By now internet/current-affairs mavens have seen the two most recent clips involving the abuse of Tasers, namely, that of the clueless Polish immigrant, Mr. Dziekanksi, at Vancouver airport (how many Polish jokes will this spawn?) and the poor husband, Jared Massey, pulled over by a Utah state trooper. Mr. Dziekanksi, who is now deceased, was the victim of a right excessive zapping (read the BBC report HERE) while Mr. Massey, who is alive and well, was the victim of a wanton, no-holds-barred series of Taser-bitch-slaps. The latter has since filed a formal complaint against the state trooper (read about it HERE). Videos of both incidents are available on Youtube.

What must the state of law enforcement be to justify such acts? Watching both videos confirms neither individual could possibly have been threatening enough to warrant the use of a Taser. Mr. Dziekanski was outnumbered by security four to one. Mr. Massey was lucid if a little flustered, understandable since no-one is quite smug when pull over. Is the fact that Taser is considered a non-lethal weapon giving police undue impetus to fire without concern for the repercussions? Let’s talk a look shall we?

Tasers, or electroshock weapons (Wiki article HERE, good read) have been around since at least the 1950s, probably earlier, though they weren’t necessarily used as non-lethal weapons. Cattle prods were likely the first practical use of electroshock devices. They work by delivering a very high-voltage (but low current) electrical shock to the body to temporarily stop muscle movement and disable the target. The severity of the effect depends on the weapon’s specifications but for a given weapon, the duration of the current is the primary factor. When I say high voltage, I mean on the order of 50,000 volts or approximately half of that carried in the big-ass electricity towers/lines (or 454 times greater than that in a household outlet). The current varies from 2.1 milliAmps (0.0021 A) to an astonishing 18 Amps for some newer, Godzilla-stopping models.

When tasers were first introduced, they were hailed as an effective, non-lethal means of subduing criminals (or targets) generally of the unarmed and relatively minor variety. No AK-47 armed, 30-page-rap-sheet, hardcore, serial offenders here. Minor criminals is important, because apparently, hardcore ones, elicit a response from a firearm. No, the taser was meant for the alcoholic who’s had a bit much to drink and is acting a fool. Or perhaps the woman who has flown into a jealous rage at the sight of her man in another’s clutches and brandishes a kitchen knife. Point, shoot, shock, capture. If necessary rinse and repeat.

Consider, though, that when it comes the electricity and the human body, damage is dependent on both voltage and current. 50,000 volts and anything above 10 mA is certainly going to cause death. Tasers overcome this certainty by pulsing the electrical delivery. Further, manufacturer’s guidelines exist dictating how long the device should be active before fatality becomes a real concern (generally held to be 5 seconds or less).

Unfortunately, since the Tasers introductions some 14 years ago, there have been in excess of 160 confirmed deaths as a result of the device. Indeed, in the past 2 months alone, there have been 9 deaths (in the US and Canada, ref. link), the two most covered being the one in Vancouver airport and that of Mr. Massey in Utah (thanks to the viral nature of the internet). There are numerous cases where officers use Tasers repeatedly and for durations in excess of 5 seconds (in one case a sustained burst of 57 seconds). Are they knowingly flouting regulations? Further, how can anyone still consider Tasers a non-lethal weapons with 160 dead? Indeed, I fail to see how anyone can consider a device that delivers 50,000 volts non-lethal.

It’s bad enough that some cops get the dreaded god-complex because they are allowed to brandish hand guns and have been assigned authority. It is, in fact, fortunate that firearms are lethal because it is said lethality that tempers an individual’s god-complex. The Taser, however, changes things. Given its inventor’s (and police departments’) insistence the device is non-lethal, there is little restraint an officer need exercise before using such a device. It’s non-lethal. Use it on the kid who was loitering. The grandma with the evil eye. The pregnant woman (No word if the child was born with super-electrical-potential!).

The Vancouver incident was appalling. A posse of stocky policemen couldn’t physically subdue one Polish man. He was Polish; He would have been stumped if you showed him a solar-powered flashlight or a nail-polish remover (zing!). I can’t see how it was necessary to use a Taser when you simply outnumber your unarmed “quarry.”

The Utah state trooper incident is yet stranger. The man was tased not for acting violent but for walking away from the officer. Apparently in this day and age, if the law asks you to bend over and kiss your ass, you must comply. Else, the law will do its best to give you a perm.

The Vancouver incident seems to have sparked debate in Canada. Granted, while the debate over the device rages (or is that simmers?) in Canada, we should note there have no cases of fatality involving tasers in Toronto, though it has been used. I’m of split minds over the issue. On the one hand I appreciate any trend towards less-lethal weapons and the Taser certainly is less deadly than a standard firearm. That said, I think police departments are underestimating the lethality of the Taser. Officers should undergo training identical to that required for use of a firearm and reprimanded should their actions exceed that which is considered justifiable force (as is the case with firearms … most of the time). Thus far, police departments have stood staunchly behind officers who were involved in such incidents. Ok, I understand the departments have to support their officers through thick and thing lest they dilute the morale of the force. Still, in these ever more testing times (what with the next terrorist attack right ’round the corner maaaan!) the citizenry (and legislature by association) needs to be sure that law enforcement itself doesn’t turn into the fear-mongering bully that terrorists have become. One more snippet of info before closing: The United Nations Committee Against Torture considers the use of Tasers to be an act of torture. Not that an act being torture prevents its use (Guantanamo Bay anyone?).

In closing: Tasing a first-time immigrant who doesn’t speak the local language and is outnumbered by security, tasing pregnant women under any circumstances & tasing a sober, sane driver at a routine traffic stop are all entirely unacceptable. More so given the ambiguity concerning the Taser’s lethality. If absolutely necessary, it should be used sparingly.

That said, I’d like to know how much of a zing the average police-issue Taser actually delivers so I’m offering myself up for a demonstration/experiment. If the Taser is actually non-lethal, there should be no problem confirming this by testing it on me. I’ll be in touch with local police stations and let you know how it goes. I always got a kick out of those cheeky. little, prank zap-lighters.

But what about you, young embryos. What do you make of all this? Would you prefer law enforcement stuck with firearms? Or perhaps that old favorite, the night-club to the knee (so bad ass and non-lethal too!)?

Some reference links and videos:

(1) The Utah state trooper incident HERE (YouTube).
(2) The Vancouver incident HERE (YouTube).
(3) Waiting a whole 40 second before tasing, video HERE (Jalopnik).
(4) Learn more from analysis of three separate incidents in the US at THIS site (Palm Beach Post).
(5) A good article on the issue by Peter Gorman HERE.
(6) The Stop Taser Abuse Today website HERE.

Popularity: 2% [?]