Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiTaser Executive Faces Tough Questions
As Toronto police consider spending millions on stun guns, forum audience comes armed with critical research
The packed auditorium listened in silence as the co-founder of Arizona-based Taser International Inc. explained at a public forum in Toronto last night the science behind the stun guns, but it was during the 75-minute question period that Thomas Smith found he had to defend himself from stinging accusations.
Mr. Smith, who was in town as the Toronto Police Services Board weighs a request by Police Chief Bill Blair to spend $8.6-million to equip and train every front-line officer with a taser, was confronted by the sister of a man who died after being tasered by Vancouver police.
He was also presented with an offer to stun an elderly man right then and there, and was caught off guard by audience members armed with research.
"Are tasers risk free? No. ... The reality is that there [are] still studies to be done, we encourage them, we work with them, we want them to be done because it's going to continue to answer those questions," he told the standing-room-only crowd.
If Chief Blair's request is approved by the civilian oversight board, the move would see the number of tasers deployed by city police rise significantly from the current 500 or so, and make the Toronto force the first in the country to have the stun guns so widely available.
Speaking to reporters after the heated question period, Chief Blair defended his position on the use of tasers as an alternative for guns.
"In the hands of a properly trained officer, properly directed, supervised and accountable for its use, those things can save lives and I want them accessible to my front-line officers for those circumstances where they can reduce injury to my people and also reduce injury to the public."
During the forum, Patti Gillman, whose brother, Robert Bagnell, died after being tasered by Vancouver police in 2004, said she was speaking on behalf of the more than 300 North Americans who have died after being shot by the guns since 2003.
"[My brother] was unarmed, he was of no credible threat to police or to the public and there were 13 police officers there the night that he died," she said. "I know that most thinking Canadians would concur that the use of tasers was not only unjustified the night my brother died, but was also likely unjustified in the majority of cases."
Ms. Gillman - who lodged a formal complaint after learning that a veteran Victoria police officer who played a pivotal role in a 1998 pilot program that led to his force adopting the weapons permanently had received several payments from Taser International since 1999 - asked Mr. Smith how many other Canadian police officers had been paid by the company.
Mr. Smith responded: "We also compensate officers when they train, for their time to train. I don't know if any Canadians were among those."
Ken Wood volunteered to be stunned in front of the crowd.
"Everything that I see that you do in your studies is basically physically fit, gung-ho military types saying, 'Go ahead, taser me.' You don't know my health history, you don't know who I am, I'm Joe Average on the street."
Andy Buxton, chair of Amnesty International Toronto, asked Mr. Smith about research on tasers conducted by Amnesty and other independent organizations. Mr. Smith repeatedly responded that he had not seen the data and so he could not comment.
Then, Mr. Buxton asked: "Are you familiar with research that suggests that 20 per cent of all use of tasers are in what you refer to yourself as pain compliance mode [set to inflict pain to get a subject to co-operate]?"
"I'm not familiar with that specific study," Mr. Smith responded.
"Those were your own statistics, Mr. Smith, from your own website," Mr. Buxton said.
© 2008 Globe and Mail
10 Comments so far
Show AllTaser is indeed ethically challenged - which raises the question of why Johns Hopkins Medicine is in bed with the company:http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/johns-hopkins-hospital-stop-supporting-taser-use
FORE X -- Something that is actually true in movies is that dosage is extremely challenging to compute in advance.
Ones mileage will vary a LOT, and I suspect that it's quite similar to cops no longer attempting to "wing" somebody in an arm or leg -- as in those cases where deadly force is allowed - one surely doesn't want the "criminal" 'waking back up'.
Medical anesthetization is complex and complicated in real time metabolic dynamics, and too often people have actually awoken during their operations while being monitored carefully.
As I posted before, can't police use tranquilizer darts instead?
Most of the arguments presented by Taser and the police fall to pieces with even a cursory examination.
Better than a gun? Taser deployments are about two orders of magnitude (~100:1) more frequent than the historical/accepted rate of police shootings. It's not even a good lie that tasers replace the gun. Tasers replace talking; to just 24 seconds in the Vancouver Airport incident for example.
Tasers are safe? The technical details are a bit too complicated for the average person. But, putting it simply, the characteristics (frequency spectrum of the waveform) that Taser claims are safe on the older less-common M26 model are the opposite for the newer more-common X26 model introduced in 2003. It appears that they wanted to ensure that the newer model would 'drop' more criminals, but perhaps they overshot the mark a bit? There are also a few other examples of technical statements made by Taser or their Directors that are not accurate. These errors bring their technical competence into question. I'm sure that they're well educated, but it appears that their confidence/competence ratio has slightly exceeded unity at times. When you're dealing with life-and-death issues, you never (!) allow that to happen.
Ethics and money? Taser shows some signs of being an ethically challenged organization. Former directors facing 142 years worth of criminal charges. Stock options everywhere you look. Friendly coroners accepting paid travel, but those that make findings that are not aligned with the company position are sued. Present "independent" (sic) director(s?) being heavily involved financially.
The police have major issues to address. Their Scale of Force tables appeared to be legally flawed. They appear to have confused lawful 'force' (noun) with illegally 'force' (verb) and thereby stepped over the fine line between The Rule of law and A Police State. Example, "Do what I say or I will taser you" is illegal on several counts. If someone is illegally disobeying a lawful order, then add that charge to the list and bring them before the court using reasonable force. Nobody ever gave the police the right to apply 'severe pain' to 'intimidate', or to 'coerce' obedience. Even the courts cannot apply electric shock as punishment. What lunatic police officer was the first to make the assumption that he now has more power than even the courts?
The above is in the situation of passive resistance or failure to cooperate. If the subject is violent, then the police are obviously allowed to defend themselves.
All this and much more is discussed in some detail on my lengthy blog:
Link= www.Excited-Delirium.com
The taser was and continues to be touted as a non-lethal alternative to using a firearm.
Therefore, it's use can only be justified when the use of a firearm would be justified.
If it wouldn't be right to shoot the person, then it wouldn't be right to use a taser, either.
Seems like a lot of cops need remedial classes in the judicious use of lethal force.
Liberty & Justice,
SJ
www.spartacusjones.com
and i say... why not use shot-guns instead of tasers?
is will surely reduce injury to police personel and also reduce injury to the public (because no-one will dare leave the house)
Did anyone see the taser skit tonight on Air Farce's Cougar's Corner? It's what I have been telling you all along!
*Cougar's Corner is a spoof of Hockey's Coach's Corner only with Cougars (older women who prey on younger men).
RE: It's for those people that the taser was invented.
I think that many of Thomas Smith's customers would be offended by your depiction of them.
Seems that Thomas Smith doesn't like an informed audience!
We would all prefer to be shot with a stun gun than with a real gun, but I'm afraid that their (usually) non-lethal results would impel cops to use them when they would not use a real gun. That might be the best rule for cops to follow when thinking of using a taser. Use only as a substitute when you would normally use a real gun, and write a report on it or tape the scene.