December, 16 2008, 04:00am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
USA: Safety of Tasers Questioned as Death Toll Hits 334-mark
WASHINGTON
Industry claims that Taser stun guns are
safe and non-lethal do not stand up to scrutiny, said Amnesty
International today as it called on governments to limit their
deployment to life-threatening situations or to suspend their use.
The call came as the organization released one of the most detailed
reports to date on the safety of the stun gun. The report "USA: Less
than lethal?" is being published as the number of people who died after
being struck by Tasers in the USA reached 334 between 2001 and August
2008.
"Tasers are not the 'non-lethal' weapons they are portrayed to be,"
said Angela Wright, US researcher at Amnesty International and author
of the report. "They can kill and should only be used as a last resort."
"The problem with Tasers is that they are inherently open to abuse,
as they are easy to carry and easy to use and can inflict severe pain
at the push of a button, without leaving substantial marks," said
Angela Wright.
Amnesty International's study -- which includes information from 98
autopsies -- found that 90 per cent of those who died after being
struck with a Taser were unarmed and many did not appear to present a
serious threat.
Many were subjected to repeated or prolonged shocks -- far more than
the five-second "standard" cycle -- or by more than one officer at a
time. Some people were even shocked for failing to comply with police
commands after they had been incapacitated by a first shock.
In at least six of the cases where people died, Tasers were used on
individuals suffering from medical conditions such as seizures --
including a doctor who had crashed his car when he suffered an
epileptic seizure. He died after being repeatedly shocked at the side
of the highway when, dazed and confused, he failed to comply with an
officer's commands.
Police officers also used Tasers on schoolchildren, pregnant women and even an elderly person with dementia.
In March 2008, an 11-year-old girl with a learning disability was
shocked with a Taser after she punched a police officer in the face.
The officer had been called to the school in Orange County, Florida,
after the child had become disturbed, pushing desks and chairs and
spitting at staff.
Existing studies -- many of them funded by the industry -- have
found the risk of these weapons to be generally low in healthy adults.
However, these studies are limited in scope and have pointed to the
need for more understanding of the effects of such devices on
vulnerable people, including those under the influence of stimulant
drugs or in poor health. Recent independently-funded animal studies
have found that the use of these kinds of electro-shock weapons can
cause fatal arrhythmias in pigs, raising further questions about their
safety on human subjects. It was also recently reported that nearly ten
per cent of 41 Tasers tested in a study commissioned by the Canadian
Broadcasting Corportation, delivered significantly more current than
the manufacturer said was possible, underscoring the need for
independent verification and testing of such devices.
Although most of the 334 deaths nationwide have been attributed to
factors such as drug intoxication, medical examiners and coroners have
concluded that Taser shocks caused or contributed to at least 50 of
these deaths.
"We are very concerned that electro-shock weapons such as Tasers
have been rolled out for general use before rigorous, independent
testing of their effects," said Angela Wright.
Note to editors
Taser is the commercial name for the most widely used "Conducted Energy
Devices" (CEDs) currently deployed in US law enforcement although other
products are also on the market. They work by delivering a high
voltage, low current, electrical charge designed to disrupt the central
nervous system and cause uncontrolled muscle contractions, temporarily
incapacitating the subject.
After reviewing 98 autopsy reports and other materials, Amnesty International found that:
- Many victims were subjected to multiple or prolonged shocks, often
far more than the standard five-second cycle, despite long-standing
warnings of the potential health risks of such use;
- In most cases, the deceased are reported to have gone into cardio-respiratory arrest at the scene, shortly after being shocked.
- In some cases there was no indication that the deceased had taken
drugs or had underlying health problems, and they collapsed shortly
after being shocked, raising further concern about the role of the CED;
- In many cases additional methods of restraint were applied,
including methods known to impair breathing or restrict the flow of
blood to the brain, creating a risk of death from asphyxia.
Most departments permit CEDs to be used at a level of threat well
below that at which officers would be authorized to use lethal force;
some even place them at the level of "hands-on" force or just above
"verbal commands".
The manufacturers of CEDs and the agencies deploying them maintain
that they are safer than many conventional weapons in controlling
dangerous or combative people and that CEDs have saved lives by
avoiding the resort by officers to lethal force.
More than 30 individuals died after being shocked in jails, where
CEDs are also widely used, or in the booking area of police stations.
Most deaths occurred in California and Florida -- 55 and 52
respectively. Phoenix, Arizona and Las Vegas, Nevada, had the highest
number of deaths of any city, with five deaths reported between 2001
and 31 August 2008.
In 37 of the 98 autopsy reports plus the two inquest transcripts
reviewed by Amnesty International, medical examiners listed the use of
a CED as a cause or contributory factor in the death. Medical examiners
or coroners reportedly made similar findings in at least 13 other cases
where Amnesty International did not have the autopsy reports.
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
'An Act of Climate Denial': Biden Faces Anti-Willow Protests After IPCC Report
"Biden will keep being haunted until he changes course," said one climate campaigner.
Mar 21, 2023
Further emboldened by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's fresh call for rapid emission cuts, campaigners are planning to rally outside the U.S. Interior Department on Tuesday morning to protest the Biden administration's approval of a massive oil drilling project that—if completed—would spew millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year.
In a press release announcing the demonstration, which is set to begin at 9:00 am ET, Fossil Free Media said those voicing outrage over the administration's decision to greenlight the project will include climate activists, social media influencers, students, and others.
The protest will coincide with President Joe Biden's planned remarks at the White House Conservation in Action Summit at the Interior Department, which signed off on a version of ConocoPhillips' Willow Project last week despite widespread opposition and warnings that it would undermine the global climate fight.
The Interior Department has estimated that the Alaska drilling project—the largest of its kind on U.S. public land—could produce nearly 580 million barrels of oil over three decades and unleash more than 270 million metric tons of planet-warming CO2. Green groups are suing the administration in an effort to stop the project, which is not expected to begin producing oil for another six years.
Jamie Henn, the director of Fossil Free Media, wrote Monday that the IPCC's report "makes it all the more clear that Biden's approval of the Willow Project was an act of climate denial and destruction."
The report, the product of years of work by hundreds of leading scientists from around the world, says greenhouse gas emissions must be cut by 60% over roughly the next decade to keep the Paris climate accord's critical warming target alive.
The Biden administration's approval of the Willow Project and other drilling—during his first two years in office, Biden outpaced former President Donald Trump in permit approvals—called into further doubt the White House's commitment to treating the climate crisis as an "existential threat."
"Reading the U.N.'s latest dire climate warnings just days after Biden approved massive new Arctic oil drilling is utterly infuriating," Shaye Wolf, climate science director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said Monday. "The fossil-fueled path to more climate disasters, mass displacements, and wildlife extinctions is bleak, but it's not inevitable."
"Chief among world leaders, Biden has the tools to not only ratchet up renewables but move us decisively off fossil fuels," Wolf added. "Scientists have mapped the way to a livable planet, but we need the political will to get us there."
On Monday, shortly following the release of the IPCC report, climate activists disrupted a Washington, D.C. event hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where White House climate adviser Ali Zaidi appeared to deliver an address on the "future of U.S. climate and energy leadership."
Reutersreported that "a dozen protesters holding a sign saying 'End Fossil Fuels' chanted 'Keep your promise, no new drilling' for several minutes, preventing Zaidi from starting his remarks." Zaidi responded by pointing to the climate investments approved under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).
"At the end of the day, nobody in a position of power seems to be accepting the reality and the urgency of this moment," Reilly Haught, a 23-year-old protestor from West Virginia, told Reuters. "And that's what we wanted to share with him. We just can't go on with business as usual with only the people in suits having these important conversations."
Collin Rees of Oil Change International tweeted Monday that "'climate leaders' don't approve huge fossil fuel projects like the Willow Project, which would negate most emissions reductions from the IRA even under rosy estimates."
"The IPCC is clear—no new oil + gas," Rees added. "Biden will keep being haunted until he changes course."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Calls Mount for US to Provide Free School Meals to All Children
"Hiving off a tiny part of the public school bundle and charging a means-tested fee for it is extremely stupid," argues Matt Bruenig.
Mar 20, 2023
Minnesota last week became just the fourth U.S. state to guarantee universal free school meals, triggering a fresh wave of demands and arguments for a similar federal policy to feed kids.
"Universal school meals is now law in Minnesota!" Democratic U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, who represents the state, tweeted Monday. "Now, we need to pass our Universal School Meals Program Act to guarantee free school meals to every child across the country."
Omar's proposal, spearheaded in the upper chamber by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), "would permanently provide free breakfast, lunch, dinner, and a snack to all school children regardless of income, eliminate school meal debt, and strengthen local economies by incentivizing local food procurement," the lawmakers' offices explained in 2021.
Congressional Republicans last year blocked the continuation of a Covid-19 policy enabling public schools to provide free breakfast and lunch to all 50 million children, and now, many families face rising debt over childrens' cafeteria charges.
"The school bus service doesn't charge fares. Neither should the school lunch service."
Matt Bruenig, founder of the People's Policy Project, highlighted Monday that while children who attend public schools generally have not only free education but also free access to bathrooms, textbooks, computer equipment, playgrounds, gyms, and sports gear, "around the middle of each school day, the free schooling service is briefly suspended for lunch."
"How much each kid is charged is based on their family income except that, if a kid lives in a school or school district where 40% or more of the kids are eligible for free lunch, then they are also eligible for free lunch even if their family income would otherwise be too high," he detailed. "Before Covid, in 2019, 68.1% of the kids were charged $0, 5.8% were charged $0.40, and 26.1% were charged the full $4.33... The total cost of the 4.9 billion meals is around $21 billion per year. In 2019, user fees covered $5.6 billion of this cost."
Bruenig—whose own child has access to free school meals because of the community eligibility program—continued:
The approximately $5.6 billion of school lunch fees collected in 2019 were equal to 0.7% of the total cost of K-12 schooling. In order to collect these fees, each school district has to set up a school lunch payments system, often by contracting with third-party providers like Global Payments. They also have to set up a system for dealing with kids who are not enrolled in the free lunch program but who show up to school with no money in their school lunch account or in their pockets. In this scenario, schools will either have to make the kid go without lunch, give them a free lunch for the day (but not too many times), or give them a lunch while assigning their lunch account a debt.
Eligibility for the $0 and $0.40 lunches is based on income, but this does not mean that everyone with an eligible income successfully signs up for the program. As with all means-tested programs, the application of the means test not only excludes people with ineligible incomes, but also people with eligible incomes who fail to successfully navigate the red tape of the welfare bureaucracy.
The think tank leader tore into arguments against universal free meals for kids, declaring that "hiving off a tiny part of the public school bundle and charging a means-tested fee for it is extremely stupid."
Bruenig pointed out that socializing the cost of child benefits like school meals helps "equalize the conditions of similarly-situated families with different numbers of children" and "smooths incomes across the lifecycle by ensuring that, when people have kids, their household financial situation remains mostly the same."
"Indeed, this is actually the case for the welfare state as whole, not just child benefits," the expert emphasized, explaining that like older adults and those with disabilities, children cannot and should not work, which "makes it impossible to receive personal labor income, meaning that some other non-labor income system is required."
Conservative opponents of free school lunches often claim that "fees serve an important pedagogical function in society to get people to understand personal responsibility" and because they "are means-tested, they serve an important income-redistributive function in society," he noted. "Both arguments are hard to take seriously."
Pushing back against the first claim, Bruenig stressed that right-wingers don't apply it to other aspects of free schooling such as bus services. He also wrote that the means-testing claim "is both untrue and at odds with their general attitudes on, not just redistribution, but on how child benefit programs specifically should be structured."
A tax for everyone with a certain income intended to make up the $5.6 billion in school meal fees, he argued, "would have a larger base and thus represent a smaller share of the income of each person taxed and such a tax would smooth incomes over time," while also eliminating means-testing—which would allow schools to feed all kids and ditch costly payment systems.
As Nora De La Cour reported Sunday for Jacobin: "The fight for school meals traces its roots all the way back to maternalist Progressive Era efforts to shield children and workers from the ravages of unregulated capitalism. In her bookThe Labor of Lunch: Why We Need Real Food and Real Jobs in American Public Schools, Jennifer Gaddis describes how early school lunch crusaders envisioned meal programs that would be integral to schools' educational missions, immersing students in hands-on learning about nutrition, gardening, food preparation, and home economics. Staffed by duly compensated professionals, these programs would collectivize and elevate care work, making it possible for mothers of all economic classes to efficiently nourish their young."
Now, families who experienced the positive impact of the pandemic-era program want more from the federal government.
"When schools adopt universal meals through community eligibility or another program, we see improvements in students' academic performance, behavior, attendance, and psychosocial functioning," wrote De La Cour, whose reporting also includes parent and cafeteria worker perspectives. "Above all, the implementation of universal meals causes meal participation to shoot up, demonstrating that the need far exceeds the number of kids who are able to get certified."
Crystal FitzSimons, director of school-based programs at the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC), told Jacobin, "There is a feeling that we can't go back."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Fight Continues' in France as Macron Government Survives No-Confidence Vote
Protests—some of them violently repressed by police—broke out in Paris and cities across the nation after a parliamentary vote following the government's deeply unpopular move to raise the retirement age by two years.
Mar 20, 2023
Fresh protests erupted in Paris and other French cities on Monday after President Emmanuel Macron's government narrowly survived a pair of parliamentary no-confidence votes over bypassing the lower house of Parliament to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64.
The first parliamentary vote of no confidence, called by a small group of centrist lawmakers, fell nine votes short of the 278 needed to pass, Agence France-Presse reports. A second no-confidence vote, brought forward by the far-right National Rally, was also rejected.
The French Senate, which is dominated by right-wing parties, approved the higher retirement age last week. However, faced with the prospect of a vote shortfall in the National Assembly, Macron's government then invoked special constitutional powers to push through the retirement age hike.
The deeply unpopular policy has sparked widespread protests, some of which have drawn hundreds of thousands of people into the streets despite government bans on gatherings in locations including Place de la Concorde and the area of Avenue des Champs-Elysées in Paris.
Protests renewed following Monday's votes, with thousands of demonstrators marching in Paris alone. Videos posted on social media showed police charging protesters, spraying them with pepper spray, and beating them. One video showed officers brutalizing a person who appeared to be a photojournalist while an onlooker repeatedly shouted "it's the press!"
"We are not resigned," the Aubervilliers parliamentary group of the left-wing populist party La France Insoumise (LFI), or France Unbowed, tweeted Monday. "The fight against retirement reforms continues. All together in the street until the retirement of this unjust and illegitimate reform!"
LFI's parliamentary group in Haute-Garonne—which includes the southern city of Tolouse—tweeted that "Macron is more isolated than ever."
"The fight continues tonight," the party group said, previewing a Monday evening demonstration.
French unions are calling for a nationwide general strike on Thursday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
SUPPORT OUR WORK.
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100%
reader supported.
reader supported.