, even if they were all the product of misuse, is unacceptable.

John A:

It should be noted that there is one common factor in all deaths following the use of a Taser. That factor is criminal behavior.

Sure. Because nothing says “right-wing authoritarian” like declaring that it’s always the victim’s fault whenever the cops kill someone.

The difference between emotion and fact can readily be seen in the comments that include the F-Word for emphasis. It proves that Einstein and Churchill were right.

Sorry, but the only people who believe that any use of the word “fuck” automatically invalidates an argument are people who don’t have the slightest fucking clue how a valid argument is actually constructed.

Out here in the real world, misplaced prissiness doesn’t gain you the intellectual high ground. It’s just another form of cowardice.

Tasers have the potential to be extremely useful tools.  However, as they are currently sold and marketed they are far too easy to abuse.  I don’t have a problem with tasers being used in situations where it is the safest option for the subject and the officer and all lower intensity options have been exhausted, but let’s face it, they are not being used in circumstances like that exclusively.

Tasers have one acceptable use, and only one acceptable use - as the option of last resort before an officer needs to use their firearm.  Once an officer has gained control of a subject (by handcuffing, for instance) there is NEVER any reason for a taser to be used.  If a subject cannot realistically harm an officer or innocent, there is NEVER any reason for a taser to be used.  If a subject can be brought under control by other, less extreme measures, there is NEVER any reason for a taser to be used.

It really is that simple.  If you remember that “don’t tase me, bro!” incident down in Florida last year, that is a perfect illustration of how NOT to use a taser.  The officers who used it on that idiot college kid should have been brought up on charges.  My wife was in the hospital at the time and we were watching it on the TV in her room and she looked at me and asked if that was not a bit excessive.  Damn right it was.  They had the kid in cuffs, he was not going anywhere, and had no capacity to injure the officers or bystanders at that point.  The taser was used not to subdue him, but to punish him for being disorderly.

All you astro-turf folks and others who are talking in favor of taser use and citing safety statistics are missing the basic point.  I don’t honestly care if the damn thing doesn’t kill one person - if it is causing substantial pain to subjects and can be used instead of less extreme measures, it should be pulled until it can be redesigned (or the training can be restructured) so as to reduce the risks of this to the lowest possible level.  I’ll even break it down into a nice “FACT” list for you!

FACT: The Taser is a tool that causes debilitation and pain on the subject when used

FACT: There are other methods for gaining compliance from a subject that are far less severe on the use-of-force continuum than the Taser.

FACT: Law Enforcement and Private Security are put in situations every day that are extremely high intensity and cause a high level of stress.

FACT: Stressed officers are more likely to have impaired judgment in how they react to critical situations.

FACT: In order for TASER to exercise due diligence in how it designs and markets its product, it at a minimum needs to take the above into account.  Any failure to do so is unacceptable and a sign of gross incompetence.

If TASER is really serious about the safety of their product, they will (I am sure) be happy to support legislation increasing the transparency of the after-action investigation on the part of law enforcement every time a taser is used.  After all, if the only problem is officer training and a few bad apples, then upping the penalties for officers who willfully misuse the taser will only help keep TASER’s all important safety statistics as high as possible.

Yes Paul - you are right. My math was wrong. If you are resisting arrest and tased, you have a .0533% chance of kicking the bucket.

This is only if I give you all 400 “tasered dead”. If you actually read the autopsy reports on some of these, you’ll find that the majority of these folks died from drug-related causes, not TASER. You’ve been listening to & buying the media hype for too long.

In the year 2000 illicit use of drugs was cited as the cause of death in *17,000 people.
*http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/30

Facts dictates that those who choose to use/abuse drugs commonly create disturbances while under the influence. Who get called in cases like this? Hmmmm… The ones that WE have delegated with the task to “protect & serve”. It’s by no means unreasonable to assume that the police were present at at least some of these 17,000 drug-related deaths that occured in 2000. 

Using your philosophy sir, I would set my house on fire, call the fire department, and then blame them for any water damage.

“FACT: The Taser is a tool that causes debilitation and pain on the subject when used.”

True, but then again so do guns, handcuffs, impact batons, pepper spray, fists, felony takedowns, courtrooms, & jail. How you propose we handle criminal behavior? 

“FACT: There are other methods for gaining compliance from a subject that are far less severe on the use-of-force continuum than the Taser.”

Yes, there are, but each situation is different. That’s where proper training and accountability come into play.

“FACT: Law Enforcement and Private Security are put in situations every day that are extremely high intensity and cause a high level of stress.”

Driving a car to and from work on a daily basis creates situations of extremely high intensity, and also causes a high level of stress in drivers around the country on a daily basis. What about it?

“FACT: Stressed officers are more likely to have impaired judgment in how they react to critical situations.”

That’s where proper training & psychological evaluations come into play.

“FACT: In order for TASER to exercise due diligence in how it designs and markets its product, it at a minimum needs to take the above into account.  Any failure to do so is unacceptable and a sign of gross incompetence.”

You obviously don’t have a clue just how much built-in accountability the TASER employs, the training TASER International provides, or the measures TASER International takes to reduce abuse . I reiterate - not a clue.

“If TASER is really serious about the safety of their product, they will (I am sure) be happy to support legislation increasing the transparency of the after-action investigation on the part of law enforcement every time a taser is used. After all, if the only problem is officer training and a few bad apples, then upping the penalties for officers who willfully misuse the taser will only help keep TASER’s all important safety statistics as high as possible.”

See previous response.

Hey, Mike Lane, I would be interested to know if your volunteers are tased often and repeatedly while being shouted at and told to do things that are impossible while their nervous system is being disrupted.  Do your volunteers get tased up to four times in quick succession?  There was a guy here in my state killed by taser while sitting on his porch.  So the fall didn’t kill him.  He was tased at least four times in a row while the police were yelling for him to put his hands up.  His hands were in the pocket of his sweatshirt when they started tasing him and surprise, surprise, that’s where they stayed.  He had no ability to make voluntary movements while they were tasing him, and they continued tasing him up until his ass died.  And no, he wasn’t on drugs.  And I don’t see anywhere in the criminal code where drug use is a capital offense.  Can you point that out for me?

It should be noted that there is one common factor in all deaths following the use of a Taser. That factor is criminal behavior.

Assuming that you class schizophrenia, diabetes and seizure disorders as “criminal behavior,” I suppose you could come to that conclusion.  Because, as we all know, schizophrenia, diabetes and seizure disorders are all things people choose to have, so if a person slipping into a diabetic coma has to get a few shocks before the cops figure out that s/he needs to go to the emergency room, well, it’s their own fault for having diabetes.  If you’re wandering around your neighborhood after having a seizure and don’t respond to police commands, don’t blame them if they Tase you—if you didn’t want to be Tased, you shouldn’t have had epilepsy.

Frankly, a huge part of this problem is that cops are taught that anyone who does not immediately obey orders is doing so willfully and while in full control of themselves, so they should treat that person as hostile.  This is why hundreds of mentally ill people die every year—the cops are too busy/impatient/poorly trained to recognize mental illness and use the same techniques on them that they would use on a rational person.  And then they’re surprised when it ends in tragedy—who knew the schizophrenic guy having delusions wouldn’t instantly respond to police commands?

You obviously don’t have a clue just how much built-in accountability the TASER employs, the training TASER International provides, or the measures TASER International takes to reduce abuse . I reiterate - not a clue.

I see Mike isn’t even pretending not to be a paid shill for Taser anymore.

Mike, why are we supposed to take you any more seriously than the tobacco company employees who swore under oath that nicotine was not addictive even though their own studies showed that it was?

mnem:  Remember that kid that had fallen off a bridge and had major head injuries and was unresponsive and the police tased the hell out of him?

If this is the assumptive attitude you take in the normal course of conversation, then there’s nothing further to discuss. If you don’t like the message - attack the messenger and skirt the issue. It’s easier that way…

I see Mike isn’t even pretending not to be a paid shill for Taser anymore.

Mike, why are we supposed to take you any more seriously than the tobacco company employees who swore under oath that nicotine was not addictive even though their own studies showed that it was?”

If this is the assumptive attitude you take in the normal course of conversation, then there’s nothing further to discuss. If you don’t like the message - attack the messenger and skirt the issue. It’s easier that way…

In other words, you have no defense of the police Tasing people who are sick or injured, so you completely dodge the question and start whining about how mmmeeeaaaannnnn we are to you?

Yeah, I figured that.  After all, in your world, it’s completely normal for police to Taser a kid with a broken back nineteen (19) times because he won’t stand up when ordered.  There’s no way the police could or should have known that the kid had just fallen from the bridge just because he was laying on the pavement and the cops were there because people had called to report someone walking on the edge of the bridge.  And I’m sure the doctors were lying when they said that surgery had to be delayed by 2 days because of the aftereffects of being Tased nineteen (19) times shortly after falling 30 feet and breaking his back.

If the kid didn’t want to be Tasered, he shouldn’t have broken his back.  What’s so hard about that?

Your issue seems to be with training, my friend. I really have no control over department training policies. Cops are humans, and make mistakes just like anyone else. There’s good cops, and there’s bad cops. The bad ones should be treated just like the criminals they are.

As far as individual situations go - I wasn’t there. I can’t say what they should have or should not have done. If you saw the whole thing, then you obviously know firsthand. I’m sure you filed a complaint? What was the outcome?

Hey, Mike Lane, I would be interested to know if your volunteers are tased often and repeatedly while being shouted at and told to do things that are impossible while their nervous system is being disrupted.  Do your volunteers get tased up to four times in quick succession?  There was a guy here in my state killed by taser while sitting on his porch.  So the fall didn’t kill him.  He was tased at least four times in a row while the police were yelling for him to put his hands up.  His hands were in the pocket of his sweatshirt when they started tasing him and surprise, surprise, that’s where they stayed.  He had no ability to make voluntary movements while they were tasing him, and they continued tasing him up until his ass died.  And no, he wasn’t on drugs.  And I don’t see anywhere in the criminal code where drug use is a capital offense.  Can you point that out for me?

You obviously don’t have a clue just how much built-in accountability the TASER employs, the training TASER International provides, or the measures TASER International takes to reduce abuse

Then enlighten us. Tell us what they do. Provide citations or documentation for all assertions.

Come on, shill. This is your big chance to make us smarty-pants cop-hating liberals shut the fuck up about your beloved torture toy. Let’s see what you’ve got.

As far as individual situations go - I wasn’t there. I can’t say what they should have or should not have done.

Is bullshit. If you put yourself forward as an expert in defence of TASER International (which is what you appear to have come to this blog to do) then you actually can say in most of these cases what should have been done. Does TASER Int. ever encourange a suspect being hit in succession?

So ya, it might be a policy issue not a TASER one, but if you’re really going to sit there and say that you believe that a kid with a broken back or an epileptic having a seisure is a danger to themselves or others and can only be controlled by shocking their system all to hell… then you’ve drunk the koolaid. There’s actually one right answer, and getting pulled into defending the indefensible puts you beyond “reasonable person with a point of view” and well into “I’ll make the facts fit my situation come hell or high water” territory.

And so again I say “IS BULLSHIT!” You might not be able to say what the Police should have done in the situation, but you can certainly say that they should not have done what they did.

spence-bob, with that attitude, I’ll let you get the information on your own. I treat others with respect, even when our opinions differ. In order to dialogue, I expect the same respect in return.

I could post documentation from now to the end of the week, and you’d still be the same close-minded individual you are now. My time is better spent with those who actually might be interested.

Come on, shill. This is your big chance to make us smarty-pants cop-hating liberals shut the fuck up about your beloved torture toy. Let’s see what you’ve got.

I was addressing the situation that “speedbudget” posed, and if you didn’t understand what I said, then there’s nothing further I can say that would help.

And so again I say “IS BULLSHIT!” You might not be able to say what the Police should have done in the situation, but you can certainly say that they should not have done what they did.

spence-bob, with that attitude, I’ll let you get the information on your own.

In other words, you have nothing to back up your shit. Color me not-surprised.

Fuck you, troll. I won’t do your goddamn research for you. You’re the one who wants to convince us, so you do the heavy lifting.

If you put yourself forward as an expert in defence of TASER International (which is what you appear to have come to this blog to do) then you actually can say in most of these cases what should have been done. Does TASER Int. ever encourange a suspect being hit in succession?

He won’t answer you, because either a) he doesn’t actually know, and is only here trying to defend his favorite torture toy, or b) he actually *does* know the answer, but he knows it would prove him to be the lying PR shill that he is - and he’s afraid he’s not quite good enough at obfuscation to try to bullshit his way around it.

Does TASER Int. ever encourange a suspect being hit in succession?

Source: TASER Product Warnings: Law Enforcement

“Minimize Repeated, Continuous, and/or Simultaneous Exposures. TASER device users should only use the number of ECD exposures which are objectively reasonable to accomplish lawful objective(s). Repeated, continuous, and/or simultaneous use of TASER devices should be used only when objectively reasonable given the totality of the circumstances and reasonable efforts should be made to continuously assess the circumstances to minimize the number of ECD exposures.”

In other words, you have no defense of the police Tasing people who are sick or injured?

No, my interest in TASER is strickly from the “lawful use” point of view.

The point is, I’m not here to argue ANY police abuse of power. We all know it happens, and if that’s the topic you’re interested in, no problem here. I’m just not going to go there - it’s a moot point.

Of course, I have my opinions. For example, the guy that fell after being Tased in NY. What kind of idiot shoots someone 10 feet off the ground with a device that causes him to fall? What morons!

If you have a specific question, and are willing to ask it in a respectful manner, I’ll be happy to try to answer you.

People like you are never convinced, because you’re incapable of being objective.

Fuck you, troll. I won’t do your goddamn research for you. You’re the one who wants to convince us, so you do the heavy lifting.

You should understand that mental illness and criminal activity are not mutually exclusive.  Mental illness may be a legal defense, but the acts still happen in realtime.  It has been recommended that all suspects caught in a criminal act, stop what they are doing and allow a psychiatric evaluation by a board of experts.  Upon making that determination the psychologists will inform the police as to the options they are allowed to imploy.  The process should only take a few days to weeks, and I’m sure every criminal will be happy to comply.

Seriously, police do receive training on how to identify mental illness whenever possible.  The reality is that they are responding to some incident in realtime and many of those mentally ill still have the physical capacity to injure others or themselves.  In many such cases rational discussion is inadequate to stop the behavior.  There is a dilemma that arises for police.  At the scene the public wants the crazy person stopped.  Later they become sympathetic to that individual.

Training and management are the key issues for all less lethal/nonlethal weapons.

You can also forget the torture issue.  Torture is the intent of the perpetrator, not the tool.  I’m for banning the most used tool of torture.  Unfortunately, the tobacco lobby is too strong.  ANYTHING can be used for torture.  You should also watch out for hammers as they are used in many parts of the world.  Let’s ban them too.

BTW: Mike is right about the lengths that Taser goes to provide training.  They are also extremely dilligent about updating officers as new information becomes available.

FTR: I have no relationship with Taser

Mike Lane:  Your issue seems to be with training, my friend. I really have no control over department training policies.

And yet both you and John A insist that Taser does extensive training.  Which is it?  Do they send their product out to departments with an hour’s worth of “training,” or do they do extensive training that hundreds of police departments all across the US and Canada just happen to ignore all at the same time?

John A.:  Seriously, police do receive training on how to identify mental illness whenever possible.  The reality is that they are responding to some incident in realtime and many of those mentally ill still have the physical capacity to injure others or themselves.

You missed my point:  using a Taser on a mentally ill person in the way most departments use it—to force compliance—not only doesn’t work, it will make the situation worse.  A mentally ill person is not capable of understanding and processing the directions that s/he is being given, and shocking them to get them to follow directions does no good whatsoever.

I’m guessing that you also think that diabetic shock and seizures are also “criminal behavior” that the police need to defend themselves from, even if it means shocking someone who needs immediate medical help.  As long as the cop doesn’t get a bruise, who cares if the guy having a grand mal seizure dies because the cops were too busy trying to get “compliance” to figure out why the person was combative.

(Hint to cops:  most people who have medical conditions that could affect their public behavior, like diabetes or seizures, wear this little thing called a Medical Alert Bracelet, which have only been around for 40 years or so.  Maybe checking to see if the person is wearing one before shocking them four times might be a good idea every once in a while.)

Mike Lane:

If you have a specific question, and are willing to ask it in a respectful manner, I’ll be happy to try to answer you.

That’s right, because nothing says “what I have to say speaks for itself” like complaining that you haven’t received sufficient deference!

People like you are never convinced, because you’re incapable of being objective.

...says the paid shill.

Whatever, folks. These are the same people who think that “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” is a devastating and unimpeachable argument. You know, morons.

Oh, and here are three brave cops in Canada who Tased a bedridden 80-year-old man three times, because there’s absolutely no other way that three police officers could take a knife away from a man who can’t get out of bed because he just had heart surgery.

Mike, you still haven’t answered my question.  Have any of your volunteers been tased often and repeatedly in your studies/practices/et cetera?  If they have, what was the outcome?  If not, why not?  Because from what I can see, it seems to happen more often than not.  The police tase and then immediately expect compliance with commands.  I don’t know about you, but I imagine a major, painful disruption to my nervous system would make it rather hard for me to do much of anything.  The suspect (or person with broken back or diabetic) is then tased again within seconds of the first tase.  The suspect is then tased again within seconds.  Have any of your volunteers done this?  How about two tasers at once?  I mean, if you haven’t tested it, how can you say it’s safe?  Because this is how the police are using the product BECAUSE YOUR COMPANY SAYS IT’S PERFECTLY SAFE.  If someone tells me something is perfectly safe to use, damn right I’m going to use the hell out of it.  It’s human nature.

And where in the US Criminal Code is it a capital offense to be a drug addict?

You’re avoiding the questions.  Answer them, please.

First I do not know where the “non-lethal” status came from; I have been around these less lethal weapons since about the beginning and have never heard them called non-lethal.  For Christ’s sake the bathtub is lethal.

Folks before you speak you should know what you are talking about.  The 50-50 is way out of line or tasers would have been banned long ago.  By these stats I should have been put in cardiac arrest by now.  I have volunteered to be a victim more than once, there is some discomfort but it ends the moment that the electricity is stopped.  Have you tried pepper spray? It has staying power and the pain is quite unpleasant.  I would take a taser over pepper spray any day.

b

Question: Have any of your volunteers been tased often and repeatedly in your studies/practices/et cetera?  If they have, what was the outcome?

Answer: Yes. Volunteers have been tased in just about every way you can imagine, including being shot with 2-3 TASERs at once for the full cycle, probes over the heart, multiple cycles, tased for extended cycles then jumping into a hot bath, then tasered again, getting drunk on purpose to determine effects of alcohol, or running a mile and then tased. You name it, it’s been done. As far as outcome - nothing unusual. Of course, there have been numerous injuries sustained - ie, dislocations, back injuries, muscle injuries, etc. - anything associated with strong muscle spasms. The day after I was tased, I was sore from head to toe. Same principle of those little “muscle toning” electric belts that you wear while watching TV, just on a much grander scale. 

Statement: The police tase and then immediately expect compliance with commands.

Answer: You’re way out of line on this one. I don’t know where you got this information. It’s usually the other way around. I can tell you one thing: if the police order me to put my hands where they can be seen, or get down on the ground immediately - I’m going to do so. Cops have families to go home to at the end of the day, and it only takes moment of hesitation to get killed.

Just my opinion, but 14,000 dead cops makes 400 so-called “taser deaths” seem a bit insignificant to me.

Statement: I don’t know about you, but I imagine a major, painful disruption to my nervous system would make it rather hard for me to do much of anything. 

Answer: That’s the point. The pain is avoidable - just comply.

Statement: The suspect (or person with broken back or diabetic) is then tased again within seconds of the first tase. The suspect is then tased again within seconds.

Answer: Situations that you’re referring to should be carefully reviewed, and if the officer is found negligent, be punished to the fullest extent of the law. These cases are the exception rather than the rule, but need to be dealt with immediately and completely. If the department’s TASER policy is inadequate, it needs to be fixed. More than 359,000 TASER devices are in use by over 13,000 law enforcement and U.S. military agencies, in the United States, Canada, and in more than 40 other countries around the world. More than 4,700 agencies are at “full deployment” meaning they deploy TASERs to all their patrol officers. Due to these large numbers of agencies reaching full TASER deployment, almost all of them have/are developing strict guidelines regarding the use of this device, and the ones with no set policy are just asking for trouble. 

Question: Have any of your volunteers done this? How about two tasers at once? I mean, if you haven’t tested it, how can you say it’s safe?

Answer:  Sure. Yes. I believe in the device, which is why I volunteered for a hit. I’m sure I will do it again in the near future. There are some folks that have had more than 100 exposures (voluntary). On top of all that, there have been numerous medical studies that have concluded that TASER is safe.

Statement: Because this is how the police are using the product BECAUSE YOUR COMPANY SAYS IT’S PERFECTLY SAFE. 

Answer: Where did you get that? Please… I’d really like to see where TASER says it’s perfectly safe. Another thing: the TASER device is used because it works. If it didn’t work, it would be history.

Statement: Where in the US Criminal Code is it a capital offense to be a drug addict?

Answer: Don’t know what this has to do with the conversation. Never said anything that would make you think it was.

Good story…

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/norwalkadvocate/news/ci_11250375

“Have you tried pepper spray? It has staying power and the pain is quite unpleasant. “

Ever seen cops? Numerous people sprayed with that didn’t seem affected at all. Even when being sprayed multiple times. They didn’t seem to be in any more pain then someone just getting a spray of dust in the eyes. They use it in army training and someone can still move and attack with it. Especially if you eat a lot of spicy foods such as habernos or the Bhut Jolokia.

Also if someone is supposed to be immobile for a while after being tasered then repeated taserings are not necessary and such have a police officer fired or punished. There is more then enough time to get the person in handcuffs and searched before the taser effect wears off.

tootiredoftheright, you are REALLY mistaken in you assumption that TASER effects continue after the power is turned off. They DO NOT. When the cycle is finished, you can get back up just about as quickly as you went down. Ideally, you won’t, because you don’t want another 5 seconds.

What/who gave you the idea that “someone is supposed to be immobile for a while after being tasered”?

You still did not answer the question. HAVE YOU been tasered or pepper sprayed?

Bernie Misiura on 12/17 at 02:32 AM
“Folks before you speak you should know what you are talking about . . . [Tasers] there is some discomfort but it ends the moment that the electricity is stopped.”

RE: tootiredoftheright on 12/17 at 11:21 AM

You are dead d wrong.  It also proves you know nothing about these two weapons

I am from Buffalo and all I eat is spicy food this does not make you immune.  Because people do not appear to be in pain does not mean that they are not.  Pepper spray can take a couple of seconds to work allowing time for an attack.  No it does not affect everyone the same.

Tasers DO NOT immobilize you for any period of time nor do they knock you out.  You have OBVIOUSLY been watching too much TV.  The moment the shock stops you can do anything that you could before being tased.

b

Amanda,

I have forgotten to complement you on your sense of humor “preview or blaspheme.”

b