Slashdot Mirror
Tasers Implicated In Far More Deaths Than We Previously Thought (fastcompany.com)
tedlistens writes: Independent studies have showed that when deployed correctly -- according to "guidelines" manufacturer Axon offers to police -- Tasers reduce injuries among both officers and the people they subdue. But amid a lack of official data about their use and effects, a new report by Reuters found 1,005 incidents in the U.S. in which people died after police stunned them with the electrical weapons, most since the early 2000s. The Taser was ruled to be a cause or contributing factor in 153 of those deaths -- far more than the 24 cases the company has counted. Reuters found that 9 in 10 of those who died were unarmed and one in four suffered from mental illness or neurological disorders; In 9 of every 10 incidents reviewed, the deceased was unarmed; More than 100 of the fatal encounters began with a 911 call for help during a medical emergency. Earlier this year, Axon rebranded, dropping the name Taser International to underscore its focus on body cameras and digital evidence, which is meant in part to add new transparency to fatal police encounters.
It's important to point out that the company has aggressively challenged any medical examiner who determines that a Taser killed someone or contributed to their death, in many cases suing to have the official cause of death changed. Therefore I am skeptical of the 153 figure.
Next time you can try to subdue the 230lb gorilla high out of his gourd on Meth then... Let me know how that works out for you.
Did you fail the literacy test? I wrote, "I'm certain there are some instances where it's a legitimate option". How did you not see that?
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Tasers should only be used as an alternative to using a gun. That means if the cop did not have justification to kill the person, he did not have justification to use a taser. Every time a cop uses a taser, the same review process for using a firearm should happen. Unfortunately, that isn't happening. Cops use tasers to torture people into compliance, often as a way to force people to follow unlawful orders. Reviews seldom happen unless someone dies. And even then, it's the standard rubber stamping "we investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong," bullshit. Lots of police departments have dropped tasers because they were paying out so much money for lawsuits because of too many cops abusing their authority.
This isn't a taser problem. It's a blue line problem. Every cop who witnesses another cop breaking the law and does not report it is guilty of being an accessory. In every instance where a bad cop finally gets charged, the ten cops who witnessed the act and didn't report it should be charged as well.
The first damn step to a fix is to take away immunity. Why is a city (thus the taxpayers) paying out millions in lawsuits when the cop clearly violated the law and written procedures? If the city tries to cover it up, yes, they should pay part. But if the city does a proper investigation then disavows a bad cop, the taxpayers should not be on the hook. Take the criminal cop's pension.
-- Will program for bandwidth
You forgot one very important bit of advice. Be white. If you're black then even while doing everything the police tell you to do you still might get shot.
There was a case in (I believe it was) West Virginia where an officer was talking someone out of being a problem, and appearantly being successful. Some other officers showed up and shot the now quiet "perpetrator". They were praised. The officer who talked the guy down was .... here I can't quite believe my memory. So I looked it up. http://ktla.com/2017/05/12/law...
Well, this doesn't directly address the use of tasers, but it addresses how justified I assume the use of force often is. I know that good people join the police force, but it often seems that either they don't stay around, or they get corrupted.
FWIW, insurance claims don't substantiate the claim the being a policeman is unreasonably dangerous compared to other professions. It *is* dangerous compared to being a computer programmer, but not compared to being a forester or, I believe, an electric company lineman. (I'd really need to check the list of more dangerous professions again to be certain, but policeman wasn't in the top 10.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.