# Taser more powerful than an electric chair?



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 22, 2005)

Well, it seems as though USA Today was in such a hurry to paint the M/X 26 Taser as a public menace, that they decided to just flat out distort reality. 

http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/3808_0_2_0_C/

According to USA Today, the Taser packs a punch of 2,100 to 3,600 Amps, making it over 100 times more powerful than an electric chair, at 6 t 20 amps, and at about the same power as the third rail on a subway (4,000 to 10,000 amps). Now that's some information that's sure to convince people how dangerous Tasers really are.

Trouble is, USA Today had to move a decimal place or two to come to that figure...6 decimal places actually. USA Today turned the actual output, 0.0021 to 0.0036 amps in to that magical, provocative figure of 2,100 to 3,600 Amps, in order to make the vastly distorted claim of Tasers dangerous product.

Now what do we call moving 6 decimal places? It's either an act of incredible stupidity or a brazen, bold face lie (fake, but accurate, perhaps). I find the whole thing astounding. Apparently USA Today doesn't have enough anecdotal evidence of Tasers dangers, so they decided to misplace a few decimal points (see also: Lie) to make their point. 

This isn't an isolated incident, but rather, a good example of where the debate on the Taser has gone. Those who want to see the device banned or highly restricted, will apparently stop at nothing to reach those goals.  

Anyone who claims this reporter wasn't biased needs to look closer at the facts at hand.  Taser International has cooperated in every way to cooperate in releasing available information about their product.  The power output is available on their website, and they had been in contact with USA Today before this article reached print...the information was available to them, but the truth apparently wasn't good enough, so they decided to rig the numbers.  I'll keep that in mind next time I read any USA Today article.


----------



## kenpochad (Jul 22, 2005)

if you follow a cops derictions there is no need to fear the taser


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 22, 2005)

kenpochad said:
			
		

> if you follow a cops derictions there is no need to fear the taser


 That's what a reasonable person would conclude. The reality, however, is that policy and political action isn't always directed by reasonable people.  Reasonable people, for example, don't purposely alter information that is easily accessible for the purposes of altering public opinion.


----------



## hemi (Jul 22, 2005)

I am by no means an expert but I do work around electricity everyday at work. I have to service 277 volt and 110 volt light fixtures and outlets HOT all the time. And some times have to work on 480 volt systems, we even have some equipment that uses 4160 volts but we leave those to TXU electric company. So for them to say that a taser has an output of 2,100 to 3,600 Amps is crazy. In truth one tenth of 1 amp can kill you. Now they would be correct in stating that a taser might output 60,000-100,000 Volts but no amps. Even that can stop your heart but the amp/heat output would not in itself kill you. As you say that USA Today stated it, if a taser could produce that much amperage 2100 to 3600 amps and you were to zap someone the current would flow down through the body find a great deal of resistance since the body does not make a good conductor. The current would take the path of least resistance and blow a leg off or make a hole in your body to get to ground.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 22, 2005)

2004hemi said:
			
		

> I am by no means an expert but I do work around electricity everyday at work. I have to service 277 volt and 110 volt light fixtures and outlets HOT all the time. And some times have to work on 480 volt systems, we even have some equipment that uses 4160 volts but we leave those to TXU electric company. So for them to say that a taser has an output of 2,100 to 3,600 Amps is crazy. In truth one tenth of 1 amp can kill you. Now they would be correct in stating that a taser might output 60,000-100,000 Volts but no amps. Even that can stop your heart but the amp/heat output would not in itself kill you. As you say that USA Today stated it, if a taser could produce that much amperage 2100 to 3600 amps and you were to zap someone the current would flow down through the body find a great deal of resistance since the body does not make a good conductor. The current would take the path of least resistance and blow a leg off or make a hole in your body to get to ground.


 It's an outrageous distortion on USA Today's part. 0.0021 to 0.0036 amps is the actual output, not 2100 to 3600 as they claimed. In effect, USA Today claimed that the Taser 1,000,000 times more powerful than it really is.  A mistake not easily explainable as "a misplaced decimal point", since it takes 6 decimal point misplaces to reach that number.  Further, it's not a typo, as they then used that "mistake" to support their statement that a Taser is more powerful than the electric chair.  

I think USA Today is going to be paying out some MONEY.  Taser may end up owning Gannett communications before this is over with.  I can see this kind of blatant libelous statement costing Gannett 10's of millions of dollars IF they settle.


----------



## arnisador (Jul 22, 2005)

As an EE student, I was taught that a tenth of an amp could kill if it passes through the chest; that one to two amps could actually be less lethal because it sometimes shocks the heart cold rather than sending it into fibrillation as a tenth of an amp can; and that six amps or more was almost certain death (severe burns).


----------



## Shizen Shigoku (Jul 22, 2005)

Did they really say that tasers could deliver 2-3 _thousand_ amperes of current?!!

That is rediculous!!

Is that even possible?
The wires on a taser don't look very thick. Could they even handle that much current in such a short amount of time?


For a 60,000 V taser, that much current has about 200,000,000 Watts of power!!!!!

Is there no one at USA Today that knows math?


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 22, 2005)

Shizen Shigoku said:
			
		

> Did they really say that tasers could deliver 2-3 _thousand_ amperes of current?!!
> 
> That is rediculous!!
> 
> ...


 I'm not sure it's a math problem.  I think it's more of a truth problem.  They didn't really have to know math well, as Taser had provided them the product data, including the Amps.  An error that makes the Taser a million times more powerful?  Hard to believe.  

Further, USA Today clearly stated in their article that the the Taser was more powerful than the electric chair, using the faulty data as proof.  

The "error" is less an error of fact, and more an error of honesty.  In USA Today's biased attempt to distort the reality on the Taser and it's safety, USA Today was just a little too obviously biased and got had.


----------



## arnisador (Jul 22, 2005)

When I visited Fermilab in the 80s, they told me that they used a 2000 amp spike to liberate the particles from the gold foil.

We're talking research physics levels of energy! Yes, imagine what the power would be if it even had a small voltage drop across the leads.


----------



## bignick (Jul 23, 2005)

Perhaps they meant to say microamps, while not a lie, it's still a way of distorting and making the amperage seem to be higher than it is...Although there were obviously other distortions of the truth in addition to that in the article.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 23, 2005)

bignick said:
			
		

> Perhaps they meant to say microamps, while not a lie, it's still a way of distorting and making the amperage seem to be higher than it is...Although there were obviously other distortions of the truth in addition to that in the article.


  Possible except for one glaring problem....they managed to get the amps of electricity, the third subway rail, and lightening correct.  The only thing misrepresented was the taser.


----------



## bignick (Jul 23, 2005)

That leads me to believe it wasn't just a simple oversight of microamps vs. amps


----------



## CanuckMA (Jul 23, 2005)

It might be as simple as an editor reading the specs as 21mA and not understanding the difference between m and M in scientific notations.


----------



## Marginal (Jul 23, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> When I visited Fermilab in the 80s, they told me that they used a 2000 amp spike to liberate the particles from the gold foil.
> 
> We're talking research physics levels of energy! Yes, imagine what the power would be if it even had a small voltage drop across the leads.


If they could manage that much power, why are they wasting time with little wires rather than simply developing particle beam weapons? Must be some darned impressive batteries.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 23, 2005)

CanuckMA said:
			
		

> It might be as simple as an editor reading the specs as 21mA and not understanding the difference between m and M in scientific notations.


  If that were the case, why the subsequent comparisons to the electric chair, the third subway rail, and lightening.  They managed to get those specs right.  Further, Taser International has offered it's technical assistance to any media organization in the effort of an accurate portrayal of it's product.  Taser should have been asked about the truth the accusation.  

What ended up happening, however, is that USA Today ended exaggerated the power output of the Taser by a MILLION times, and then using that erroneous information as evidence of Taser's lethality.  

Again, I smell a HUGE financial problem for Gannett communications over this snafu.  Even if it was a matter of a mistake, it's a HUGE avoidable mistake. Huge error of HUGE lie, either way, it's gonna cost them.


----------



## arnisador (Jul 23, 2005)

Yes, publications do get sued over errors like these. Someone could be out some serious cash over this.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 23, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Someone could be out some serious cash over this.


And, most likely, out of a job.


----------



## Tgace (Jul 23, 2005)

Most of the reporters who write about any weapons seem to be ignorant hacks when it comes to details. I cant count how many times pistols have been called "assault weapons", semi-auto rifles called "machine guns" etc. And these are the people who mold public opinion on these topics.

I think much of it goes to show bias and agenda IMO. From the reporters to the editor to the owners.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 23, 2005)

Tgace said:
			
		

> Most of the reporters who write about any weapons seem to be ignorant hacks when it comes to details. I cant count how many times pistols have been called "assault weapons", semi-auto rifles called "machine guns" etc. And these are the people who mold public opinion on these topics.
> 
> I think much of it goes to show bias and agenda IMO. From the reporters to the editor to the owners.


  I'm not so sure i'm willing to chalk it all up as sheer ignorance.  I have to wonder at what point the agenda gets in the way of objective journalism.  The willful disregard of any objective standards should be a concern to anyone on either side of the political divide.


----------



## mrhnau (Aug 31, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Yes, publications do get sued over errors like these. Someone could be out some serious cash over this.


http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/050701/taser_international_gannett_lawsuit.html?.v=8

Should be interesting. I don't own a taser, but own some shares, so I do have a horse in this race ;-)


----------



## heretic888 (Aug 31, 2005)

Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."


----------



## punisher73 (Aug 31, 2005)

Thought this might be of interest to some of you folks on the board.  I was down for my sister's wedding this past weekend and my new brother-in-law was talking to one of the other groomsmen (John) and they asked me about if I had been tased.  I told them that I had and John asked me about my experience with it and said that he was going to be getting it soon as well.

He works for the company that does the marketing/ad work for taser.  I asked him about the video that we saw before getting tased and he helped put that together.  The conversation turned towards this article and he was pretty ticked about it and said that they spent almost 2 hrs going over the technical data with the paper to make sure they got it right.  Needless to say after the article they are going to attempt to sue the paper for what they printed.


----------

