Tasers are Safe ? Myth Busted!

[Gibraltar]

Therein lies one problem. Imagine a police officer under no obligation to risk injury? In a one-on-one situation, or two officers even, I can see the hesitancy. But groups of 4 - 6 still feel that's it too much of a hassle, or risk.

Do you realize the combined weight of 6 or 7 officers? That much weight on a subject could easily cause injury and perhaps positional asphyxia. Usually such resistive subjects are in an altered state, either mentally ill or high on a mind-altering substance such as cocaine or meth. This means that for all intents and purposes, they do not feel pain, so pain-compliance techniques such as pressure points and focused blows are ineffective.

That leaves you with a pig-pile flailing around trying to wrench this person's limbs into restraints while he/she is actively resisting. This is almost certainly going to result in injury to the subject. Much better to deploy a Taser that will incapacitate them for long enough to get them safely into handcuffs.

 

[Apogeal Alpha01]

I cannot disagree with that use, it makes sense. But I've seen abuses that lead me to believe that the textbook isn't always the rule. Some officers want to let off a little steam.

I understand that officers are only human, and if "pain-compliance techniques such as pressure points and focused blows," as well as Tasers are used judiciously, there should be no objection.

 

[Gibraltar]

Anything can be abused as a weapon, from a Taser to the officer's fist. I'm suggesting that the Taser is a tool, and is no more or less prone to being abused than any other tool in that officer's arsenal.

As for leaving physical evidence, Tasers do leave either telltale burn marks from a drive-stun (when used in a contact 'stun-gun' fashion) as well as minor wounds from the probes which pierce the skin when the probe cartridge is deployed. Though minor, these are still evident days later.

The X-26 also records all uses on a data chip that cannot be accessed by the officer, but only by Taser International. Some X-26 packages come with an integrated camera that records the entire deployment while the weapon is cycling.

 

[cultcross]

Therein lies one problem. Imagine a police officer under no obligation to risk injury? In a one-on-one situation, or two officers even, I can see the hesitancy. But groups of 4 - 6 still feel that's it too much of a hassle, or risk.

I don't mean this to be as rude as it probably sounds, but spoken like someone whose never had to wrestle a non compliant prisoner intent on fighting you to the ground and hold them there while they're cuffed and controlled. You'd be surprised how many officers can still struggle to control someone using simple hands-on restraint.
Besides, as Gibraltar says, the idea that this is somehow a much safer option than a taser is largely a fallacy - a major cause of death in police custody is positional asphyxia - from exactly what you describe - a lot of heavy officers on top of them when they're prone on the floor.
A taser may not be 100% safe. In fact I'd put money on the fact that they're not. But they're safer than 4-6 beefy guys wrestling on top of you crushing your rib cage into the floor, or worse, being hit with a steel baton.

 

[Captain X]

They have guns, dude, would you rather police have nothing to fall back on but those? You honestly think the cops who have been abusive of the tazers wouldn't be equally abusive of their pistol, and that there haven't been such abuses in the past?

Yes, I honestly think they are less likely to overuse their firearms in an abusive way. Because they are guns.
As for "falling back on", I would rather see them all mandated to be regularly trained in martial arts. Then I might trust them with the tasers.

On both points...

 

[Captain X]

Whenever we hear about tasers used to ill effect, or death, why haven't we heard before about tested tasers output? An uneven charge or overcharge of 50% is wildly outside safety margins. They are not meant to be lethal, and more often than not, are not. They are used without consideration of health risks because it's assumed that there are few and temporary. Tasers should have a reliably tested discharge rate with very narrow tolerances.

Yes, they should. And just as with their service pistol I think there should be mandatory tazer training, including shoot-don't-shoot scenarios. I also think officers should have to be tazed and sprayed with pepper spray and/or mace before they can be authorized to carry them. But I don't think it would do anyone any good to take these valuable tools away from law enforcement.

I agree with Chaos Descending, the idea of a Taser being used to humiliate and gain compliance when ordinary physical force could subdue an offender is disturbing. Of course I should have thought of it before because I've seen it on video, groups of cops using batons to beat a person lying prone on the ground.

So given the choice, you'd rather be beaten than zapped. Fascinating...

Now they have a tool that usually leaves no marks.

Actually, depending on the voltage, they can leave a couple little indentations or burn marks.

Therein lies one problem. Imagine a police officer under no obligation to risk injury? In a one-on-one situation, or two officers even, I can see the hesitancy. But groups of 4 - 6 still feel that's it too much of a hassle, or risk.

Why should any police officer be under any obligation to risk injury in order to subdue an unruly suspect? These people are just trying to do their jobs, and you sound like some paranoid tinfoil hat wearer convinced that the police are only out to get you.

 

[Gibraltar]

Yes, they should. And just as with their service pistol I think there should be mandatory tazer training, including shoot-don't-shoot scenarios. I also think officers should have to be tazed and sprayed with pepper spray and/or mace before they can be authorized to carry them. But I don't think it would do anyone any good to take these valuable tools away from law enforcement.

Unfortunately, there is no constant in this area. Some agencies train their personnel exhaustively in escalation/de-escalation scenarios, where the defensive tool they go with changes according to the threat's level of aggression and means.

Other police forces take the Taser (or other defensive tool) out of the box and hand it to the officers with little or no training at all. It just depends on where you live and the relative professionalism of your local law enforcement agencies.