TheAgitator.com
The “Non-Lethal” Taser
Saturday, May 3rd, 2008Despite claims from Taser defenders that there has never been a confirmed case of a taser jolt contributing to death, the Arizona Republic did a little digging, and found at least 27.
Taser International, fresh from threatening to sue bloggers for trademark infringement for merely using the Taser name, is apparently threatened by the willingness of more and more medical examiners to look past Taser’s corporate propaganda and list a stun from the weapon as a contributing cause of death–so they’re suing the medical examiners, too.
Taser would rather medical examiners attribute such deaths to “excited delirium,” a vague condition relatively unheard of in medical research before the advent of the Taser, but that now seems to be a frequent cause of death in Taser-related cases–but totally unrelated to the actual Tasering, of course. Coincidentally, Taser is apparently also shoveling money at researchers willing to lend medical bona-fides to the “excited delirium” theory.
Broadly speaking, I don’t have a problem with the Taser. Assuming that it’s used in situations where a more lethal gun would otherwise be sued, it’s probably an improvement. But the incessant “non-lethal” marketing of the weapon I think makes the police much more willing to use it, particularly in cases where the person being tased is pretty clearly not a potent or imminent threat. That, and it’s increasingly looking like the “non-lethal” descriptor simply isn’t true.
And frankly, one surefire way to piss away your credibility is to start bullying bloggers and intimidating doctors with litigation.
Why wouldn’t you have a problem with Taser? It’s as much of a government agency as Raytheon, KBR, and other military contractors are. Murray Rothbard once wrote an article (I wish I could find it) arguing that any firm that derives a significant portion of its revenue from sales to governments or government-enabled industries, it ceases to be a voluntary business association and becomes a quasi-state corporation.
Initially, the Taser was marketed as a less-lethal weapon. The thinking was that a person who was in a situation where they were contemplating using a gun would have a less deadly weapon in their arsenal.
The taser produces a short pulse of 6 Amps. A current of .6 Amps can cause the heart to fibrilate or otherwise disturb the electrical function of the heart. While the current that goes through an organ deep within the body will obviously be a fraction of the current exiting the electrodes, but there is sufficient current to kill a man.
I am stunned that the officers of Taser would make such a unreasonable claim. The science contradicts them, and all they will accomplish is to gain a reputation for dishonesty.
The science contradicts them, and all they will accomplish is to gain a reputation for dishonesty.
Wrong – they will gain (and have gained) lots of contracts with police departments.
Excellent coverage Radley. Please keep hammering away at this! You are correct that the taser is, in many ways, an “improvement.” People who try to make the taser sound like a medieval torture device should stop to consider that 30 years ago, some police agencies equipped their officers with axe handles. A severe jolt is probably more humane than blunt trauma (most of the time). But, the taser is being used too much and Taser International is complicit. Their marketing has been irresponsible and could be considered fraudalent. The company’s threats to bloggers represent the very ugly side of the corporate sector. Corporations have been given the same right to free speech as you or I. Hence, they believe they have the right to decieve people, even if the deception results in death. So, if anyone wants to sue, I say sue Taser International. They deserve it.
TASER as an alternative to lethal force I am all for. TASER as a “pain compliance tool” or as an alternative to harsh words (as it seems to be on the force continuum now) I am very much against.
I agree with Phelps, a Taser is good alternative to a gun (although guns can be used in a non-lethal (or less lethal) manner by shooting for the leg) but is a poor choice for “pain compliance” where a Police officer may be injured but not killed (e.g. the hysterical man at Vancouver Airport). Is pain compliance not a synonym for torture? It certainly seems cruel and unusual and enforced without court oversight.
I’m hoping to get a case of “excited delirium” tonight. At least once, maybe twice.
I attended a trauma surgery conference at which was presented some well-done research on the TASER. In the summary of the research that had already been done they noted that all the previous pig studies (animal of choice for this research) had been TASERed in the back. Their study showed that if the current went across the heart (i.e. one probe on each side of the chest or one up one down) the current could cause fibrillation but ONLY if the probes were in the front of the pig. It must be noted that in all cases the fibrillation stopped spontaneously and the pig survived (at least until they were sacrificed — which kinda sucks, you’re not even allowed to roast them afterward).
In any case, it seems clear that in certain conditions a frontal tasering could cause v.fib cardiac arrest especially when the heart is stressed with catecholamines (e.g. adrenaline) or stimulants (cocaine, amphetamines).
I’d still rather be TASERed than shot or hit in the head with a baton — but that’s not saying much.
although guns can be used in a non-lethal (or less lethal) manner by shooting for the leg
Right, because there’s nothing lethal about having your femoral artery blown open.
If you thinks Taser is OK, please feel free to volunteer yourself to be shot by one.
“But the incessant “non-lethal” marketing of the weapon I think makes the police much more willing to use it…”
I think it’s the bully-values of corruption, entitlement, and tribalism endemic to police culture that makes them willing to use it, not the fact that it is pushed as a ‘non-lethal’ weapon.
I mean, to think that was the case, you’d almost have to think that they have something against killing people.
There are some really good comments above. It’s nice to see a series of comments that are pretty much balanced and no mindless Taser spokespuppets. If you are interested in the taser issue, please visit my blog http://www.Excited-Delirium.com (no, it’s not pro-taser).
Peace.
Tarran writes
“The taser produces a short pulse of 6 Amps. A current of .6 Amps can cause the heart to fibrilate or otherwise disturb the electrical function of the heart”
Tasers use only 0.0021 amperes of current. Your estimate is 2857 higher than the actual figure. So much for your credibility.
Tarran further writes
“I am stunned that the officers of Taser would make such a unreasonable claim. The science contradicts them, and all they will accomplish is to gain a reputation for dishonesty.”
Fiction is often thousand times more stunning than fact.
“In any case, it seems clear that in certain conditions a frontal tasering could cause v.fib cardiac arrest especially when the heart is stressed with catecholamines (e.g. adrenaline) or stimulants (cocaine, amphetamines).”
Cleveland Clinic Study Reveaaled that Cocaine increased the margin of safety for ventricular fibrillation.
Effects of Cocaine Intoxication on the Threshold for Stun Gun Induction of Ventricular Fibrillation
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess cocaine’s effects on Taser-induced ventricular fibrillation (VF) threshold in a pig model.
BACKGROUND: Stun guns are increasingly used by law enforcement officials to restrain violent subjects, who are frequently intoxicated with cocaine and other drugs of abuse. The interaction of cocaine and the stun gun on VF induction is unknown.
METHODS: We tested five adult pigs using a custom device built to deliver multiples of standard neuromuscular incapacitating (NMI) discharge that matched the waveform of a commercially available electrical stun gun (Taser X-26, Taser International, Scottsdale, Arizona). The NMI discharges were applied in a step-up and step-down fashion at 5 body locations. End points included determination of maximum safe multiple, minimum VF-inducing multiple, and ventricular fibrillation threshold (VFT) before and after cocaine infusion.
RESULTS: Standard NMI discharges (x1) did not cause VF at any of the 5 locations before or after cocaine infusion. The maximum safe multiple, minimum VF-inducing multiple, and VFT of NMI application increased with increasing electrode distance from the heart. There was a 1.5- to 2-fold increase in these values at each position after cocaine infusion, suggesting decreased cardiac vulnerability for VF. Cocaine increased the required strength of NMI discharge that caused 2:1 or 3:1 ventricular capture ratios at all of the positions. No significant changes in creatine kinase-MB and troponin-I were seen.
CONCLUSIONS: Cocaine increased the VFT of NMI discharges at all dart locations tested and reduced cardiac vulnerability to VF. The application of cocaine increased the safety margin by 50% to 100% above the baseline safety margin.
http://content.onlinejacc.org/cgi/content/abstract/j.jacc.2006.03.055v1
I commend your checks on the safety of the Taser, but it should be noted that the AZ Republic has been known to have a huge bias and REALLY screw up (sometimes MAKE UP) facts to push a story. When called on it, they put a tiny retraction in a back page (if at all). Just saying.
It would be nice to have a “fire and forget” weapon, but this doesn’t seem to be it. It does still seem better than a bullet.
I agree with various above that Tasers have appropriate uses, but they are often misused. Tasers don’t seem unusual in this respect. There is a place for guns in policework, but we see police misuse them too. Ditto pepper spray, clubs (no I will not call it a “baton”), and verbal warnings.
JOR, you’re missing the point on that. All of what you say about police force structures and values certainly make them more likely to do things that are bad for the public, but using lethal force is still a rarity which makes significant press coverage (and so which even police forces frown upon, though not to the point of actually disciplining individuals).
Because taser is presented as non-lethal, deaths can be passed off as not being a result of the tasering, and so they know that there’s no chance the death will go on their statistics or cause uncomfortable headlines. That inevitably makes them more stun-happy.
Just the facts:
From Taser’s website:
What matters is not the time average current, but the maximum. The heartbeat is regulated by a series of small electrical timing signals. If sufficient current passes through one of the nodes that controls the contraction and relaxation of the heart, it can fool that node into sending signals out of cycle. The nodes don’t care about the time average of the current passing through them. Rather they receive some electrical signal, they delay for a time, then they fire sending orders to the heart muscle cells they control, and timing signals to adjacent nodes which are used to initiate those nodes’ action.
I wonder what Taser International will say when, inevitably, a police officer (who may be required to undergo a tasing) dies after being shot with their perfectly safe, non-lethal weapon. Will they claim that this poor guy some how suffered from excited delirium?
Lori,
That has already happened. Every time, it is because the officer failed to disclose a preexisting condition. Or, at least the reports say.
On a related note, a story in today’s Columbus Dispatch:
So here we have a competent medical examiner, and the judge goes against it (as opposed to the Mississippi situation).
We may see a whole lot of examples on May 7 in NYC.
I’m already seeing police discussion groups wishing for a youtube video of Al Sharpton on a TASER.
I’ve heard of police using tasers in the perfect situation for it, (cops roll up to house as man is chasing girlfriend across the front yard with a knife, they taser him, rather than shooting him) and in less so (man won’t submit to being handcuffed after he’s found guilty of a crime and has bond revoked).
Interestingly, the guy chasing his girlfriend got to plead no contest rather than guilty in his plea bargain, because the judge accepted that a combination of drunkeness and being tased made his memory rather hazy as to what had happened.
Nick - thanks, I wasn’t aware that this had happened.
So, the officers pass physical exams, undergo rigorous physical training, and agility tests, yet they have some “undisclosed” condition that suddenly decides to rear its deadly head when they get tasered?
Has anybody studied the number of officers who die during taser training vs the number with “undisclosed” conditions who just drop dead after a chase of physical confrontation with a suspect?
I can’t wait until someone starts using the word “Taser” to refer to any of the brands, not just the Taser brand. I believe the term has been used so much that the brand can no longer hold the trademark of the word “Taser” due to common usage. This happened to aspirin, cellophane, elevator, and thermos, and I really hope it happens to Taser!
Tasers are just one of the many tools that cops should have at there disposal to ensure the safety of them and others. Tasers are very rarely used, and when they are used, they very rarely cause any sort of lasting harm, and very rarely cause death. But if you take away the less-than lethal tools from the police, and you leave them only with lethal tools, they will use them more. It has been shown that if you remove “compliancy holds,” “joint locks,” “chemical compliance devices,” and finally “electrical compliance devices (aka Tasers).” The death and injury rate for both the police and the public go up.
If the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, then all your problems look like nails.
Well if one of the tools in your toolbox is consistently referenced as non-lethal and safe its use will escalate. The ‘non-lethality’ of the device is in question.
I just heard an advertisement on the radio for a local gun store that is pushing tasers as a great Mother’s Day gift. I just thought I’d mention that for all you people who think I only say bad things about Alabama.
The likelihood of dying from having been ‘Tased’ is less than the likelihood of dying in a or from an auto accident. We pretty much only hear of deaths from Tasers in the news, not about the thousands who have been Tased and who did not die. In an emergent situation where prevention of harm to others by an out-of-control or order-ignoring subject is necessary, then would you rather the subject be shot to death or subdued with a Taser?
Bottom line, when the police say STOP, then stop. I think it would be better to be Tased and live than receive a bullet, for not listening to the police or other authorities.