STUN GUNS PROHIBITED

FAIR USE, IN EDUCATING THE PUBLIC:

KEEP TASERS SAFE, EFFECTIVE AND ACCEPTED IN YOUR COMMUNITY


A large insurer of law enforcement agencies has issued a position paper on Tasers that cites 10 "risk management considerations" for their safe and effective use and directly refutes concerns of activist groups that allege these popular control tools are dangerous and inhumane.

In contrast to intense criticism from Amnesty International and the American Civil Liberties Union, which have called for a moratorium or tight restrictions on Taser use, the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust has concluded after a thorough review of available studies that these weapons have "resulted in a considerable reduction of arrest-related injuries to both officers and subjects" and are a "safe and effective" means of "controlling dangerous behaviour and overcoming resistance."

Attorney and former police administrator and trainer William Everett author the Trust’s report, distributed recently to its 800-plus clients and posted in full on the Internet. Everett is the Trust's associate administrator and a member of the National Advisory Board of the Force Science Research Centre at Minnesota State University-Mankato.

The 10-page paper is intended to provide helpful, objective information to police administrators and city officials who are debating whether to equip officers with Tasers and to those agencies already using the devices that want to minimize potential problems. Content includes an assessment of widely publicized claims by activists that Tasers have caused deaths and severe injuries, findings from recent Taser field studies in the U.S. and Canada, where to place these devices on the force continuum, as well as specific suggestions for optimizing positive results from their use.

Titled "Police Use of Conductive Energy Devices (Tasers)," the complete "risk management memo" can be accessed at
www.lmnc.org/search97cgi/s97is.dll


Meanwhile, here is a summary of its highlights:

SAFETY CONCERNS. The report concludes that while Tasers are "highly effective in helping officers achieve control over violent and resistive subjects," they pose a "very low risk of injury to the individual arrested." Indeed, "scientific and medical studies have...largely debunked claims" that Tasers have been "a primary cause of death for individuals who have perished while in police custody."

In fact, research indicates that when used appropriately, Tasers "generally present a very low risk of danger to the subject....Law enforcement agencies have reported notable declines in injuries to officers and arrestees" once Tasers are introduced into a confrontation. Tasers have "alleviated the need for deadly force in many encounters with armed individuals." In many cases, "an officer's mere display of the device is sufficient to overcome an individual's willingness to fight or resist."

No device has ever been--and perhaps never will be--100% safe, the report acknowledges. However, "substantial evidence" from current research indicates that Tasers pose scant risk to healthy individuals.

If drug impaired or mentally ill subjects are at any greater risk, as some critics contend, "[m]edictal professionals who have thoroughly studied the issues believe...the risk stems from multiple applications of electrical energy," the report states. Therefore, LEOs "should generally limit the duration of electrical discharge cycles to no more than 15 to 20 seconds."

The report points out that arrestees may be "already in a medical danger zone" before police arrive. Such influences as cocaine and methamphetamine and extreme mental/physical states like excited delirium can provoke "a life-threatening cardiac event," for example, regardless of police intervention.

A report on Taser safety from the Canadian Police Research Centre this past summer concludes, "existing studies indicate that the risk of cardiac harm [from a Taser application] is very low." In addition, the CPRC found there is NO "definitive research or evidence" to suggest that Taser use has caused death.

The Trust memo notes: "There is general medical agreement that the effect is immediate when an individual comes into contact with a fatal electrical shock. It follows that when an in-custody death occurs minutes or hours after a [Taser] application, then death didn't occur as a result of a heart-stopping shock" from the device.

FIELD STUDIES. The Trust report summarizes the findings of half a dozen studies of Taser deployment by patrol officers from agencies in Ohio, Washington, Wisconsin, Florida and Ontario. These findings include

Columbus (OH) P.D.: Tasers were effective nearly 90% of the time that fired probes struck on target. Ineffectiveness was tied to suspects' thick clothing, misses generally to deployment during foot pursuits. Once Tasers were on the street, excessive force complaints declined more than 25%, subject injuries more than 24% and officer injuries more than 23%. The devices were credited with preventing a dozen suicides.

Seattle P.D.: Injuries to subjects and officers are reported, "low in Taser deployments when compared with other use-of-force situations." Of subjects Tasered, 71% were impaired by alcohol, mental illness or delusion," (conditions that often blunt a suspect's reaction to chemical sprays and other pain compliance techniques). Twenty-three per cent of suspects Tasered were armed, primarily with knives.

Cincinnati P.D.: After more than 300 Taser deployments, arrest-related injuries to officers were down 70%, with suspect injuries down 40%. Use of force by "other traditional means" dropped 50%. The department notes a decrease in citizen complaints regarding use of force.

Madison (WI) P.D.: Tasers were successful in producing incapacitation 77% of the time. More than 6% of use was to subdue suspects "whose actions would have justified the use of deadly force." Reduced injuries to officers and subjects alike were reported.

Toronto Police Service: "In 65% of all incidents, the presence of the device contributed to a successful resolution without being used. The device was effective in 88% of the incidents in which it was actually used." More than one-third of the incidents involved individuals who were armed (overwhelmingly with edged weapons).

Orange County (FL) S.O.: Among all "lower-lethality options," Tasers had "the highest level of de-escalation (subjects were less likely to fight harder against an arrest after use)" and the "highest deterrent effect (people were less likely to resist or fight once they were aware the device might be used)." Workers' comp claims related to arrest injuries have dropped 50%. Taser's rate in controlling resistant suspects was much higher than that of "conventional hand-to-hand techniques," which besides being ineffective nearly 30% of the time also resulted in the "largest number of subject and officer injuries."

FORCE CONTINUUM PLACEMENT. Options are ranked along a continuum of force "by comparing how much harm they are likely to cause the subject," the Trust paper explains. As an "obvious starting point" on where to place Tasers on the continuum, they "are not likely to cause death or great bodily harm," the report notes, "and thus should not be classified as deadly force."

Bottom line: Tasers should be placed lower on the continuum than impact weapons and techniques and slightly higher than chemical spray.

RISK REDUCTION. The memo offers these 10 "risk management considerations" to help minimize the risks of using conductive energy devices:

1. Involve your local governing body in deciding whether to equip officers with Tasers. This lets local politicians weigh in on Taser issues "while they are more abstract," rather than being confronted by them "for the first time after an emotionally charged incident has occurred." Optimally, local officials should be well versed in the benefits and risks of Taser use before they need to respond to a media or citizen inquiry about police use of the devices.

2. Strongly consider the Taser X26 rather than the M26, which uses more wattage to incapacitate a subject. The X26, with its digital pulse controller and lower wattage, "increase [es] the margin of electrical safety."

3. Training should reflect "multiple applications, particularly continuous cycling for periods exceeding 15-20 seconds may increase the risk to the subject and should be avoided when practical." If you have not gained control after 15-20 seconds, "reassess and consider another force option or disengagement." On the other hand, the memo points out, "continuous cycling may be a very prudent choice when the apparent alternative is escalation to deadly force."

(Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Research Centre, told Force Science News that the Centre "encourages only limited use of more than 3 Taser applications until further research results are known about the safety of frequent and repeated applications.")

4. Be sure policy and training providing guidelines for when to use the Taser in the probe mode versus the drive-stun mode.

5. If you're going to use a Taser, "do so before everyone is exhausted...as soon as it becomes apparent that arrest needs to occur and that lower-level force options are unlikely to work" or are otherwise inappropriate. "[P]prolonged struggle heightens the risk to both the officer and the subject." Taser use may accentuate "the negative physiological effects of physical exhaustion" and respiratory impairment may become a concern when a Taser is used during, or at the end of, an extended struggle.

6. "Pregnancy contraindicates [Taser] use because of the risk of miscarriage. With pregnancy, [Taser] use is clearly preferable to a firearm if the situation warrants deadly force, but is less justifiable if the situation does not require a firearm."

7. "Try to avoid discharging through probes placed on the head. Scientific evidence suggests that electrical outputs delivered to the head are capable of producing seizures."

8. "Carefully consider the ramifications of [Taser] use on children and the elderly." Backlash from the public (including judges and jurors) may be strong in these cases, and people with smaller bodies may have "a lower margin of safety with regard to electrical currents." However, the paper cautions against "blanket prohibitions" that may expose officers and others "to unreasonable risks of danger due to the alternatives."

9. Give careful consideration regarding the use of Tasers on officers as a part of their training. "Officers are better equipped to defend their use of the device on the witness stand if they have themselves experienced" Taser incapacitation. However, "occasional injuries" have been reported because of Taser discharges in training. The Trust acknowledges, "there is no clear solution to this dilemma," but stresses that it should be "recognized and resolved thoughtfully."

10. "As with other force transactions, it is imperative that officers prepare accurate and detailed reports" of Taser use. Reports should document: the circumstances leading to Taser deployment...verbal commands given...the subject's response...why Taser was selected instead of other less severe force options...where the probes struck the suspect...the approximate number of cycles delivered...and how the situation was resolved.

Some tested Tasers fire stronger current than company says: CBC/Radio-Canada probe
Last Updated: Thursday, December 4, 2008 | 9:58 PM ET Comments305Recommend142CBC News
Some Tasers deliver a higher level of electricity than the manufacturer promises, reveals a series of tests on 41 stun guns that was commissioned by CBC News and Radio-Canada.

Three of the X26 Tasers tested by U.S.-based lab National Technical Systems as part of a CBC/Radio-Canada investigation into the devices. (CBC)
The abnormal X26 model Tasers were manufactured before 2005, prompting some scientists to suggest police should stop using any older versions of the stun guns until they can be tested.

Of the 41 Tasers tested, four delivered significantly more current than Taser International says is possible. In some cases, the current was up to 50 per cent stronger than specified on the devices.

TASER INTERNATIONAL OFFICIAL STATEMENT:
"TASER International has reviewed the testing results from the National Technology Systems study various TASER X26 electronic control devices as provided by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The results from the testing are generally consistent with the specifications provided by TASER International and which would be expected from such tests.

TASER acknowledges that there are four data that appear to be outliers — instances where current increased as resistance increased which would not be expected based on the laws of physics. TASER International intends to contact NTS to suggest that the tests be repeated to verify the results.

TASER International appreciates the continued interest in TASER technology, and sincerely hope that the CBC report will focus on the proven injury reductions law enforcement experience with this technology rather than using engineering minutiae to confuse the viewer and create a false sense of controversy over a test that confirms the output of TASER X26s are consistent, and well below acceptable safety thresholds."
The tests, conducted by the U.S.-based lab National Technical Systems, used X26 Tasers from seven police departments in that country. Each weapon was fired at least six times.

Arizona-based Taser International makes virtually all the stun guns being used by police forces. The technical term for a stun gun is conductive energy weapon, or CEW. They are intended to incapacitate people with an electric shock.

The RCMP says it has pulled a random sample of some of the forces' Tasers for testing based on the results of the CBC News/Radio-Canada investigation.

"Given that you have raised this issue with us, we are taking steps to take CEWs out of our inventory devices that have deployed across the country, we are gathering up samples from each of our divisions, every province and every territory and we will have them independently tested," RCMP Commissioner William Elliott told CBC News at a recent policing event.

A force communications official, Supt. Tim Cogan, informed CBC News late Thursday that preliminary test results showed the sample of Tasers operated within the manufacturer's specifications.

Cogan said the tests were conducted at an accredited, independent laboratory in Ottawa, but didn't provide details on how many Tasers were tested or which lab conducted the analysis. The RCMP is still awaiting final test results.

"The RCMP recognizes that any use of force, including the CEW, carries risks, both to the public and to the police," Cogan said in a letter to CBC News.

"We do not take the use of force lightly. Ongoing assessment of the tools provided to our members and of the policies that guide their use is essential to mitigate these risks."

Pierre Savard, a biomedical engineering professor at École Polytechnique de Montréal, designed the technical procedure for the CBC's testing based on Taser International’s specifications.

Savard told CBC News it is scientifically significant that about nine per cent of the Tasers fired in the tests delivered more current than they are supposed to do, especially since he believes no one is verifying the company’s claims.

"I think it's important because Taser is not subjected to international standards," Savard said.

"When you use a cellphone, well, cellphones have to respect a set of standards … for the electric magnetic field that it emits. The Taser, well, nobody knows except Taser International."

Savard said the cause of the increased current could be either due to faulty quality control during the stun guns' manufacturing or electrical components that deteriorate with age.

The findings are troubling, since police officers are trained to aim a Taser at the chest, said Savard, who studies heart rhythms and how they are affected by electrical stimulation.

"When you combine an increased current intensity with a dart that falls right over the heart for somebody who has cardiovascular disease or other conditions such as using drugs, for example, it can all add up to a fatal issue," Savard said.

Malfunctioning Tasers
One of 44 X26 Tasers provided for testing by seven police departments in the United States. (CBC)Police forces across North America assure people that Tasers are safe. The manufacturer, Taser International, has said its product has a higher safety margin than Tylenol.

Taser International said they couldn’t provide someone for an interview before the CBC published results from the tests.

However, Magne Nerheim, Taser's vice-president of research and development, sent a written response to the results, in which he called the four malfunctioning Tasers an anomaly — one that could be explained if the weapons are not spark tested on a regular basis.

Nerheim also suggested the testing be repeated to verify the results. He made no comment about the age of the Tasers and whether there could be an issue of reliability.

During the tests commissioned by CBC News and Radio-Canada, three of the weapons didn't fire, even with charged battery packs. Those were set aside and not counted in the final results.

But a Taser that doesn't deploy can potentially create a safety issue for a police officer, Savard said.

"When we are talking about Tasers that don’t function, I think it is dangerous for the policeman who would try to use the Taser and the individual response can be aggressive," he said.

The CBC showed the results to several electrical engineers as a peer review of the analysis. They agreed that at the very least, the Tasers made before 2005 should not be used again until they are tested and proved reliable.