# Tasers



## MJS (Jun 30, 2008)

A Taser is supposed to be a less-lethal tool.  Its something that is brought up, usually when there is a shooting that involves a LEO.  "Why did they have to shoot him?  Why didn't they use a Taser?"  That is usually the first thing you hear.  

On the flip side, there have been some people who've died after Taser use.  Of course, right away the fingers are pointed to the Taser as the source of the death, instead of taking into consideration that the person may have had a medical condition or that the person was under the influence of drugs.  

I didn't post any links to use as a guideline.  If someone wants to post one to support something they say in their post, thats fine.  

Basically I'm just looking to discuss everyones views on this tool.  We have alot of LEOs on board here, so I'm sure we'll have some great feedback!!

Mike


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 30, 2008)

MJS said:


> A Taser is supposed to be a less-lethal tool.  Its something that is brought up, usually when there is a shooting that involves a LEO.  "Why did they have to shoot him?  Why didn't they use a Taser?"  That is usually the first thing you hear.
> 
> On the flip side, there have been some people who've died after Taser use.  Of course, right away the fingers are pointed to the Taser as the source of the death, instead of taking into consideration that the person may have had a medical condition or that the person was under the influence of drugs.
> 
> ...


To date, Taser International has only lost one lawsuit where the Taser was held to be the cause of death; in most, if not all, cases of deaths following a Taser hit there have been complicating factors like high levels of narcotics in the blood stream.

But that's really irrelevant to what I think you're asking.  The Taser is LESS LETHAL, not non-lethal or harmless.  It's much less likely to cause serious bodily harm than being shot with a .40 calibre lead bullet from my Glock 22, struck repeatedly with any sort of baton, or even with "empty" hands.  It's also much less likely to get the cop hurt, and it's much more reliable than pepper spray.  It is a great tool -- but it's only one tool.  Imagine a handyman who came to your house, and only had a hammer, and said he could fix anything and everything with his hammer...  There are many jobs where the hammer is just plain not the correct tool, right?  It's the same thing with the Taser or any other tool a cop has available.  In almost any case, for example, where the suspect has lethal force options available and ready, the Taser is not the best tool.  At a minimum it would need to be backed up with lethal force options.  A Taser would be a terrible choice in an environment where a lot of gasoline or some other flammable vapor was present, or for someone on a ledge where they might fall to their death...  And so on.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 10, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> To date, Taser International has only lost one lawsuit where the Taser was held to be the cause of death; in most, if not all, cases of deaths following a Taser hit there have been complicating factors like high levels of narcotics in the blood stream.
> 
> But that's really irrelevant to what I think you're asking.  The Taser is LESS LETHAL, not non-lethal or harmless.  It's much less likely to cause serious bodily harm than being shot with a .40 calibre lead bullet from my Glock 22, struck repeatedly with any sort of baton, or even with "empty" hands.  It's also much less likely to get the cop hurt, and it's much more reliable than pepper spray.  It is a great tool -- but it's only one tool.  Imagine a handyman who came to your house, and only had a hammer, and said he could fix anything and everything with his hammer...  There are many jobs where the hammer is just plain not the correct tool, right?  It's the same thing with the Taser or any other tool a cop has available.  In almost any case, for example, where the suspect has lethal force options available and ready, the Taser is not the best tool.  At a minimum it would need to be backed up with lethal force options.  A Taser would be a terrible choice in an environment where a lot of gasoline or some other flammable vapor was present, or for someone on a ledge where they might fall to their death...  And so on.


 Even that lawsuit is on appeal, and is not a 'product liability' lawsuit but a failure to train lawsuit where the jury felt that Taser should train against multiple extended duration uses of the Taser, meaning for 40 or 50 seconds.  And even that one is likely to be thrown out on appeal.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 10, 2008)

MJS said:


> A Taser is supposed to be a less-lethal tool.  Its something that is brought up, usually when there is a shooting that involves a LEO.  "Why did they have to shoot him?  Why didn't they use a Taser?"  That is usually the first thing you hear.
> 
> On the flip side, there have been some people who've died after Taser use.  Of course, right away the fingers are pointed to the Taser as the source of the death, instead of taking into consideration that the person may have had a medical condition or that the person was under the influence of drugs.
> 
> ...


 Basically folks like Amnesty International are alleging 'a couple hundred deaths' correlated with Taser usage, many dying minutes or hours after the Taser was administered, MOST involving subjects in a state of 'excited delirium' and mania, almost all the time drug induced, typically from hyper-stimulants such as Cocaine and Methamphetamines.

In short, the people who get Tasered in these situations have often already taken lethal amounts of cocaine or methamphetamine that is very likely to kill them.  This overdose manifests itself as bizarre, provocative and violent behavior....which is the very kind of behavior that results in the police getting called to the scene initially, and results in the need for the application of the Taser, as hyper-stimulant usage makes an individual exceptionally strong and pain resistant.

The FACT is that, over the years different methods were employed on this same group of people.  Pepper spray, Carotid Neck restraints, Swarm tactics, Baton strikes, Hog Tieing......and whatever the Law Enforcement control technique du jour, the same numbers of people were DYING!  

Several years ago Amnesty International was saying that Pepper Spray was killing people.....that had approximately 100 people 'Killed by Pepper Spray' and were calling for a moratorium on OC Spray usage until 'independent study' could verify it's safety.

Before that it was hog-tieing that was 'killing people'......

Before that Neck restraints were 'killing people'.....

Throughout all those years the SAME people were dying under the SAME identical situations, in the EXACT same manner, in EXACTLY identical numbers......the only thing that changed is the techniques used to restrain them.

Correlation doesn't equal causation.....the only variable that HASN'T changed in in-custody deaths is hyper-stimulant usage and excited delirium.  Amnesty International and it's ilk are either ignorant, dishonest are insane to claim that different things are killing the same people in the exact same manner.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jul 10, 2008)

The fact that Tasers occassionally kill a few people doesn't bother me much, when the situation for such force arises.  As others have noted, beats a bullet or a baton.  My problem is that probably because Tasers are seen as "harmless" they are being used when the situation doesn't call for it.  Like on 6 and 12 year olds.


----------



## Drac (Jul 10, 2008)

Empty Hands said:


> The fact that Tasers occassionally kill a few people doesn't bother me much, when the situation for such force arises. As others have noted, beats a bullet or a baton. My problem is that probably because Tasers are seen as "harmless" they are being used when the situation doesn't call for it. Like on 6 and 12 year olds.


 
We had a 13 year old girl at a local carnival that had been smoking *"wet"* .When we advised her to leave the area she charged the 2 officers with teeth and nails...Had I been licensed at the time to carry the Taser I would have used it..She had the strenght to fight 2 large officers and unlimited energy and she felt no pain..Her screaming " Get offa me" drew a large crowd..The Taser would have ended this little scene quickly..Our Tasers have the camera and sound unit..So when she shows up in court dressed in her Sunday best  the judge , jury. etc..etc.. can see and hear what we did..



"wet cigarettes: Cigarettes dipped in formaldehyde left to dry and then smoked"..


----------



## Archangel M (Jul 10, 2008)

Theres some BIG 12-13 yo out there too. Under 10 though? That would take some explaining. Not that it was improper, but I would want to know why it was chosen.

I think the Taser is as close to the "magic arrest wand" for non-compliant subjects as we have to date. Not perfect (what is) but better than anything else Ive seen.


----------



## Drac (Jul 10, 2008)

Archangel M said:


> Theres some BIG 12-13 yo out there too. Under 10 though? That would take some explaining. Not that it was improper, but I would want to know why it was chosen.
> 
> I think the Taser is as close to the "magic arrest wand" for non-compliant subjects as we have to date. Not perfect (what is) but better than anything else Ive seen.


 
Boy did you say a mouthful..Dealing with juveniles on the streets are becoming a* nightmare *..Many are armed and will fight or shoot at the drop of hat...


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 11, 2008)

Empty Hands said:


> The fact that Tasers occassionally kill a few people doesn't bother me much, when the situation for such force arises. As others have noted, beats a bullet or a baton. My problem is that probably because Tasers are seen as "harmless" they are being used when the situation doesn't call for it. Like on 6 and 12 year olds.


 Not one Taser has ever been shown to have killed anyone.  That is the problem with the discussion.  Correlation does not equal causation....just because you die after being Tasered doesn't mean the Taser killed you anymore than dying after watching a Seinfeld rerun means that Seinfeld is potentially lethal.

That having been said, there are situations where use of the Taser is less than ideal.  The '6 year old Tasered by police' stories are a case in point, and officers need to keep in mind that it's important not only to do the right thing, but APPEAR as though you're doing the right thing.  

Are there cases where Tasering a 12 year is necessary?  ABSOLUTELY!  What do you do with a 12 year old armed with a butcher knife threatening to harm himself and others?  But it does seem as though some officers are a little quick to yell 'Taser, Taser, Taser'.....each situation must be judged on the facts presented to the officer at the time, however.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 11, 2008)

Archangel M said:


> Theres some BIG 12-13 yo out there too. Under 10 though? That would take some explaining. Not that it was improper, but I would want to know why it was chosen.
> 
> I think the Taser is as close to the "magic arrest wand" for non-compliant subjects as we have to date. Not perfect (what is) but better than anything else Ive seen.


 EXACTLY!  And when it happens and it's justified, the Department needs to explain the details of the situation to the media.


----------



## Adept (Jul 11, 2008)

We don't have tasers over here, but something has been playing on my mind:

OC spray is highly flammable.

Tasers produce a spark.

If you were to spray someone, and then taser them, would they go up like a roman candle?


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 12, 2008)

Adept said:


> We don't have tasers over here, but something has been playing on my mind:
> 
> OC spray is highly flammable.
> 
> ...


It's a valid concern, depending on the carrier used for the OC in the spray, and in some cases the propellant.  It has happened.  Most OC providers have either shifted entirely to or provide a non-flammable option for their spray in response.


----------



## Skpotamus (Jul 12, 2008)

.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 12, 2008)

Adept said:


> We don't have tasers over here, but something has been playing on my mind:
> 
> OC spray is highly flammable.
> 
> ...


 SOME OC Spray is flammable.....many modern sprays are not.


----------



## Drac (Jul 12, 2008)

Adept said:


> We don't have tasers over here, but something has been playing on my mind:
> 
> OC spray is highly flammable.
> 
> ...


 


jks9199 said:


> It's a valid concern, depending on the carrier used for the OC in the spray, and in some cases the propellant. It has happened. Most OC providers have either shifted entirely to or provide a non-flammable option for their spray in response.


 

Well said JKS..They cover that during the training..They douse a guy with Jack Daniels and nothing happens..They use the older OC sprays and he ignites..Maked sure the OC you carry is the new stuff..


----------



## Archangel M (Jul 12, 2008)

While I tend to carry whatever I can carry. I think I would just replace my OC with the Taser and not worry about it.


----------



## Drac (Jul 12, 2008)

Archangel M said:


> While I tend to carry whatever I can carry. I think I would just replace my OC with the Taser and not worry about it.


 
I hear ya..Anytime I've used OC or been around another officer that has decided to dose some perp with a shot of OC, the cross contamination is a real pain to deal with..


----------



## NinjaJax (Sep 3, 2008)

Adept said:


> We don't have tasers over here, but something has been playing on my mind:
> 
> OC spray is highly flammable.
> 
> ...




All OC sprays as of late are NOT flammable.  Maybe the old stuff was, but not anything an officer carries today is.


----------



## VegasM4 (Sep 13, 2008)

I've used the Taser or "Electronic Control Device" several times on suspects.It is an extremely valuable less lethal tool.In fact the Taser has _*saved*_  numerous lives of suspects.


----------



## Drac (Sep 14, 2008)

VegasM4 said:


> I've used the Taser or "Electronic Control Device" several times on suspects.It is an extremely valuable less lethal tool.In fact the Taser has _*saved*_ numerous lives of suspects.


 
Well said...I've pulled mine a few time but never had to use it...Usually the sight of the red targeting dot focused on their person is enough to elicit compliance..


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Sep 18, 2008)

NinjaJax said:


> All OC sprays as of late are NOT flammable.  Maybe the old stuff was, but not anything an officer carries today is.


  Sorry to contradict you but that's DANGEROUSLY inaccurate.....ALL fogger based OC's will flame without exception.

Streams will put out flame, but firing a fogger across a flame source will turn it in to a flame thrower......regardless of brand.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Sep 18, 2008)

Archangel M said:


> While I tend to carry whatever I can carry. I think I would just replace my OC with the Taser and not worry about it.


 That's great, but keep in mind that the Taser is contraindicated in situations where flammable materials are nearby......such as meth labs, gas station parking lots, situations where suspects have doused themselves in flammable materials.

A Joplin cop was killed and another seriously injured a couple years back when a suicidal suspect turned on all the gas in his house before their arrival.  They struggled with him as he tried to reenter the residence and Tasered him to prevent him from going back inside......igniting the gas that had built up in the house, killing the suspect and one officer and seriously injuring the other.

http://www.policespecial.com/inthelineofduty/2004/04-120-Nielson.htm

The Taser is a wonderful device and has it's uses.....but I haven't removed my OC Spray and Baton from my belt just yet as they each fulfill roles the others don't.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Sep 18, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> To date, Taser International has only lost one lawsuit where the Taser was held to be the cause of death; in most, if not all, cases of deaths following a Taser hit there have been complicating factors like high levels of narcotics in the blood stream.


 Update on that case....it looks like they are likely to win that one on appeal.


----------



## kyosa (Sep 27, 2008)

The Taser is a very usefull tool but only one of many tools that officers have.  Never become over-dependant on any one tool.  I've run into situations where the Taser could not be deployed and other tactics had to be used.  When I have used the Taser it has been 100% effective.  I just completed my 3rd Taser instructors course this past week.  21 years as a law enforcement officer and the Taser is the single best tool or item that has come out since I started in law enforcement.  Thats crazy when you think about it-when I started with my department in 1987 we didn't have fax machines or computers or pepper spray.  We had to drive an hour and a half to serve paperwork, now we just fax it!  We had to deal with violent persons with empty hands tactics unless they had a weapon.  Most people know enough about the Taser that when it is drawn they don't want any part of it and will comply with your orders.  It has really changed the nature of law enforcement and how we do business.


----------



## ben (Sep 28, 2008)

Although it's rare, a Taser can also be ineffective if the target is enraged.

Here's an example where the target only responded to the Taser after the fourth time he was stunned. The first time he simply pulled one of the probes out of his arm and kept coming. 

http://thedailytimes.com/article/20080505/NEWS/228557898

I've also heard of this being possible after a sufficient amount of training in internal arts but I don't have a link for that.


----------



## kyosa (Sep 28, 2008)

ben said:


> Although it's rare, a Taser can also be ineffective if the target is enraged.
> 
> Here's an example where the target only responded to the Taser after the fourth time he was stunned. The first time he simply pulled one of the probes out of his arm and kept coming.
> 
> ...


 
A couple things to note on this.  The darts do sometimes fall out or the wires break when the suspect hits the ground which means he doesn't feel any effect.  The drive stun doesn't cause NMI or neuro-muscular incapacitation and only causes pain, therefore a focused combative person, very drunk and/or drugged up persons or emotionally disturbed persons can and frequently do fight through the effects.  The beauty of the Taser is that for the first time LE officers have a tool that doesn't only rely on pain compliance.  Pepper spray, flash bangs, joint locks, pressure points etc. all rely on pain to gain compliance.  When you get NMI or neuro muscular incapacitation it doesn't matter how much pain they can fight through-it creates a body lock and generally drops em to the ground.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Sep 28, 2008)

ben said:


> Although it's rare, a Taser can also be ineffective if the target is enraged.
> 
> Here's an example where the target only responded to the Taser after the fourth time he was stunned. The first time he simply pulled one of the probes out of his arm and kept coming.
> 
> ...


 Those situations result from insufficient spread between the darts, one dart hits or similar failures.

The fact is that a human being cannot 'will' himself to overcome the Taser wave when a sufficiently large area of muscle mass is being stimulated. 

Now if an insufficiently small amount of skeletal muscle is effected, it's merely pain, and can be overcome with sufficient self control.


----------

