Taser Deaths and Death by Taser

October 16, 2009

Exactly what is a Taser and Where Tasers are used

Filed under: Taser News — Tags: , , , , , , , — brian @ 7:00 pm

A Taser is an electroshock weapon that uses electrical current to disrupt voluntary control of muscles. Its manufacturer, Taser International, calls the effects “neuromuscular incapacitation” and device’s mechanism “Electro-Muscular Disruption (EMD) technology”. Someone struck by a Taser experiences stimulation of his or her sensory nerves and motor nerves, resulting in strong involuntary muscle contractions. Tasers do not rely only on pain compliance, except when used in Drive Stun mode, and are thus preferred by some law enforcement over non-Taser stun guns and other electronic control weapons. At the present time, there are two main police models, the M26 and X26. Both come with various accessories, including a laser sight and optional mounted digital video camera that can record in low-light situations. Taser International is also marketing a civilian model called the C2. On 27 July 2009, Taser introduced the X3, capable of subduing 3 suspects without reload.

Tasers were introduced as less-lethal weapons to be used by police to subdue fleeing, belligerent, or potentially dangerous subjects, often when what they consider to be a more lethal weapon would have otherwise been used. The use of Tasers has become controversial following instances of Taser use that have resulted in serious injury and death, and while they are far less lethal than many other weapons, the U.N. are concerned that use of Tasers may amount to torture, and Amnesty International has reported cases where they believe that their use amounted to “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment which is absolutely prohibited under international law”.

Name

Taser is an acronym, named for a fictional weapon: Thomas A. Swift’s Electric Rifle. Taser is a registered trademark. It has prompted a backformed verb to tase, which means to use a Taser on; however, to taser is also commonly used.

History

Jack Cover, a NASA researcher, began developing the Taser in 1969. By 1974, Cover had completed the device, which he named after his childhood hero Tom Swift. The Taser Public Defender used gunpowder as its propellant, which led the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to classify it as a firearm in 1976. In 1991, a Taser supplied by Tasertron to the Los Angeles Police Department failed to subdue Rodney King. Its lack of effectiveness was blamed on a faulty battery.

Taser International CEO Rick Smith has testified in a Taser-related lawsuit that the catalyst for the development of the device was the “shooting death of two of his high school acquaintances” by a “guy with a legally licensed gun who lost his temper.” In 1993, Rick Smith and his brother Tim began to investigate what they called “safer use of force option[s] for citizens and law enforcement.” At their Scottsdale, Arizona facilities, the brothers worked with the “… original TASER inventor, Jack Cover” to develop a “non-firearm TASER electronic control device.” The 1994 AIR TASER Model 34000 had an “anti-felon identification (AFID) system” to prevent the likelihood that the device would be used by criminals; upon use, it released many small pieces of paper containing the serial number of the Taser device. The US firearms regulator, the ATF, stated that the AIR TASER was not a firearm. In 1999, Taser International developed an “ergonomically handgun shaped device called the ADVANCED TASER M-series systems” which used a “patented neuromuscular incapacitation (NMI) technology.” This is due to losing control over the sphincter. In May 2003, Taser International released a new weapon called the TASER X26, which used “Shaped Pulse Technology.” On July 27, 2009 Taser International relasead a new type of taser called the X3 which can fire three shots before it must be reloaded. It holds three new type cartridges, which are much thinner than the previous model.

How Tasers Work

The Taser fires two small dart-like electrodes, which stay connected to the main unit by conductive wire as they are propelled by small compressed nitrogen charges similar to some air gun or paintball marker propellants. The air cartridge contains a pair of electrodes and propellant for a single shot and is replaced after each use. There are a number of cartridges designated by range, with the maximum at 35 feet (10.6 m). Cartridges available to non-law enforcement consumers are limited to 15 feet (4.5 m). The electrodes are pointed to penetrate clothing and barbed to prevent removal once in place. Earlier Taser models had difficulty in penetrating thick clothing, but newer versions (X26, C2) use a “shaped pulse” that increases effectiveness in the presence of barriers.

Drive Stun

Some Taser models, particularly those used by police departments, also have a “Drive Stun” capability, where the Taser is held against the target without firing the projectiles, and is intended to cause pain without incapacitating the target. “Drive Stun” is “the process of using the EMD weapon [Taser] as a pain compliance technique. This is done by activating the EMD and placing it against an individual’s body. This can be done without an air cartridge in place or after an air cartridge has been deployed.”

A Las Vegas police document says “The Drive Stun causes significant localized pain in the area touched by the Taser, but does not have a significant effect on the central nervous system. The Drive Stun does not incapacitate a subject but may assist in taking a subject into custody.” “Drive Stun” was used in the UCLA Taser incident and the University of Florida Taser incident. It is also known as “dry tasing”, “contact tasing”, or “drive tasing”.

Amnesty International has expressed particular concern about Drive Stun, noting that “… the potential to use TASERs in drive-stun mode — where they are used as ‘pain compliance’ tools when individuals are already effectively in custody — and the capacity to inflict multiple and prolonged shocks, renders the weapons inherently open to abuse.

Accessories

The TASER CAM is a specialized device designed for the Taser X26 to record audio and video when the Taser’s safety is disengaged. The CAM is integrated into a battery pack and does not interfere with the Taser’s existing function.

Users

Taser use in Phoenix increased from 71 incidents in the year 2002 to 164 incidents in the year 2003. In addition, the number of officer-involved shootings decreased by seven during this time period. In Houston, however, police shootings did not decline after the deployment of thousands of Tasers.

According to the analysis of the first 900 police Taser incidents by the Houston Chronicle, no crime was being committed and no person was charged in 350 of those cases. In addition, it has been reported that the Houston Police Department has “shot, wounded, and killed as many people as before the widespread use of the stun guns” and has used Tasers in situations that would not warrant lethal or violent force, such as “traffic stops, disturbance and nuisance complaints, and reports of suspicious people.” In Portland, Oregon, meanwhile, police found that 25 to 30 percent of the situations in which a Taser was employed met the criteria for the use of deadly force.

Although Tasers were originally proposed as alternatives to lethal force, they have entered routine use as a way to incapacitate suspects or as a “pain compliance” method at times when the use of firearms would not be justifiable. The American Civil Liberties Union alleges that, since 1999, at least 148 people have died in the United States and Canada after being shocked with Tasers by police officers. Police departments counter that while Tasers were used to subdue these individuals, their in-custody deaths were un-related to their encounter, and could have likely been caused by more traditional police impact weapons (like batons).

A recent development has included marketing Tasers to the general public. A line of pink Tasers are specifically being marketed for women. The Taser website states “Who says safety can’t be stylish?” in reference to its “latest designer TASER C2 colors” and patterns, which include leopard print patterns and a range of colors.

Legality

Australia

Taser use in Australia is varied from state to state, though possession, ownership and use of a stun gun (including Tasers) by civilians is considerably restricted, if not illegal.

Canada

According to previous interpretation of the Firearms Act, Tasers were considered to be “prohibited weapons” and could be used only by members of law-enforcement agencies after they were imported into the country under a special permit. The possession of restricted weapons must be licensed by the RCMP Canadian Firearms Program unless exempted by law. A 2008 review of the Firearms Act found that the act classifies “the Taser Public Defender and any variant or modified version of it” as “prohibited firearms”. However, Canadian police forces typically treat Tasers as “prohibited weapons”, inconsistent with the restrictions on firearms.

The direct source for this information comes from an independent report produced by Compliance Strategy Group[31] for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The report is called An Independent Review of the Adoption and Use of Conducted Energy Weapons by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. In the report that is available through access to information, the authors argued that the CEW was, for several years after its adoption by the RCMP, erroneously characterized as a prohibited “weapon” under the Criminal Code, as opposed to a prohibited “firearm.” This misunderstanding was subsequently incorporated into the RCMP’s operational policies and procedures as well as those of other police services in Canada. While the most recent RCMP operational manual, completed in 2007, correctly refers to the CEW as a prohibited firearm, a number of consequences of this error in classification remain to be dealt with by both the RCMP and other Canadian police services. Consequently, it could be argued the police in Canada may not have had the proper authority under their provincial policing Acts and Regulation to use the CEW in the first place. The point of unauthorized use by the police was also raised by Dirk Ryneveld, British Columbia’s Police Complaint Commissioner at the Braidwood inquiry on June 25, 2008.

Estonia

Tasers are not allowed in this country.

France

Tasers are used by the French National Police and Gendarmerie. In September 2008, they were made available to local police by a government decree, but in September 2009, the Council of State reversed the decision judging that the specificities of the weapon required a stricter regulation and control.

Greece

The Greek police use tasers. Greek Police Special Forces used a taser to end the hijacking of a Turkish Airlines A310 by a Turkish citizen at Athens International Airport on March 2003.

Hong Kong

Under HK Laws. Chap 238 Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance, “any portable device which is designed or adapted to stun or disable a person by means of an electric shock applied either with or without direct contact with that person” is considered as ‘arms’ and therefore, the importation, possession and exportation of Tasers require a license by the Hong Kong Police Force which would otherwise be illegal and carries penalties up to a fine of $100,000 and 14 years in jail.

Israel

Israeli police approved using Tasers. As of 16 Feb 2009, the first Tasers became available to police units. Tasers are expected to enter operational use by the Israeli Defense Forces in the near future.

Malaysia

Royal Malaysian Police are set to become the second in Southeast Asia police force after Singapore Police Force to use the non-lethal Taser X26 stun guns. The force had taken delivery of 210 units of the stun guns, known as the X26 electronic control device, which cost RM2.1 million, last year they have yet to be distributed to personnel on the ground. Taser would be included under the Firearms Act 1960. The Taser X26 set bought by Malaysian police comes with a holster and uses a non-rechargeable lithium battery able to deliver 195 cartridge shots. Policemen going on rounds will be issued four cartridges. The force began toying with the idea of using Tasers in 2003 when they purchased 80 units of the M26, the X26’s bulkier predecessor. This was not made public as it was part of a testing exercise. The Tasers were issued to policemen in Petaling Jaya, Dang Wangi in Kuala Lumpur and Johor Bahru.

Poland

Under Polish law, Tasers are not considered to be firearms. No permission is needed to buy and carry one.

UK

Tasers are considered to be ‘prohibited weapons’ under the Firearms Act and possession is banned without the written permission of the Home Secretary. The maximum sentence for possession is ten years in prison and an unlimited fine.

Taser guns are now used by British armed police as a “less lethal” weapon. It was also announced in July 2007 that the deployment of Taser by specially trained police units who are not firearms officers, but who are facing similar threats of violence, would be trialled in ten police forces.

The 12 month trial commenced on 1 September 2007 and took place in the following forces: Avon & Somerset, Devon & Cornwall, Gwent, Lincolnshire, Merseyside, Metropolitan Police, Northamptonshire, Northumbria, North Wales and West Yorkshire.

Following the success of the trial, the Home Secretary agreed on 24 November 2008 to allow Chief Officers of all forces in England and Wales, from 1 December 2008, to extend Taser use to specially-trained units in accordance with current Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) policy and guidance, which states that Taser can be used only where officers would be facing violence or threats of violence of such severity that they would need to use force to protect the public, themselves, and/or the subject(s).

A fund for up to 10,000 additional Tasers is being made available for individual Chief Officers to bid for Tasers based on their own operational requirements.

U.S.

Taser devices are not considered firearms by the U.S. government. They can be legally carried (concealed or open) without a permit in 43 states. They are prohibited for citizen use in the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin, as well as certain cities and counties. Their use in Connecticut and Illinois is legal with restrictions.

Taser International the makers of Taser Guns

Filed under: Taser News — Tags: , , , , , , , , — brian @ 6:51 pm

Taser International, Inc. (NASDAQ: TASR) is an American developer, manufacturer, and distributor of TASER electroshock guns, a handheld less-lethal weapon designed to incapacitate a single person from a distance. The company is based in Scottsdale, Arizona, USA. Taser is the most common brand of electroshock gun.

History of the company

The company was founded in September 1993 (under the name ICER Corporation) by brothers Rick and Tom Smith. The Smith brothers were upset when two friends were shot and killed in a traffic altercation in Scottsdale, Arizona. As part of earlier research, Rick Smith contacted John H. “Jack” Cover, the original inventor of the TASER system, to work on a non-firearm weapon using compressed air (or nitrogen) propulsion system. In October 1993, they signed an agreement whereby Mr. Cover licensed his technology to the company while also joining the corporation as an employee. The company name was then changed to AIR TASER, Inc.  The word “TASER” is the acronym of the fictional weapon “Thomas A. Swift’s Electric Rifle”.

In June 1994, a non-firearm version of the TASER was developed, allowing it to bypass federal and state laws that only apply to firearms, and a tracking system (the “anti-felon identification” or “AFID” system) was created. This enables the weapon to disperse confetti with serial numbers when fired and links the specific weapon to the scene where fired.

In 1998, the company adopted its current name to emphasize the company’s international expansion. In the same year, the company began marketing the weapon to law enforcement agencies and police departments, in addition to public consumers who had bought tasers for personal self-protection in prior years.

In 2001, Taser International developed its “Advanced Taser Electro-Muscular Disruption” system. In May 2001, they filed for an initial public offering and began trading NASDAQ under the stock symbol TASR. In May 2003, the company released its new Taser X26 model.

Rick Smith is the current chief executive officer, director; Tom Smith is Chairman of the Board; Jas Dhillon is Chief Strategy Officer.

Building architecture

The headquarter building has biometric access control via iris scan. The facility is keyless, has fiber optic data networks, and motion sensing light switches. It received “Best New Office Building in the State of Arizona” award by the Arizona Commercial Real Estate Magazine, Real Estate & Development Awards on February 7th, 2006.

Products

The company manufactures various TASER products and accessories for 4 markets: Law Enforcement; Consumers; Professional Security; and Military. Sample products includes,

  • AXON is a networkable computer-controlled TASER with audio-video recording.
  • X26 and M26 are electronic control devices. They use replaceable cartridges containing compressed nitrogen for propulsion.
  • XREP is a wireless Taser fired from a 12 gauge shotgun: see Electroshock weapon, Wireless long-range electric shock weapon.
  • C2 is a self-defense electronic control device for consumers.
  • Shockwave is a system that simultaneously deploys six TASER cartridges.
  • TASER X3 is a electronic controlled device that will be launched July 27, 2009

Technology

TASER devices use a replaceable cartridge containing compressed nitrogen to deploy two small probes that are attached to the handheld device with insulated conductive wires. The devices transmit controlled pulses of electricity that are designed to stimulate skeletal muscles of the human body without affecting the heart or other vital organs. The pulses affect the sensory and motor functions of the peripheral nervous system and cause incapacitation. The electricity from a device will transmit through clothing up to one inch per probe or two inches cumulative. Generally, currents approaching 100 mA are lethal if they pass through sensitive portions of the body. The TASER device transmits between 2.1 to 3.9 mA of current.

Military use

The TASER is largely unregulated and has never been studied for safety or effectiveness by the Consumer Product Safety Commission. But for years the Defense Department has studied TASERs as part of military research into weapons designed to be effective without being deadly. Examples of use includes: 12th Security Forces Squadron training to improve the number of options for police; the U.S. military police to help keep order in Iraq; and robots. The company has affiliation with the the Defense Technical Information Center.

Issues

According to Taser International, as of October 9, 2007, the company has not lost any product liability lawsuits:

This lawsuit represents the fifty-ninth (59th) wrongful death or injury lawsuit that has been dismissed or judgment entered in favor of TASER International. This number includes a small number of police officer training injury lawsuits that were settled and dismissed in cases where the settlement economics to TASER International were significantly less than the cost of litigation. TASER International has not lost any product liability lawsuit.

On June 6, 2008, the company lost its first product-liability suit. A San Jose, California, jury said Taser had failed to warn police in Salinas, California, that prolonged exposure to electric shock from the device could cause a risk of cardiac arrest, attributing the death to inadequate training by the company.

In late January 2008, the public safety committee of the 39th Parliament of the Canadian House of Commons launched an investigation into their use, after the death of Robert Dziekanski. Additionally, the Braidwood Inquiry is a public inquiry being conducted in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, examining the safety of Tasers and this particular death. The inquiry is a two-stage investigation being conducted by the Court of Appeal of British Columbia and a retired Yukon Territories Justice.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation commissioned National Technology Systems (NTS) to conduct a series of tests finding that some TASER X26 Stun Guns manufactured before 2005 “deliver a higher level of electricity than the manufacturer promises”. The company’s partial reponse was,

The results from the testing are generally consistent with the specifications provided by TASER International and which would be expected from such tests. TASER acknowledges that there are four data that appear to be outliers — instances where current increased as resistance increased which would not be expected based on the laws of physics. TASER International intends to contact NTS to suggest that the tests be repeated to verify the results.

Fire risk involved with Taser Guns

Filed under: Taser News — brian @ 6:45 pm

Fire risk

Tasers come with express instructions not to use them where flammable liquids or fumes may be present, such as filling stations or by police raiding methamphetamine labs, as tasers, like other electric devices, have been found to ignite flammable materials.

An evaluative study carried out by the British Home Office investigated the potential for tasers to ignite CS gas. Seven trials were conducted, in which CS gas canisters containing methyl isobutyl ketone (a solvent used in all CS sprays utilized by the United Kingdom police) were sprayed over mannequins wearing street clothing. The tasers were then fired at the mannequins. In two of the seven trials, “the flames produced were severe and engulfed the top half of the mannequin, including the head”. This poses a particular problem for law enforcement, as some police departments approve the use of CS before the use of a taser.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Taser Complaints

Filed under: Taser News — Tags: , , , , , , — brian @ 6:44 pm

Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP – 18 June 2008 report

The Commissioner for Public Complaints made several recommendations regarding the use of tasers including:

  • RCMP members with less than five years of operational experience should be prohibited from using Taser stun guns.
  • Individuals who are Tasered about whom police have no knowledge of underlying medical conditions receive prompt medical attention, thereby possibly saving their lives.

Compliance Strategy Group Independent Review of the RCMP – June, 2008

Compliance Strategy Group (John Kiedrowski, Principal Consultant, Michael Petrunik and Ronald-Frans Melchers, Associate Consultants) conducted An Independent Review of the Adoption and Use of Conducted Energy Weapons by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police[ http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ccaps/cew/kiedrowski_report_e.htm] that was completed in June 2008, but only released under access to information and privacy around September 12, 2008. The report is available from the RCMP under access to information, but is censored (e.g., no recommendations). The report as released by the RCMP may be found on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation website www.cbc.ca. The Report reviews how the RCMP made the decisions to introduce the conducted energy weapons, training, policies and procedures, and accountability. The report is approximately 150 pages and provides an excellent analysis on how a police force adopted the Taser. The authors of the report argued that the police did not due their due diligences, is concerned abut training and the issues of accountability. The report also pointed out that the police in Canada have misclassified the taser as a prohibited weapon whereas under the criminal code it is referred to as a prohibited firearm, and refers to excited delirium as “folk knowledge”.

Legal issues and court cases involving Taser Guns

Filed under: Taser News — Tags: , , , , , , , — brian @ 6:41 pm

According to Taser International, tasers are intended “to incapacitate dangerous, combative, or high-risk subjects who pose a risk to law enforcement officers, innocent citizens, or themselves”.

Tasers are illegal or subject to legal restrictions on their availability and use in many jurisdictions.

Police officers in at least five US states have filed lawsuits against Taser International claiming they suffered serious injuries after being shocked with the device during training classes.

The UN Committee Against Torture (CAT), an agency charged with overseeing the application of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, arrived at the conclusion on Friday, November 23, 2007, that the use of the electric pulse Taser gun constitutes a “form of torture” and “can even provoke death.”

Summit County, Ohio Medical Examiner Lisa J. Kohler cited Taser use as a cause of death in three cases, Mark D. McCullaugh, Dennis S. Hyde, and Richard Holcomb. Taser International sued, and on May 2, 2008, visiting judge Ted Schneiderman ordered the Medical Examiner to remove all references to “Taser” in the reports and change the cause of death in McCullaugh’s case from “Homicide” to “Undetermined.” Deputy Sheriff Stephen Krendick remains on trial for McCullaugh’s murder.

On June 9, 2008 Taser International lost its first Product-Liability Suit.

Advantages and disadvantages of Tasers

Filed under: Taser News — Tags: , , , — brian @ 6:37 pm

Supporters say that electroshock guns are a safer alternative to devices such as firearms. Taser International uses the term “non-lethal” as defined by the United States Department of Defense – which does not mean the weapon cannot cause death, but that it is not intended to be fatal. Non-lethal weapons are defined as “weapons that are explicitly designed and primarily employed so as to incapacitate personnel or material, while minimizing fatalities, permanent injury to personnel, and undesired damage to property and the environment.”

Supporters say that electroshock weapons and tasers are more effective than other means including pepper-spray (an eye/breathing irritant), batons or other conventional ways of inflicting pain, even hand guns, at bringing a subject down to the ground with a minimum physical exertion.

Critics, however, charge that police officers who are risk-averse resort to tasers in situations where previously they would have used more conventional, less “extreme” techniques, such as trying to reason with a cornered suspect.

Taser Use on Police

Filed under: Taser News — Tags: , , , , — brian @ 6:35 pm

Taser International recommends that users be tased during training.

On 5 July 2005 Michael Todd, then Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, England, let himself be shot in the back with a Taser, to demonstrate his confidence that tasers can be used safely. This was captured on video, and the video was released to the BBC on 17 May 2007. He was wearing a shirt and no jacket. When tased, he fell forward onto his chest on the ground, and (he said afterwards) “I couldn’t move, it hurt like hell,” he said after recovering. “I wouldn’t want to do that again.”

Although tests on police and military volunteers have shown Tasers to function appropriately on a healthy, calm individual in a relaxed and controlled environment, the real-life target of a Taser is, if not mentally or physically unsound, in a state of high stress and in the midst of a confrontation. According to the UK’s Defence Scientific Advisory Council’s subcommittee on the Medical Implications of Less-lethal Weapons (DoMILL), “The possibility that other factors such as illicit drug intoxication, alcohol abuse, pre-existing heart disease, and cardioactive therapeutic drugs may modify the threshold for generation of cardiac arrhythmias cannot be excluded.” In addition, Taser experiments “do not take into account real life use of Tasers by law enforcement agencies, such as repeated or prolonged shocks and the use of restraints”.

Police officers in at least five US states have filed lawsuits against Taser International claiming they suffered serious injuries after being shocked with the device during training classes.

On September 30, 2009, the manufacturer issued a warning and new targeting guidelines to law enforcement agencies to aim shots below the chest centre mass as “avoiding chest shots with ECDs avoids the controversy about whether ECDs do or do not affect the human heart”  Calgary Police Service indicated in a news interview that the rationale for the warning was “new medical research that is coming out is showing that the closer probe to heart distances have a likelihood, or a possibility, that they may affect the rhythm of the heart”.

Taser Studies

Filed under: Taser News — Tags: , , , , , — brian @ 6:33 pm

A study published by the American Journal of Cardiology found that California police departments that introduced Tasers experienced significant increases in the numbers of in-custody sudden deaths and firearm deaths in the first full year following deployment. The rates declined to predeployment levels in subsequent years. No significant change in the number of officer injuries was found.

A study by the Potomac Institute concluded; “Based on the available evidence, and on accepted criteria for defining product risk vs. efficacy, we believe that when stun technology is appropriately applied, it is relatively safe and clearly effective. The only known field data that are available suggest that the odds are, at worst, one in one thousand that a stun device would contribute to (and this does not imply “cause”) death. This figure is likely not different than the odds of death when stun devices are not used, but when other multiple force measures are. A more defensible figure is one in one hundred thousand.”

After hearing many witnesses and briefs the report  by the Canadian House of Commons, Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security makes 17 recommendations as a result the death due to the repetitive tasering of a Polish immigrant at the Vancouver International airport.

An investigation by the Canadian Press and Canadian Broadcasting Corporation found that one-third of those shot by a Taser by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police received injuries that required medical attention as a result. The news agencies used Freedom of Information requests to obtain the Taser-use forms filled out by RCMP officers from 2002 to 2007.

The study  done by Pierre Savard, Ing., PhD., Ecole Polythechnique de Montreal, et al., for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), indicated that the threshold of energy needed to induce deadly ventricular fibrillation decreased dramatically with each successive burst of pulses. The threshold for women may be less .

Although the TASER  is a programmable device, the controlling software does not limit: a) the number of the bursts of pulses and the time between bursts while the trigger is held down continuously, or b) the number of times the shock cycles can be repeated. Thus the design does not adequately reduce the likelihood that the victim’s heart enters into a deadly ventricular fibrillation.

According to a study presented at the Heart Rhythm Society’s 2007 Scientific Sessions, Tasers may present risks to subjects with implanted pacemakers. However, a study conducted by the Cleveland Clinic in 2007 on a single animal determined that a standard five-second TASER X26 application “does not affect the short-term functional integrity of implantable pacemakers and defibrillators… The long-term effects were not assessed.”

A Chicago study suggests that use of the Taser can interfere with heart function. A team of scientists and doctors at the Cook County hospital trauma center stunned 6 pigs with two 40-second Taser discharges across the chest. Every animal was left with heart rhythm problems and two of the subjects died of cardiac arrest. One of the subjects died three minutes after being shot indicating, according to researcher Bob Walker, that “after the Taser shock ends, there can still be effects that can be evoked and you can still see cardiac effects.”

In 2006, the US National Institute of Justice began a two-year study into taser-related deaths in custody.

San Francisco cardiologist and electrophysiologist Dr. Zian Tseng told the Braidwood Inquiry that a healthy individual could die from a Taser discharge, depending on electrode placement on the chest and pulse timing. He said that the risk of serious injury or death is increased by the number of activations, adrenaline or drugs in the bloodstream, and a susceptible medical history. After Tseng began researching Tasers three years ago, Taser International contacted him, asking him to reconsider his media statements and offering funding.

A February 2005 memorandum from the Aberdeen Proving Ground, a United States Army weapons test site, discouraged shocking soldiers with Tasers in training, contrary to Taser International’s recommendations. The Army’s occupational health sciences director affirmed the Taser’s effectiveness, but warned that “Seizures and ventricular fibrillation can be induced by the electric current.” and that “the practice of using these weapons on U.S. Army military and civilian forces in training is not recommended, given the potential risks.”

A study conducted by electrical engineer James Ruggieri and published January 2006 in the Journal of the National Academy of Forensic Engineers measured a Taser’s output as 39 times more powerful than specified. The study concluded that the discharge is sufficient to trigger ventricular fibrillation, a 50 percent risk according to electric safety standards. Ruggieri said that electricity breaks down skin tissue, decreasing its resistance and increasing current through the body.

Taser Safety

Filed under: Taser News — Tags: , , , , , — brian @ 6:30 pm

Taser International has admitted in a training bulletin that repeated blasts of a taser can “impair breathing and respiration“. Also, on Taser’s website it is stated that, for a subject in a state known as “excited delirium” (a controversial term in itself), repeated or prolonged stuns with the Taser can contribute to “significant and potentially fatal health risks“. In such a state, physical restraint by the police coupled with the exertion by the subject are considered likely to result in death or more injuries. Critics alleged that electroshock devices can damage delicate electrical equipment such as pacemakers, but tests conducted by the Cleveland Clinic found that Tasers did not interfere with pacemakers and implantable defibrillators.

It is assumed that tasers as well as all other high voltage stun devices can cause cardiac arrhythmia in susceptible subjects, possibly leading to heart attack or death in minutes by ventricular fibrillation (which leads to cardiac arrest and if not treated immediately to sudden death). People susceptible to this outcome are sometimes healthy and unaware of their susceptibility.

Critics argue that although the medical conditions or illegal drug-taking among some of the casualties may have been the proximate cause of death, the electric blast of the taser can significantly heighten such risk for subjects in an at-risk category. This suggests that tasers and other electroshock weapons would be dangerous to use on people with certain medical conditions and yet, since police officers will typically not know about a person’s medical history or possible drug use, this entails a risk of death with virtually any suspect.

While they are not technically considered lethal, some authorities and non-governmental organizations question both the degree of safety presented by the weapon and the ethical implications of using a weapon that some, such as sections of Amnesty International, allege is inhumane. As a consequence, Amnesty International Canada and other civil liberties organizations have argued that a moratorium should be placed on taser use until research can determine a way for them to be safely used. Amnesty International has documented over 245 deaths that occurred after the use of tasers. Police sources question whether the taser was the actual cause of death in those cases, as many of the deaths occurred in people with serious medical conditions and/or severe drug intoxication, often to the point of excited delirium.

Critics of taser use, however, argue that “excited delirium” is not a valid medical term and is not listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.  Tasers are often used as an alternative to talking and waiting for a suspect to comply, striking the suspect with a baton or shooting them with firearms. Only the later two of which have a much higher chance of serious injury and death than the taser, even using the highest estimates of possible taser-related deaths. The term “less-lethal” is being used more frequently when referring to weapons such as tasers because many experts feel that no device meant to subdue a person can be completely safe. The less-lethal category also includes devices such as pepper spray, tear gas, and batons. One problem when comparing the Taser to other forms of force is that no precise statistics are kept in the U.S. on policing related deaths or the use of excessive force. In 2001, the New York Times reported that the U.S. government is unable or unwilling to collect statistics showing the precise number of people killed by the police or the prevalence of the use of excessive force. There has been one case report in the medical literature of a person suffering spinal fractures after being shocked by a taser. The U.N. has declared: “TASER electronic stun guns are a form of torture that can kill.”

Powered by WordPress