Slashdot Mirror
Taser International Wins Lawsuit to Change Cause of Death
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Taser International recently started a legal campaign against medical examiners who claimed tasers contributed to the cause of death for several people. On Friday, an Ohio judge ruled in favor of the stun gun manufacturer (free registration may be required). While they do have a number of scientific studies on which they establish their claims, it's interesting that the alternate cause of death they champion — excited delirium — appears only in police reports on the deaths of difficult or drug-addled inmates, not in medical textbooks. Of course, that may change soon — Taser is funding and promoting research on the subject. Coroner reports such as the ones in this case contributed to the UN's opinion that taser use is torture."
Yes but there is a common cause to these deaths, police intervention with taser. Calling it something else is a lie.
At the same time, it's nice of you to bring up previous quack explanations like hysteria, especially female hysteria which was cured by rape.
Nice.. so peace officers are now equivalent to mindless, monolithic slabs of steel and concrete? Highway dividers do not think, they just obey the laws of physics, and react according to their design and construction.
Police officers, on the other hand, are thinking human beings capable of making a variety of decisions, all of which can change the outcome of encounters with "unruly individuals."
But it seems that North American cops are somehow incapable of basic self-defense, unless it involves hardware with a button or a handle on it. In many other parts of the world, "unruly individuals" are subdued using basic grappling and/or martial art skills. Something American police departments seem to have little interest in.
Check out this cop trying to arrest an unruly individual, drunk or on drugs. This officer obviously has no idea how to take control of a suspect, drunk or sober.
This cop can't even control a 90lb 15-year old girl! Then he pepper-sprays her just to show who the boss is. Unbelievable!
Compare and contrast with some of the many grappling techniques available for police officers to learn.
When properly trained in subduing unruly individuals, police officers can change the nature of the confrontation, into a situation they control. The cops in the two sample vids exhibit all the traits of loss of control of the situation: pleading, bullying, ineffective physical control, fear of becoming a victim, and reacting to that with weapons to regain control of what in other hands would be easily controlled individuals. Both lost the element of surprise when they physically engaged the subjects without an apparent goal or outcome in mind, and they both appear to lack basic takedown skills.
But hey, if they can make their jobs easier at the push of a button, why not? That's the American way!
O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
>1. It's clear that some individuals, because they were full of illegal drugs or possibly
>for other reasons, have died after being shot by tasers. It's also been asserted that at
>least one police officer has died in a training exercise after being shot by a taser;
>presumably he or she was not full of illegal drugs. So, knowing this and assuming the above
>is true, would you willingly be shot by a taser again as part of a training exercise?
If an officer died after being shot by the Taser, there was probably some condition that was agitated by the Taser, or the Taser malfunctioned and delivered sufficient amperage to cause electrocution. There is also the possibility of legal drugs causing a reaction that led to death. I am not going to be so blind or stupid as to say that the Taser *cannot* be the cause of death, but I would say that considering the thousands of non-lethal uses of the Taser, it is statistically unlikely that it will cause my death or the death of a suspect I need to subdue. I am still willing to be shot with it, because I am not willing to use any potentially questionable subdual methods on the citizens of my city without first having it used on me. I will not have myself held above the people I protect.
>2. You stated that the taser must be used appropriately, and made reference to drugs and
>unnamed medical issues. Could you define more specifically what that means? Having read the
>TFA, do you think there is a possibilty that the taser is being used inappropriately either
>by accident or on purpose?
When I reference drugs, I specifically mean cocaine, methamphetamine, LSD, and "multi-vector intoxication", which is a "cocktail" of multiple drugs both prescription and "street". In my experience, any stimulant is the most agitating factor in death or serious harm when dealing with police vs. suspect use of force, Taser or otherwise. When assessing the situation, we often have seconds to react, but in ideal circumstances we watch for rapid eye movement, heavy and rapid breathing, and someone taking off their clothes for no apparent reason. If these signs are present, I try to find an alternative to the Taser, such as a lot more officers to subdue for medical assistance. This has only happened to me once, and unfortunately even six of us could not subdue the suspect without the Taser. He threw me off of him, and I'm 6'5" tall and built large.
There is always the possibility that the Taser is accidently misused. Careful training and an honest, open assesment of the data will lead to reducing or eliminating these accidents. Deliberate misuse almost certainly happens. I've never seen it in my agency, but not all officers are idealists. There are thugs who wear a badge.
>3. As a police officer, you and your coworkers are obviously constantly in situations where
>you're subjected to serious bodily harm, and let me be the first to say that as a citizen I
>deeply appreciate it and think the police are not supported as well as they should be from
>a financial and operational perspective. That being said, do you believe that the
>mitigation of serious injury is worth the death of a suspect? Put another way, would you
>forego the use of the taser and accept increased risk of bodily harm if you thought there
>was a heightened risk of the suspect's death?
To say that we are *constantly* in dangerous situations would be an exaggeration. While the "supercop" ideal is appealing, the job is really hours of boredom or tedium, punctuated by heart-pounding terror. I'd also like to say that the citizens of Florida reward us very handsomely for our service, maybe 5% to 10% less than the private sector for equivalent experience and education. I'm very grateful to the people of Florida for my salary; I'm not wealthy, but with a sensible budget I can live quite comfortably.
To answer the question, I definitely believe in forgoing the Taser as often as possible. The Taser as designed isn't capa