TASER OPINIONS?

[Roy Harding]

That sort of use-of-force info is generally kept by the training branches of the various Departments.  I don't think it is public info, although maybe you could dig it up for the RCMP, since they are federal.  I am also of the belief that there is a national use of force symposium (meeting? conference?) every year or so where these sort of issues are bandied about.  As for whether or not it is published is anyones guess. 
I know around our parts they get used all the time, and there isn't anything too sexy to report about them.

(Emphasis added by Roy)

Thanks, ZC - I'll start with the RCMP and see what is available publicly.

Your last sentence makes the point that I THINK the stats will show - IE, TASERS have been used THIS many times, and only THIS many deaths resulted from it (and of those 18 THIS many were attributed directly to the use of the TASER).  I guess what I'm driving at is that if the chances of dying from being TASER'd are less than the chances of winning the lottery, then there IS no problem.  On the other hand, if the stats say something else, then TASER use MAY need to be reconsidered.

I've followed this issue with interest, and it has frustrated me that such statistics aren't out there in the public realm (or at least I haven't run across them - and I read a LOT of newspapers every day)  - you get vague stats such as "18th death in recent years", which are MEANINGLESS unless placed in context.  It's the context I'm interested in.

If I dig anything up (keep in mind that I'm a rank amateur at this type of thing), I'll be sure to post it here.


Roy

 

[Koenigsegg]

In what IN HOC SIGNO posted, it is stated that tasers have been fired by the RCMP over 3000 times since their adopting in 2001.  So at least going off that, those 18 deaths make the chances of dieing from them no worse than 0.6%.  No matter how you look at it, it CAN NOT be worse than that.  In fact, it isn't even that bad, because the 3000 is less than what they have really fired.  That number is just the RCMP, and the 18 deaths are for all across Canada, and not just by the RCMP (Or so I assume).

So the odds are less than 0.6%.

 

[Roy Harding]

In what IN HOC SIGNO posted, it is stated that tasers have been fired by the RCMP over 3000 times since their adopting in 2001.  So at least going off that, those 18 deaths make the chances of dieing from them no worse than 0.6%.  No matter how you look at it, it CAN NOT be worse than that.  In fact, it isn't even that bad, because the 3000 is less than what they have really fired.  That number is just the RCMP, and the 18 deaths are for all across Canada, and not just by the RCMP (Or so I assume).

So the odds are less than 0.6%.

Thank you.

I saw that - but the 18 deaths reported are NOT all from RCMP incidents, therefore the .6% figure you calculated MUST actually be lower.  I'm interested in the totality of the issue - IE - X Number of TASER "pulses" fired since year X - in the same time X deaths happened during the incidents, of those X deaths, X are directly attributable to TASER use.

You've made a good start, based on the available material - once again, thank you.


Roy

 

[zipperhead_cop]

and of those 18 THIS many were attributed directly to the use of the TASER

From what I understand, there has never been a death directly linked to the taser. There have been in-custody deaths where the taser happened to be deployed, but as mentioned a few times, they would likely have died in any case. 
Somewhat unrelated, but still passingly pertinent:
A few years back we had a guy die in a bar fight from a single punch to the head.  This person had been warned by his doctor that he had a very thin blood vessel in his brain, and that he should avoid physical altercations.  This came up, because the guy was a dickhead and like to pick fights.  He was about 6'1" and 300 lbs.  Typical bar bully. 
However, he still goes to one of our dive bars (The Little Memphis, for you locals) and proceeds to make sexually derogatory comments to a woman whose boyfriend is quite a bit smaller.  Boyfriend steps up and tub-o-goo challenges him to a fight.  Boyfriend clocks him, T-O-G goes down.  Couple leaves, not thinking much of anything. 
I guess my point is that there are people out there who have known physical conditions that most people would avoid aggravating.  But these people cannot help their inner-dickwad, and still do what they feel like doing.  Invariably, they run afoul of the law and we have to deal with them.  So when they do end up calving out, we get panned for "excessive force" or "brutality".  Funny, these peoples family wouldn't spit on their face if it was on fire, but once the popo is involved, the dollar signs start flying around and the media is all too happy to feed the flames. 
Here is a guaranteed statistic:  100% of people who don't act like idiots will not be injured by a taser weapon.

 

[Koenigsegg]

You're very welcome.  I just thought I would give you and others something to fall back on just in case more indepth information is harder to come across.

 

[Koenigsegg]

Article link:
http://www.hour.ca/news/news.aspx?iIDArticle=13498

And here is a relevent part of said article:

"We don't have a policy about when you use and when you don't use," explains Montreal police spokesman Sgt. Ian Lafrenière. "Unfortunately for police, you never know [what you may be confronted with]. And just because you have the recipe doesn't mean you're going to make the perfect cake."

He cites a personal example of when simple physical force was not enough. "There was this one girl at La Ronde who was 15 years old, and we were six of us on her and we still couldn't control her. You never know what drugs they are on sometimes."

And therein lies the problem: It is starting to become apparent that the people who are most likely to be encountered by police in a situation that would cause a TASER to be used are the very people who should not be TASEd.

A recent American medical study (Strote and Huston) identified factors associated with the sudden death of 37 men, aged 18-50, after having been subjected to a TASER: "Illegal substance use was found on toxicology screening for 78.4 per cent; within that group, 86.2 per cent were found to have been using stimulants. A diagnosis of excited delirium was given for 75.7 per cent of the cases. Use of a TASER was considered a potential or contributory cause of death in 27 per cent." In short, psychological and medical factors - in combination with various restraint practices, as we will doubtless see in the case of Dziekanski - play an enormous role in TASER fatality rates, considerations that don't exist in usage policy because usage policy itself is largely non-existent."


I'm not saying I agree or disagree, but from what I have heard police officers saying in my area...what the author is saying has merit.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

Senator Kenny wading in again this morning on the Taser question.

Published: 2007-12-15 in The Chronicle Hearld, Halifax NS
Time for a strategic retreat on Taser use


By COLIN KENNY


RCMP Commissioner William Elliott says he doesn’t want a moratorium on the use of Tasers. Nor does Paul Kennedy, Commissioner for Public Complaints Against the RCMP, recommend a moratorium in his interim report on Taser use within the agency.

So why am I recommending a self-imposed RCMP moratorium on the use of Tasers? Because there is no way of getting to Mr. Kennedy’s goal – more restrained and capable use of Tasers by the RCMP – without one.

There are two hurdles to making Taser use beneficial that a moratorium would help solve. The first is that too many RCMP officers are undertrained in the use of Tasers, which Mr. Kennedy points out.

Until the RCMP can assure the public that every officer using a Taser is well trained and understands the consequences of misuse, the officers should not be using them.

Second, the RCMP is using outdated Tasers that will need to be replaced. That will take time – to order the new Tasers, get them delivered, and train personnel in their use.

The Taser – manufactured by Taser International Ltd. – is meant to be a less lethal alternative to the gun, to be used when other options such as words, headlocks, pepper spray and batons aren’t up to defusing situations in which the physical safety of officers or other people appears to be in danger.

That last part is important – no police force should be using Tasers in situations in which someone’s personal safety isn’t threatened. Yet Mr. Kennedy’s report reveals that RCMP policy allows for the use of Tasers even in cases of simple resistance, rather than in combative situations in which there is risk that an officer or anyone else could be killed or suffer grievous bodily harm.

Mr. Kennedy believes that Tasers should not be used in simple cases of resistance. He is dead right.

He also laments the fact that officers as well as their supervisors should be given better training on the use of these weapons. But here is where he confuses me. When the RCMP first began using Tasers, officers were required to retrain on them every year – as they are required to retrain on the use of pistols, pepper spray and batons. Somehow the requirement slipped to every three years on Tasers, while it stayed at one year for the other control devices.

That makes no sense. Mr. Kennedy recommends recertification every two years. Surely if baton and pepper spray retraining is required every year, Tasers should be as well.

The Auditor General released a report in 2006 emphasized that too many RCMP officers are young, and too many are not fully trained. The report said that 16 per cent of newly graduated cadets had not received what is supposed to be mandatory field coaching – a valuable form of mentoring. She also noted that 12 per cent of field coaches had less than two years of experience in the force, and that 18 per cent of those coaches hadn’t taken the courses that are supposed to be required to do the coaching.

These gaps can’t be redressed without a moratorium. Nor can the fact that, as Mr. Kennedy points out, most RCMP supervisors have not, themselves, been trained in the use of Tasers. They should be, if they are going to make the decision as to when their units are sufficiently trained on the weapons to use them wisely.

They should also be using modern Tasers, not the outdated Tasers that the cash-strapped RCMP is stuck with. The older model they use, the M26, doesn’t accommodate audio-video equipment. The modern X26 Tasers allows users to add two ounces of audio-video equipment for approximately $400 a weapon. This equipment has been available since 2005. It records everything that the Taser is pointed at as soon as the safety lock comes off.

How much more likely is a police officer to show restraint in the use of a Taser if everything that officer does is going to be recorded? I suggest there would be a lot more restraint. Furthermore, reviewing officers will have a clear picture of what transpired from the officer’s perspective.

City police forces in places like Ottawa and Edmonton use Tasers equipped with audio-video equipment, which helps turn the Taser into what it is capable of being: an effective, civilized alternative to riddling suspects with bullets.

It is crucial that the RCMP convince the public that these Tasers – which when used correctly and with restraint can save lives – aren’t going to be misused. If there are many other mishaps with Tasers, the public won’t be calling for a moratorium – it will be calling for abolition.

This is supposed to be a law-and-order government. It needs to quit starving the RCMP of funds and allow the force to buy up-to-date Tasers, or Canadians are going to lose an important law enforcement device.

Our police officers are often confronted with situations in which it is extremely difficult to tell whether there is a hidden weapon or hidden madness. Far too many Canadian police officers have died when people they were trying to treat with civility declined to return the favour.

These officers live through terrifying moments that most of us can’t imagine. But none of this justifies police using Tasers improperly. The public won’t put up with it, nor should it.

We’ve got to stop using them until every Canadian inside and outside our police forces knows they are being used properly. The RCMP needs to retreat before it advances in the use of Tasers. A little short-term pain will lead to a lot of long-term gain.

( kennyco@sen.parl.gc.ca)

’If there are many other mishaps with Tasers, the public won’t be

calling for a moratorium – it will be calling for abolition.’

 

[Roy Harding]

I've been digging, but although there are many sources which list the number of deaths in various jurisdictions, there are none I could find which would indicate how many non-lethal Taser deployments were conducted in those jurisdictions.  There doesn't seem to be anybody keeping track of such information. 

It is my understanding that some (perhaps MOST?) Police Services require a report of some kind after an Officer deploys his Taser - so the statistics exist (perhaps only in individual departments), but aren't easily discovered (by an amateur at any rate).  I suspect an Access To Information request may have to be made to get at this information - a route I'm not willing to personally go down.  I don't have the time or resources to devote to such an endeavour.  I have written to various MSM publications suggesting that such research may be worthwhile for them.  We'll see.

In the meantime, during my poking around, I came across MANY reports regarding Taser use.  I found this one both very informative, and as it was completed by a Canadian group (Canadian Police Research Centre), I thought others here may find it as interesting as I:

http://www.taser.com/research/statistics/Documents/Canadian%20Police%20Research%20Centre%20FINAL%208%2005.pdf

Although the document is located at www.taser.com it was not completed at the behest of the Taser industry and makes, I believe, an unbiased assessment of Taser use.

I will continue to look for statistics regarding number of Taser deployments compared to number of Taser involved deaths, but I don't hold much hope for success, at least on the open sources available to me (coupled with my admitted amateur non-existent research abilities).

Roy

Edited to add:  right after posting the above, didn't I come across this little gem:  http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=169acb15-4a5f-417e-840b-a8e12e1a7bc1

The search continues.

 

[bigguy]

As a police veteran of 35yrs service I think the Taser is a good weapon when used properly and under the correct conditions. There are times when it's use has ended in death but the alternative is the sidearm which would cause many more deaths.

There has been discussion about the "old days" before Tasers. I went thru those old days when the only weapon was the 38 spl. To apprehend someone you had three options: 1) talk them into submission 2) trick them into submission 3) fight them into submission 4) the last resort only when used to prevent loss of life was to shoot . In those days we did our best  to do the job with options 1 and/or 2 because using 3 usually hurt like hell.  I think today that the new breed is tending to skip the first 2 options and to go directly to the Taser as  it lowers the personal risk factor and removes the need to get down and dirty.  There are still many officers out there everyday not equipped with a Taser and able to survive

Chief Closs and the Kingston Police have learned the hard way that Tasers kill  and they have studied the matter at great length and their policies reflect that. By limiting the use of Tasers  to supervisors and ERT they are ensuring the weapon is being used by experienced and well trained officers and thereby reducing then risk of causing more deaths.  But as the Auditor General says, there are alot of inexperienced officers out there. This will be the situation  for some time as the attrition rate in all Forces nation wide will continue to be high for several years  .

I think LEA's have to re-think this issue and then re-tool their training programs to instill the idea that Tasers are far more lethal than originally thought and that their use has to be much more restricted. 

The world is changing and the new breed officer is faced with many more challenges than we "oldtimers" ever were. Today's officers are better educated, better trained, better equipped and better paid but I don't envy their job one bit. I wish them all the best.

bigguy

 

[a_majoor]

While the thrust in Canada seems to be to limit or eliminate the use of Tasers (and reduce the number of "use of force" options), in the United States things are swinging the other way:

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/1129taser1128.html#

Taser parties stunning success with female clients
Social events aimed at female clients and their personal safety

Nicole Gomez
Special for The Republic
Nov. 29, 2007 12:00 AM
Pack up your Tupperware, and get ready for a new kind of party.

Dana Shafman, founder of Shieldher Inc., has recently started sponsoring Taser parties, giving women a chance to buy Tasers for $300, or $350 with a laser beam to help with aiming.

Shafman's parties allow women to get together to discuss concerns and learn about the Taser C2, the newest consumer Taser that is similar to the device police officers use. "I felt that we have Tupperware parties and candle parties to protect our food and house, so why not have a Taser party to learn how to protect our lives and bodies," Shafman said.

She has had parties in Phoenix and Scottsdale by invitation. Guests have the opportunity to shoot the Taser for the first time at a cardboard cutout during the parties. For safety reasons, no alcohol is served and no one is actually Tasered.

After her first Taser party in Scottsdale recently, Shafman said, "I think the party was spectacular. It opened up opportunities for people to ask questions and get informed about the Tasers."

Debi McMahon was excited to get her Taser activated.

"I feel like I'm 6 feet tall and 250 pounds. I'm going to buy one for my mom. It's going to be her 81st birthday present."

The Tasers come in color choices of pink, blue, silver or black, which caused the women at the Scottsdale party to worry that their small children might see the colored Tasers as a toy.

Caily Scheur, a mother of two, said, "I want to protect my children from (the Taser) just as much as I want to protect myself by using it."

Scheur said that once the Taser enters her house, she will keep it in a locked box under her bed with the key high enough so her children cannot open the box.

But some of the other women planned on telling their children what the Taser does and why it should be handled only by Mommy and Daddy.

Shafman created Shieldher Inc. in February and became the only Taser party coordinator in the nation, she said.

Shafman used to sleep with knives in her nightstand for protection until she came across Taser International Inc.

"I did not understand why they weren't doing marketing," she said, so the idea materialized to sell the Tasers at house parties or office parties. Shafman learned more about the product and volunteered to be shot by a Taser so she could inform others about the product. "I want to provide something that will allow people to protect themselves in and outside of their house."

The Taser C2, which is not considered a firearm, comes with a manual, training DVD and one replaceable C2 cartridge that loads into the device. The cartridge contains two small probes that can reach an attacker up to 15 feet away. After the trigger safety cover is released, the Taser is aimed at the target and the push of a button to activates the probes. The small probes either attach onto the attacker's clothing or into their skin, releasing up to 50,000 volts in their body and rendering them motionless. The Taser sends volts for a maximum of 30 seconds, compared with police Tasers that only last for five seconds. Shafman said the consumer model's voltage lasts longer to give the owner more time to escape.

There is no special certification to own one, but owners must be at least 18 and pass a background check before the Taser can be activated. A call to Taser headquarters or accessing their Web site will activate the device once the background check is complete. Shafman warned that the device is prohibited in seven states, so check the Taser Web site for more information before purchasing or traveling with it.

"As a dealer, I take a cut of all the Taser C2's and Taser C2 accessories that pass through Shieldher," she said.

Shafman also said the party hosts will receive a free Taser if 10 devices are sold during their party. She hopes to get the parties going nationwide, sending out representatives and attending the parties herself when possible.

 

[The_Falcon]

I've been digging, but although there are many sources which list the number of deaths in various jurisdictions, there are none I could find which would indicate how many non-lethal Taser deployments were conducted in those jurisdictions.  There doesn't seem to be anybody keeping track of such information. 

It is my understanding that some (perhaps MOST?) Police Services require a report of some kind after an Officer deploys his Taser - so the statistics exist (perhaps only in individual departments), but aren't easily discovered (by an amateur at any rate).  I suspect an Access To Information request may have to be made to get at this information - a route I'm not willing to personally go down.  I don't have the time or resources to devote to such an endeavour.  I have written to various MSM publications suggesting that such research may be worthwhile for them.  We'll see.

In the meantime, during my poking around, I came across MANY reports regarding Taser use.  I found this one both very informative, and as it was completed by a Canadian group (Canadian Police Research Centre), I thought others here may find it as interesting as I:

http://www.taser.com/research/statistics/Documents/Canadian%20Police%20Research%20Centre%20FINAL%208%2005.pdf

Although the document is located at www.taser.com it was not completed at the behest of the Taser industry and makes, I believe, an unbiased assessment of Taser use.

I will continue to look for statistics regarding number of Taser deployments compared to number of Taser involved deaths, but I don't hold much hope for success, at least on the open sources available to me (coupled with my admitted amateur non-existent research abilities).

Roy

Edited to add:  right after posting the above, didn't I come across this little gem:  http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=169acb15-4a5f-417e-840b-a8e12e1a7bc1

The search continues.

I posted a link to the stats for Toronto Police earlier in this thread.  From what I gathtered from reading several police service board minutes is that agencies in Ontario are required to record all usage of tasers, however not all of them post the info on the net, and your probably right you would need to file an ATI request (or spend your time digging through police service board minutes).

 

[Roy Harding]

I posted a link to the stats for Toronto Police earlier in this thread.  From what I gathtered from reading several police service board minutes is that agencies in Ontario are required to record all usage of tasers, however not all of them post the info on the net, and your probably right you would need to file an ATI request (or spend your time digging through police service board minutes).

Yes indeed you did - I read the link.  What has me stymied is a lack of similar reporting nation wide.  When I try to find statistics, I get LOTs of hits which report the number of Taser related deaths - but NONE that put the number in anything close to context.  This is true of the MSM in both the US and Canada - very frustrating.

 

[Chester Rush]

This is my first post on this Forum and this particular thread caught my attention.  About 2 weeks ago a friend of mine drank a little too much at the bar in our hometown and got into a fight with the bouncers. after beating up the bouncers, police were called to the scene. Immediatly he engaged them in a fight and they were forced to taser him 3 times before he was subdued.  His personal opinion was that he was glad they used the taser gun before he seriously injured himself or someone else.  We can only hope that this taught him a lesson and he won't be drinking anymore.  My opinion is that the Taser is a great tool when used responsibly, and yes it sometimes causes death, but handguns have a better chance of causing death.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

While the thrust in Canada seems to be to limit or eliminate the use of Tasers (and reduce the number of "use of force" options), in the United States things are swinging the other way:

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/1129taser1128.html#

Just what we need.....not only will handguns be stored in nightstands for little kids to find but now tasers too....what a brilliant idea!  

 

[armyvern]

Something smells around here.

Do tasers burn the skin? They are way out of my lane ... just wondering? Can someone answer --- I'm in a receiving mood right now.  ;D

 

[Shamrock]

Can someone answer --- I'm in a receiving mood right now.  ;D

Is this the Verninatrix asking?

 

[Cheshire]

Bigguy....

Small correction..... :-[

"Ontario's chief coroner has ruled the death of a 43-year-old Kingston man was not caused by a Taser gun.
Dr. Jim Cairns said the death of the man, who died hours after being shot with a Taser Sunday morning, was caused by a drug overdose.
"I can state categorically that the Taser did not play any role whatsoever in his death," Cairns said."

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/08/09/taser_040809.html

Wasn't the taser that killed him, it was the dope.

 

[The_Falcon]

Yes indeed you did - I read the link.  What has me stymied is a lack of similar reporting nation wide.  When I try to find statistics, I get LOTs of hits which report the number of Taser related deaths - but NONE that put the number in anything close to context.  This is true of the MSM in both the US and Canada - very frustrating.

And you think MSM and those with an agenda would really, want to report the stats for all the times tasers are used and no death occurs, then they wouldn't be able to demonize the use of device.  Although you would think that with all the controversy around them, police agencies would make the stats easier to find/obtain.

 

[Roy Harding]

And you think MSM and those with an agenda would really, want to report the stats for all the times tasers are used and no death occurs, then they wouldn't be able to demonize the use of device.  Although you would think that with all the controversy around them, police agencies would make the stats easier to find/obtain.

I'm not that naive - your last sentence above is what is frustrating me - I THINK the stats would prove that these weapons are GENERALLY non-lethal - and the chances of them proving otherwise are an "acceptable risk" associated with their use.  And yet - stats aren't out there.

 

[The_Falcon]

I'm not that naive - your last sentence above is what is frustrating me - I THINK the stats would prove that these weapons are GENERALLY non-lethal - and the chances of them proving otherwise are an "acceptable risk" associated with their use.  And yet - stats aren't out there.

Didn't mean to suggest your naive, forgot to add the appropriate smilie