A Tour of Taser HQ 334
Soychemist writes "Walk into the Taser headquarters in Scottsdale, Arizona and it may seem like you are on an episode of Get Smart. The foyer is like a fortress, with giant steel doors and biometric identification systems. Inside, factory workers meticulously assemble the less-lethal weapons by hand and then put them through a battery of safety tests. In addition to making pistol-shaped devices, the company also produces the electronic equivalent of a claymore mine, which hurls dozens of electrified needles at the push of a button and electronic shotgun cartridges that deliver a powerful jolt."
Tasers are lethal (Score:3, Informative)
Taser are NOT "non-lethal."
They have killed many times. Amnesty International says 351 people have been killed by tasers in police hands. Although they are marketed as non-lethal and safe, they are most definitely not.
Information on taser deaths:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/us-human-rights/taser-abuse/page.do?id=1021202
http://www.justicenewsflash.com/2009/08/31/dallas-wrongful-death-lawyer_200908312018.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/14/crimesider/entry5013690.shtml
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0730taser30.html
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jun2009/tasr-j19.shtml
http://www.startribune.com/13841301.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126936.100-taser-guns-raised-deaths-in-custody.html
http://www.taserdeaths.org/
Their marketing is part of the problem. Because they are seen as "safe," officers are more likely to use them in situations where it is unnecessary. There are many viral videos where the police officer goes directly to the taser as soon as the person asks a question or protests in any way. (I would post them, but youtube is inaccessible from my work.) They are more likely to escalate a situation and use force because they believe the taser to be safe. For example, there was one incident a woman was tased in front of her kids after protesting an unjustified traffic ticket. The officer in question was about a foot taller and outweighed her by around 100 lbs, yet felt threated enough that using a weapon was justified even though the woman made no aggressive movement against him at all. Thankfully she didn't die, the ticket was dismissed and she is currently in the process of filing a lawsuit. (http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/08/mom_in_minivan_tasered_in_traf.html)
Re:and all I can think (Score:5, Informative)
Based on the following excerpt, from page 19 of the X26C operator's manual, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that "more humanitarian" would be seen as a defect. The last three lines are particularly... Suggestive.
"Page 19
TASER® X26C Operating Manual
DRIVE-STUN BACKUP
Drive-stun capability is available with or without a TASER Cartridge installed. The drive-
stun mode will not cause NMI and generally becomes primarily a pain compliance option.
Probe deployment is usually considered more desirable, even at close range. Some of the
advantages include:
Drive-stun is only effective while the device is in contact with the subject or the
subject's clothing. As soon as the device is moved away, the energy efiect stops.
Deploying the probes allows the user to create distance between the user and the
subject while maintaining control.
Due to automatic reflex actions, most subjects will struggle to separate from the
TASER device. When the TASER device is used in the drive-stun mode and the subject
struggles to get away it may be difficult to maintain contact between the device and
the subject.
If the probes are deployed, even at very close range, the user may be able to use
drive-stun to another portion of the body that is farther away from the probes,
thereby resulting in enhanced NMI effect.
If the drive-stun is not effective, evaluate the location of the drive-stun and consider an
additional cycle to a different pressure point.
When using the drive-stun, push (drive) the front of the TASER X26C firmly against the body
of the subject. Simply "touching" the X26C against the subject is not sufficient. The subject
is likely to recoil and try to get away from the stun electrodes. It is necessary to aggressively
drive the front of the X26C into the subject for maximum efiect.
The drive-stun works more effectively when aggressively applied to pressure points on nerve
bundles. This includes the brachial area, common peronial, mastoid, and pelvic triangle. The
TASER X26C must be actively depressed or aggressively driven into the nerve bundles in a
"drive-stun" manner to be effective in the drive-stun mode.
RECOMMENDED DRIVE-STUN AREAS FOR MAXIMUM EFFECT
Drive the X26C into the following areas for maximum effectiveness.
Carotid (sides of neck) (see warning below).
Brachial plexus tie-in (upper chest).
Radial (forearm).
Pelvic triangle (see warning below).
Common peronial (Outside of thigh).
Tibial (calf muscle).
WARNING: Use care when applying a drive-stun to the neck or pelvic triangle. These areas
are sensitive to mechanical injury (such as crushing to the trachea or testicles if applied
forcefully). However, these areas have proven highly effective targets."
Re:Less Lethal... (Score:5, Informative)
You don't want to rely on pain for compliance. It just doesn't work on all people. The electric shock of a taser screws with the target's muscles, it's not just pain.
Grab on to a non-pulse electric fence sometime near the fencing unit. Try to let go.
Re:Less Lethal... (Score:3, Informative)
How does that matter to it being clearly "less-lethal" than a claymore mine?
And why would the police use it anyway? THe description in the article refers to "Military personnel" at "checkpoints".
Re:Taser Use (Score:5, Informative)
Before tasers, an officer wasn't allowed to just knock a suspect out with a nightstick if he was worried he'd try and run. How is using a Taser different? Both are incapacitating, and both carry a risk of fatal injury.
I don't understand the relevance of this point, unless you're trying to imply that people who dislike indiscriminate use of tasers are dislike it because it makes it harder for them to kill cops at traffic stops.
Saying "Period." after a sentence seems to be some sort of shorthand for "please don't question that bit; it's a little shaky". If an unarmed shoplifter is running from police, and is asked to stop, and doesn't, why is it life or death situation? Should he be tasered (which, after all, carries the risk of fatal complications)? If this had happened before the use of tasers, should he have been shot?
Re:Less Lethal... (Score:3, Informative)
I'd like to see laws allowing citizens to carry tazers and use them against anyone presenting a life-threat, including police officers.
Uh...citizens are allowed to carry tasers. It's regulated, just like the carrying of any weapon is, but it's not like only police officers can have them. And as it turns out, the law does allow you to use them against someone illegally threatening you, including police officers. You'll have a heck of a time proving that attacking a cop was justified, but that's true of any assault on a police officer. If you're trying to say that police officers can never justifiably threaten your life, have fun explaining that to the next armed mugger you meet. I'm not saying that there haven't been abuses by police officers, but come on - grow up.
Re:Less Lethal... (Score:1, Informative)
If you are going to speculate, at least use the D20 Modern SRD.
http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/msrd/msrdequipmentweaponsandarmor.rtf
It's 1D4 electric, DC 15 Fort save or be paralyzed for 1D6 rounds.
Low con level 1 characters can easily go unconscious from 1D4 and would already need a fort save to avoid dying.
That's also why tasers don't work VS undead, they are immune to paralysys.
Re:Less Lethal... (Score:4, Informative)
Odd, I get to argue in favor of clubbing people, this is a rare (and somewhat amusing) day.
I'd actually prefer it if police clubbed people to subdue them, rather than tase(?) them, for a couple reasons. Police need to think twice before hopping in with a club, a TASER is somewhat different in that it is a point and click weapon (branded as being as safe as throwing twinkies at whoever is being arrested), it lowers the threshold of use. It makes it easier to use force, and opens it up to be used in places where not even a baton would be used. While it might be a bit safer to the person its being used on than a club, this might be outweighed by the fact that it is used more than the baton would have been used, for situations requiring much less escalation.
Call me a namby pamby liberal who likes his rights, but officer safety is only HALF of the equation, being that the people their stopping, no matter how much they resist, are innocent and and have equal rights, to the officer until it is found otherwise in a court of law. Also the bar to "resisting" or "stuggling" is far more cloudy than we'd like to realize. Hell, even watch Cops, which is nothing but friendly to the police, and see how resisting can be very nonresiting looking, if it is convenient. Hell, struggling against strange restraint positions is resisting somehow, even though I'm guessing anyone would struggle with some of them. Its a high stress enviroment for cops and the people they are arresting (guilty or not), but somehow we expect everyone to turn into a limp bean bag when an attacker puts out arms behind our back as a restraint. As a person who has been wrongfully arrested, it would be a miracle of someone DIDN'T struggle. Trying being surprised and thrown against a wall by someone who just screams "POLICE!" at you, and not trying to struggle a bit.
No, I'm not anti-police, but I realize that police are humans, and thus are not infallible, and their ranks contain a fair share of bad eggs. And also not all crooks are violent sociopaths out to kill the police and innocent bystanders. Hell, not all people who are arrested are violent, much less actually guilty of a crime. Also not all cases of "resisting" are actually people actively being antagonistic to the police, sometimes its just an expedient way of jailing them for otherwise banal things, or a way to escalate charges, or a way to vent some frustration of the person being arrested. Yes, this isn't the majority of times, but even in the minority of times when the police go too far, we should protect the innocent and others from the police.
We also don't know how lethal the TASER actually is. We can't really judge whether it is more or less lethal than the common baton. We really shouldn't be saying it is equal to a baton when we have no proof of it, and what proof that might exist is being actively blocked by the corporation whose job it is to sell the device. This corporation is also saying that no one has EVER died from a TASER, just some mythical pre-existing condition that mysteriously appeared at the same time the TASER was developed and sold to law enforcement.
Re:Less Lethal... (Score:5, Informative)
The need might be rare, but the use of them sure is not.
Like when you need to get someone who has a broken back to stand up.
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/93135/teen_with_broken_back_tasered_19_times_for_not_standing_up_when_ordered/ [alternet.org]
Or when you think a diabetic might be giving you trouble.
http://www.digtriad.com/news/features/article.aspx?storyid=115481&catid=216 [digtriad.com]
Or if you have a deaf and disabled man you need to get out of a store:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/28/antonio-love-ala-police-u_n_246081.html [huffingtonpost.com]
Re:Seriously, don't taze me. (Score:3, Informative)
I typoed the link to thor-shield, here it is raw
http://www.thorshield.com/ [thorshield.com]
And here is a link to the video on youtube where they demonstrate its use, including tasering a guy's head and it has no effect because his hat is lined with the material
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y__ZmYhtbzo [youtube.com]