I haven't seen Taser, Inc.'s official statement yet -- but I suspect it's a liability lawyer's idea. Enough people have ridden that lightning (and I'm one of them) that I think if it was a significant risk, we'd have more documented "adverse cardiac events."
Personally -- the Taser is a lot more effective than pepper spray, and while it's not a substitute for lethal force, it's a great tool to reduce the risk of serious injury in dealing with combative and/or noncompliant subjects. And that's reduced risk of injury on both sides of the badge!
FYI: You can read Taser's training bulletins for yourself here: http://www.taser.com/legal/Documents/Training%20Memo%20with%20Training%20Bulletin%20and%20Warnings.pdf
It's not as drastic a change as some folks are making it out to be...
Just had an incident up here in Maine. an animal hoarder faked out a law enforcement officer and got him in the neck with a stun gun. Fortunately the L.E. wasn't incapacitated, and arrested the woman. As for its risk? You never know who the hell you are dealing with, one guy might drop and be in serious trouble while another might beat you silly after being hit with the stun gun.
Or, this could just be another "talking point" for those of us who would rather not rely primarily on a tool (any tool) as our primary defense technique...
There is a huge difference between a civilian stun gun and a TASER. I've been tased. Every skeletal muscle in my body locked up and I involuntarily screamed a curse word. There was no fighting through it. And I tried. DGT Taser is just being cautious and the press blew it way out of proportion. A neighboring agency tased a naked guy awhile back. One prong in the chest, one in the left testicle. My brain won't let me imagine how that feels.
Holy crap.
ReplyDeleteThat little story shows just how dangerous the rhetoric is getting out there.
Anyone else read that and think of aluminum foil?
ReplyDeleteJust sayin'.
I haven't seen Taser, Inc.'s official statement yet -- but I suspect it's a liability lawyer's idea. Enough people have ridden that lightning (and I'm one of them) that I think if it was a significant risk, we'd have more documented "adverse cardiac events."
ReplyDeletePersonally -- the Taser is a lot more effective than pepper spray, and while it's not a substitute for lethal force, it's a great tool to reduce the risk of serious injury in dealing with combative and/or noncompliant subjects. And that's reduced risk of injury on both sides of the badge!
FYI: You can read Taser's training bulletins for yourself here: http://www.taser.com/legal/Documents/Training%20Memo%20with%20Training%20Bulletin%20and%20Warnings.pdf
ReplyDeleteIt's not as drastic a change as some folks are making it out to be...
Just had an incident up here in Maine. an animal hoarder faked out a law enforcement officer and got him in the neck with a stun gun. Fortunately the L.E. wasn't incapacitated, and arrested the woman. As for its risk? You never know who the hell you are dealing with, one guy might drop and be in serious trouble while another might beat you silly after being hit with the stun gun.
ReplyDeleteOr, this could just be another "talking point" for those of us who would rather not rely primarily on a tool (any tool) as our primary defense technique...
ReplyDeleteThanks for the post!
There is a huge difference between a civilian stun gun and a TASER. I've been tased. Every skeletal muscle in my body locked up and I involuntarily screamed a curse word. There was no fighting through it. And I tried. DGT Taser is just being cautious and the press blew it way out of proportion. A neighboring agency tased a naked guy awhile back. One prong in the chest, one in the left testicle. My brain won't let me imagine how that feels.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if it has occurred to the tin foil underwear crowd that they may NOT WANT to make less lethal weapons less effective?
ReplyDeleteIf you negate a TASER what's going to happen?
(Hint it involves MORE lethal force rather then less)