Taser releases new "shock shotguns" - safety tests MIA, but they're on Twitter and Facebook!
Over at Wired's Danger Room blog, David Hambling has an extensive post up about a new series of "less-lethal" weapons from "controversial electroshock weaponeer" Taser International. , is shown above. As Hambling notes, results from safety and field tests of Taser's new gear, which includes the eXtended Range Electronic Projectile (XREP) above, is coming along far more slowly. But hey, at least those new weapons are tweeting!
The Taser X3 has its own Facebook page and, worst of all, it Twitters. Presumably the agency were briefed to come up with something cute and non-threatening. Evidently they decided that the X3's image should come across less as Arnold Schwarzenegger and more as Paris Hilton, judging from these tweets:Safety Tests MIA for Taser's Shocking New Shotgun (wired.com)"Check out my color screen. Like a Tele-Tubby ... only a little more intense!"
"Just out of the solar radiation box. Tanning bed for TASER's... 3 months of Arizona summer sun radiation. Check that one off!"
"Never thought I'd get so excited about the feel of a safety switch. But wait until you feel it - smooooooth."
Don't miss the breathing, pulsing, utterly over-the-top Taser X3 online ad campaign.
the latest
latest episodes
"Check out my color screen. Like a Tele-Tubby ... only a little more intense!"
None of those are good things for a weapon to say.
"smooooooth." Are you in a beer commercial now, talking weapon?
I can't wait for the Sat. morning cartoon. Each episode caps with a brief lesson on weapon safety.
I've always dreamed of peppering someone in the face, with electricity.
It also has a youtube channel.
I think it would be great for cartoons to contain messages about weapons safety. Maybe there would be fewer firearms accidents.
If only it tweeted every time one of their products shocked someone... maybe even graph it with a google maps mash-up.
I don't understand the fuss. They have a new product and they want to market it; they've done a middling. The linked article is begging the question a little by assuming from the start that Tasers are bad and then using that point of view to say "ZOMG ANOTHER TASER THAT'S EVEN BADDER". He describes the marketing at taserx3.com as "ghastly" even though the exact same strategy has been used to market... er... EVERYTHING.
And then in the end of the article, he moves onto abuse of Tasers, as if that's the fault of the company in some way. There's no way to make the weapon know whether or not it's being fired at a granny or a non-threatening person, that's the job of the person firing it.
A midding job, I should say.
Some ad campaign ideas:
Tasers: would you rather kill a man? Really?
Tasers: because electricity is cool
Tasers: because people understand pain better than death
Why does the new Taser sound like Billy Mays?
Would somebody please invent the "Loogey" gun quick and put these bastards out of business please!
To add to the criticism about the Taser company, in France they are charged with violation of privacy and corruption of a higher public servant, for their spying on a far-left activist (Olivier Besancenot) who was questioning publicly the health risks related to their products and it's misuse as a torture device by police officers.
When the first allegations came out, they were like "come on, this is ridiculous, we would not pay for such puny things", and it turned out they paid thousands euros to obtain personnal infos about Besancenot, and probably would have not hesitate to blackmail him, without the scandal that followed.
@ demidan #6:
The problem isn't the "loogey gun," immobilizing goo has been around for years. The hard part is inventing the cleanup kit.
Edit : Some news report in english of the Besancenot/Taser trial.
http://www.france24.com/en/20081021-libel-case-goes-court-over-taser-stun-guns-justice-besancenot-france
yet you indulge in your delicious steam punk ray gun props more than any other blog, oh the irony!
I'm loving how this immediately preceded the Tesla post. You need to add "Shocking irony" to the tags.
Having been extensively trained on the 12 gauge shotgun, I would assure you that almost anything would have to be better than getting shot with a charge of 00 buckshot. I can only hope that less lethal devices become standard issue in place of most firearms. Having to seriously injure or kill someone is a terrible, awful thing for all concerned and any effort to reduce actual law enforcement shootings should not be laughed at.
LOOGEY GUN!
http://www.schlockmercenary.com/d/20020928.html
Such a good idea. Cops would love this.
On another note, I would much rather get tased then get shot point blank with a beanbag round from a shotgun. It's makes sense that they are coupling a shotgun (bean bags) with a taser.
I'm still trying to wrap my head how you can fire "a complete Taser system including power supply in a 12-gauge shotgun round" with any reasonable assurance that it won't be lethal.
Or, to go with Keneke's brilliant campaign slogans:
Taser shotguns: Because nothing says "Settle down, you scamp!" like an electrified shotgun shell to the sternum.
Why do they need to make real weapons bright colors? That's what toy guns look like! Let the kids have their toys!
It's disgusting. If I am ever assaulted by someone wielding such a weapon I will have justice, either in the courts or vigilante. No man may lay a hand on me except in direct self-defense.
* Warning: Pregnant women, the elderly, and children under 10 should avoid prolonged exposure to Taser X3.
* Caution: Taser X3 may suddenly accelerate to dangerous speeds.
* Taser X3 contains a liquid core, which, if exposed due to rupture, should not be touched, inhaled, or looked at.
* Do not use Taser X3 on concrete.
* Discontinue use of Taser X3 if any of the following occurs:
o itching
o vertigo
o dizziness
o tingling in extremities
o loss of balance or coordination
o slurred speech
o temporary blindness
o profuse sweating
o heart palpitations
* If Taser X3 begins to smoke, get away immediately. Seek shelter and cover head.
* Taser X3 may stick to certain types of skin.
* When not in use, Taser X3 should be returned to its special container and kept under refrigeration. Failure to do so relieves the makers of Taser X3, Wacky Products Incorporated, and its parent company, Global Chemical Unlimited, of any and all liability.
* Ingredients of Taser X3 include an unknown glowing green substance which fell to Earth, presumably from outer space.
* Taser X3 has been shipped to our troops in Saudi Arabia and is being dropped by our warplanes on Iraq.
* Do not taunt Taser X3.
* Taser X3 comes with a lifetime warranty.
Yeah, that's right! After all the fuss about "weapons confusion" when that cop shot the kid in Oakland a few months back, they're gonna put a shotgun and a taser on the same stalk! You pump, you aim, and then you press ONE of the two triggers! But don't confuse them! One zaps the victim, the other slams them with a fistful of lead!
Great idea, folks, great, great idea!
"Geeee Eye JOOOooooOOoooe"
Joshuaterrel:
I get the feeling the Taser is more Edison than Tesla.
Taser shotguns: for when you need to electrocute the guy directly behind the guy you just blew a hole straight through.
Very poor design. Giving less/non-lethal devices the same form factor as lethal devices is both lazy and criminally negligent. This is some of the worst industrial design I've ever seen.
Just look at the Oakland shooting that anselm mentions (assuming for the moment that it was an accident).
Sure, the form factor of modern firearms is a well-honed, effective design but it is worth sacrificing a degree of functionality for safety.
Plus, I doubt that the recoil on even a longer range taser round is going to be anywhere near that of a shotgun shell, so putting a full shoulder stock on the thing is probably unnecessary.
The yellow color as visual indicator is also dumb, because when you are holding the thing to your shoulder, the yellow would be barely visible, never mind low-visibility situations, common in non-lethal situations, e.g. smoke and tear gas at protests.
Just goes to show that granting a corporation a monopoly contributes to stupid decision making.
Sure, tasers are not 100% non-lethal, but they're better than a bullet by far. Which would you rather be shot with?
Sednaboo: depends on the results, doesn't it? If you're corvid food, you're still food regardless of how you get there. US cops are using these things instead of talking people down, and the cops are using them a lot--more people get convulsed with Taser products than ever get shot. I suspect that when the numbers are tallied, more people are harmed by being convulsed by the police than being shot by the police in the USA.
Sednaboo@19: I see your point, as long as you're talking about the taser being used in *place* of a bullet, not just to make it easier to restrain someone.
In other words, it seems to me that the only time these things should ever be used is when deadly force would otherwise be called for, like when someone is rushing you with a knife. Even if there were no chance of their killing someone, they're simply too cruel to be used outside of extreme circumstances.
Heh. I just used there, their, and they're, all in the same sentence.
i never figured that boingboing would be against less-leathal personnel control devices.
but i guess it goes to show what the sensible portion of this country has known for years, 3" buckshot is the way to go!
As someone mentioned above, the problem is not that less-lethal is worse than lethal. For a lethal force situation where less-lethal could be used safely (generally, this would mean safety for the people using the less-lethal force), it's a good choice.
The problem is this less-lethal force is often used in non-lethal force situations. A guy on the ground with six guys sitting on him, is not a lethal force situation. Someone not giving desired verbal responses, is not a lethal force situation. If this could be made to occur less often, if the repercussions for using less-lethal force in a non-lethal situation were high, these tools could become a lot more desirable. It's their abuse potential, as proven by real abuses, that is a negative.
Don't XREP me bro!
They're probably demoing these at the G8 summit--gotta keep the dark hordes at bay, y'know.
I'm still waiting for those statistics. The ones that tell us whether police forces with tasers fire their guns less than they did before they got the tasers. From what I can tell, they still fire their guns like they would have before and now they tase people who previously would have been dealt with verbally. Without statistics, the claim that tasers are less lethal than guns is a bogus argument. There's nothing other than guesswork to suggest that there's any relationship of any kind between guns and tasers.
Dealt with verbally?
More likely dealt a skull cracking blow with a billy club. That's what tasers replaced.
(And, to your point, more lethally.)
Checking out the facebook page, it would seem that no-one has left any negative comments whatsoever. Added one myself. Wonder how long it will last?
Some of you seem to misunderstand the X3, this is a shotgun, yes, but first of all, the Taser X3 custom Mossburg(?) is permanently modifed to shoot only X3 cartriges, and cannot be loaded with regular shotgun shells. Secondly, the X3 system is (indended as) a less than lethal device, the comments above seem to interpret this as a shotgun/taser combo, which it is not. The X3 package depicted in the BB summary is a taser/taser combo. The X3 is a low-power electrified shotgun slug intended to give law enforcement officers more range than existing systems allow for.
But I digress. The above comments concerning misuse of these products are certainly valid, although I can hardly agree with laying blame on the company. I prefer to think that the fault lies with improper guidelines within the law enforcement community regarding the use of these devices. No one can argue that they wouldn't rather be shot with one of these versus some hot lead. I fail to see how some hillbilly/uneducated/jackboot thug cop misusing the device negates its legitimate purpose.
(DISCLAIMER: I am not affiliated with TASER International in any way, I only seek to play the devil's advocate in this case)
Soo cute! Totally Kawaii! I just can't wait to get shot by one! I'm literally quivering just thinking about it!
Yes, it's colourful, ad non-lethal. But it's still a weapon.
The advent of practical non-lethal weapons is a great thing, but regrettably sullied by the attitudes of its users: "Great! Now we don't have to be careful/use restraint anymore!"
Any weapon, even a non-lethal one, can kill if used incorrectly or used on an individual with an incompatible medical condition. (See the case of Robert Dziekański in my home town of Vancouver)
Sorry to be the spoil sport!
@Lobster: "...Why do they need to make real weapons bright colors?"
SWAT trucks have cabinets with slide-out racks that bristle with weapons. In the heat of the moment, with officers running in and out, they want it to be absolutely clear which weapons are less-than-lethal, so they are marked with bright day-glo colors. [I design law-enforcement vehicles, so in this rare case I'm not talking thru my hat.]
I just saw the TASER "shotgun" story regarding and safety studies. A couple of key points need serious clarification. First, the TASER® eXtended Range Electronic Projectile (XREP™) is self-contained wireless NeuroMuscular Incapacitation (NMI) projectile housed in a shotgun shell. The XREP can be deployed from any pump action shotgun depending on the type of XREP model but more on that later.
The XREP increases the ability to project NMI stopping power from 25 feet to 100 feet. (It isn't a replacement for the handheld TASER® X26™ as mentioned in this article.) It's a new tool in the toolbox for police to stop dangerous subjects at distances greater than the current handheld technology. By eliminating the wires the XREP's longer range keeps officers safer than getting close to dangerous subjects.)
But what about the so called “TASER shotgun headline?” While the Mossberg/TASER Less Lethal Shotgun (LLS) can deploy the XREP round, it is however, the world’s first dedicated less-lethal 12-gauge pump-action shotgun. This innovative technique allows this “shotgun” to ONLY deploy the TASER XREP R or other future less lethal rounds. By utilizing our patent-pending Radial™ Ammunition Key technology, this shotgun actually prevents the firing of a regular lethal shotgun round to prevent what’s known as weapons confusion. While, it is technically a shotgun, it cannot deploy deadly rounds.
This is remarkable breakthrough technology. Not only did TASER “shrink” the incapacitating power of a TASER X26 into a wireless shotgun round, but we also developed a truly less lethal shotgun. See http://tinyurl.com/lzwdtt for more info.
Unfortunately, this report also made mention that there were no safety studies based upon the original source of this story that will hopefully be corrected soon. There ARE safety studies for the XREP and they can be source at: http://tinyurl.com/lfucap (See numbers 65, 70, 73 and 99.)
Sincerely,
Steve Tuttle
Vice President of Communications
TASER International (NASDAQ: TASR)
Wow, Steve. You pasted a press release into the comments without actually answering anyone's concerns.
I invoke shenanigans.
The non-lethal purpose convulsers is the induction of pain. Corvids don't care too much about hominid pain...but perhaps hominids do.
Essentially it's that unless law enforcement training protocols and behavioral guidelines about less-lethal force are more strictly enforced (I.E. with dismissals or jail sentences for the severely negligent), that a product like this has no appropriate market and should be abandoned.
Giving police officers "non-lethal" weaponry without the proper training and rules to follow encourages them to resort to the use of weaponry in situations when they would normally use their bare hands, such as tasing suspects who are being non-cooperative but whose conduct is clearly not hazardous to the officers. It's hardly unheard of for police to resort to the use of non-lethal weaponry just to make their jobs easier in situations where weapon usage is not appropriate. The "non-lethal" explanation given to these items encourages that, by implying that since the recipient will not receive life-threatening wounds, it's okay to use it on a criminal suspect who is not cooperative.
Unless police are trained to only ever aim this at someone if it would be justified to use a lethal payload instead, this weapon is not a legitimate or responsible item to be purchased. If you fire something at someone from a shotgun, there is a chance that they will die, regardless of its intended lethality. Unless the company is very clear about that fact and does not attempt to gloss over it with marketing, then the company itself is being irresponsible as well.
Knowing Taser, they will do everything in their power to gloss over the potential lethality of this weapon. They will try to make it seem like their non-lethal gun is 100% safe. Taser is a proven dishonest company and it is damn-near assured that they will deliberately misrepresent this product to everyone interested in purchasing it.
#34 Anonyman
and the other guy who said the same thing:
"I can hardly agree with laying blame on the company"
The 'company' made this thing. Who else's fault is it?
I strongly support things like this.
A former colleague of mine who was a part time police officer (now full time) ended up with his gun on a man with a weapon in the emergency room of a San Francisco hospital, with the doctors and nurses screaming to shoot the guy. All my colleague could do was try and reason with the man past the screaming doctors. He came very close to having to shoot him.
Both ancedotally and statistically, a lot of situations get that bad, and a lot less of them end up with shootings in departments with tasers than without.
There's a lot of knee-jerk "OMFG they tased that student those jackbooted thugs!". Sure, abuses have happened with them. But a lot less people are dead because of them. If you want to avoid abuses get a law passed or get an abusive cop brought up on charges. Keeping good cops (the vast majority) from having the tools to AVOID killing people most of the time is just dumb.
But a lot less people are dead because of them.
I'm sorry. I didn't see the link to the statistics that back up that claim.
give the cops another instrument of torture and they will torture more.
The gentleman from the Taser company posted a link to several reports; those are found on their reports and statistics page here.
Reduced injury rates to officers and suspects, and reduced fatality rates to suspects, are reported consistently across departments where tasers are deployed, to synthesize a wide range of the reports listed there.
I have seen similar info elsewhere.
All the above are rebuttable - lying with statistics is a common hobby among the educated classes - but should be rebutted with equal quality info.
Police agencies research this pretty extensively. Injury to suspects / criminals often causes lawsuits, fatalities to criminals almost always cause lawsuits, injuries to officers always involve monetary loss to the department (either insurance, or workmans comp / lost services).
Violent policing is bad policing - it's more expensive when you end up hurting people, and that ends up with less police on the street, less effective law enforcement, less trust of the officers by the community. Violence is necessary in some cases - officers are armed for a reason - but contrary to police shows, most officers don't have to fight people all that often.
Some police just don't understand that, and some of them are more violent than policy allows. But departments have strong incentives to get it right, balancing doing their job with minimizing damage in the process.
Tasers are catching on because they are far more effective at safely incapacitating than OC spray, which is far more effective than older tear gas, which are all less likely to injure people than batons.
Batons are far less critically examined - and far easier to injure people with. But we're used to them, they've been around forever. They're normal. Officers having guns is normal. Tasers are new(ish).
http://www.fas.org/cw/documents/nl_slippery_slope_1996.html
And the statistics that compare use of firearms before and after adding tasers to the force?
As I said - fatalities for suspects down after tasers introduced.
You can go dig the individual PD reports in detail for their fatalities due to cause X, but the vast majority of all suspect deaths are police shootings, so total deaths is at least a good proxy for shooting deaths and arguably the statistic you should care about anyways.
And does it bother you that most of those reviews are from Police Departments rather than independent agencies? Fox, henhouse, I'm just sayin.
if I recall, George is a nuclear scientist/technician.
Some specifics -
Madison WI Police Department
( report here on Taser website - specifically pp 11 and 12 )
MPD use of force incidents with taser used had 2% officer injury rates and 5% suspect injury rates. National average for the comparable time period for all use of force incidents was 10% officer injuries and 38% suspect injuries.
Within MPD as a whole - 2002 versus 2004 (after tasers deployed):
90 incidents of officer injury vs 68 due to use of force incident injuries
29 vs 26 missed work days
54 vs 25 light duty days
about $9k in lost work savings
(the report didn't have suspect injury rate info for those two years)
Long Beach PD:
( here on Taser site )
June 2003 to June 2005, before and after Tasers deployed, other force options usage declines between 27% to 63% depending on the force in particular (not tabulated in article). Officer injuries down 25% despite 2% more arrests and 8% more use of force incidents. Total suspect injuries up 10% but apparently the reporting included non-injury redness in the statistics - the serious injury rate went down. 3 serious and 19 moderate injuries in 284 Taser deployments, with all 3 of the serious and most of the non-serious injuries blamed on something other than the Taser - Taser injuries were basically bruises and cuts from falling down after being tased.
Internal affairs complaints down 9% and liability claims down 33% against the department.
If you have statistics from non-police agencies that show total use of force, abuses, injuries to suspects up, please post 'em, Antinous. I do not have any presumption that the statistics on the Taser site are necessarily 100% accurate across the country, nor that police agencies necessarily get their statistics right. As I said, adults get good at lying with numbers.
That said - I tend to go with apparently validly large statistical surveys (which those appear to be) versus ancedotal evidence. If it's statistics versus statistics you need to sweat the details. If the organization tends to lie, you need to sweat the details. But most organizations don't outright lie, most statistics are at least useful if not precise or perfectly valid in the most experimentally correct / data analysis correct sense.
If the anti-Taser groups have solid statistics, I want to see those. I haven't seen them in the past, but I don't discount just having not seen what's out there. Post 'em if you've got 'em.
never mind stats. Do you want cops to feel they can use torture even once?
I don't know how to answer that. Sure, let's try and ban torture.... Wait, you can torture someone smaller than you are with your bare hands. How do we ban torture again?
If there was a magic non-painful sleep gun, which was equally safe as the painful Taser or OC spray, would we want police to use that instead of Tasers or pepper spray? Sure. Is it real? Where's my Pony. I distinctly remember asking for a Pony.
We have the tools we have. You can disallow existing tools, but unless you disband the police you can have abusive officers.
You can disallow existing tools, Agreed.
WWFD? (what would Feynman do?)
Road cyclist tasered for not pulling over
72 y/o great-grandmother tasered for getting mouthy about a speeding ticket
16 y/o tasered for having an epileptic seizure
12 y/o truant tasered for not wanting to go to school
Collection of stories with 12-18 y/o tasered by Florida school police
Handcuffed 9 y/o tasered
Feel safer?
Sorry if I'm late, but wouldn't a directed projectile defeat the purpose of having a shotgun design?
Grimc:
As opposed to the collection of stories about people hit with batons, or sprayed with OC spray, or shot by cops without imminent threat of harm to anyone, etc?
I feel safer with good cops around, and I live somewhere that I trust the police department. I also live somewhere that uses tasers. And it makes me feel better, because if they do make a mistake with me or someone I know, the odds of us getting injured are lower with taser than with OC or with a baton or gun.
I feel safer knowing that they make relatively few mistakes, and seem to be intolerant of bad cops, but the tasers don't hurt.
Getting rid of bad cops is the #1 way to avoid those abuses. Given that it's not perfectly attainable, equipping all the police with equipment which minimizes injury during confrontations seems like a really good idea as a next step.
Let's use some logic.
If police use bad judgement and improperly use Tasers *more* than they do batons, OC spray, or guns, then there may be reason to worry about deploying Tasers.
If they misuse Tasers at a similar rate to other nonlethal force, then less people being hurt by Tasers is good.
If they avoid shootings by Tasing people effectively, then that's good.
All the ancedotal evidence of "Cop did XYZ bad with a Taser" ignores the issue that matters - would they have done XYZ with a baton or OC spray (or gun) if they had no Taser. The evidence - statistical or ancedotal - is lacking.
If you go purely by ancedotes, more civilians were unjustifyably shot with .40 caliber Glock handguns in police hands than any other weapon over the last decade. Using the logic some have used above, we should look into banning Glock 22 and 23 handguns from police departments because of the obvious abuse.
Statistically, the above happened because there are more .40 caliber Glocks in service than any other police handgun nowadays. The rate of mistaken / improper shootings is unrelated to what handgun brand was used. All the individual ancedotes mean nothing, without the statistical context, which shows that they're normal (if regrettable).
So - to those who dislike Tasers - prove the right thing. Provide evidence that Police are more likely to misuse Tasers than other nonlethal force, or more likely to use nonlethal Tasers than they were to use nonlethal OC or batons or tear gas before. Either good statistics or good (as in, lots) of ancedotal evidence.
If that's true, then there's a problem.
So answer the right question. If the answer is yes, I'll be suprised, but I'll agree there's a real issue.
Logic? There is no logic in the game of the Arms Race, which is what this is on a civil (?) level.
In Australia we are just entering this wonderful age of abstracted torture, and there is already a death-toll of mentally disturbed people.
"Auto da Fe", thats the term I was searching for.
The automatic sentence of the Spanish Inquisition, but now in a real-time and highly aestheticized form.
Mr. Herbert: police forces are "severely" treated - to all the latest in equipment, that is!
No wonder "free-enterprise" is tripping all over itself to sell to these guys.
How much we got to pay for all this "hi-tech" crap for the cops? Will it come out of our welfare/food bank/poverty-health-clinic funding? Will military spending be cut to pay for it?
Or do the cops have a free pass to the Treasury vault, whenever they ask?
This is a waste of taxpayers' dollars....
GWH: your base assumption is police behave logically.
Mr.Herbert's point is a good one: but where I live police budgets are they only item of Goverment getting more and more dollars, every year - so there's a problem with the cops: they cost too much.
And this new equipment costs money, new or taken from other parts of the budget - so it is those who wish to get these new toys who must justify it, not those who would "just say no" to bigger police budgets.
Lety's protect the citizenry, eh? Especially from over-expensive public services...
Anyway, are not "makers of weapons" amongst the automatically-damned-to-reincarnate-and-suffer, in Buddhist ideology?
They just aren't much good:
http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s2960blac.html
Who is really paying YOUR politicians? Taser, Inc.?
http://www.harperindex.ca/ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=0062
http://starkravingviking.blogspot.com/2009/03/taser-company-man-lobbyist-and-cop.html
the greatest swordsmiths and wielders that produced and carried the finest weapons were idealized as buddhist avatars in the sense that a physically perfect blade that lay rusted tight in the scabbard was the "good sword".
"The sword is for giving life, not taking it."
Also note the buddhist ken style sword held by Fudo along with a rope signified the conquering and binding of evil thoughts/spirits in the sense of justice and self-mastery - not warfare.
Finally, dear Canuck, I direct your attention to the Sword Taia concept, as revealed by an insignificant mendicant.
http://www.new-york-art.com/eyepress.jpg
"doan chew fuk wid me, lousy Maya!"
http://traveljapanblog.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/gallery_fudo2.jpg
Meh. As far as I can tell, the same amount of comments would go toward the negative were this to be released as a means of civilian self-defense (why that would be a good idea I dunno, it's a thought experiment). It has little to do with the police...
"Anyway, are not "makers of weapons" amongst the automatically-damned-to-reincarnate-and-suffer, in Buddhist ideology?"
Maybe. Helps to be Buddhist, I'd imagine.
It's not that the cops use it, it's that it's a weapon of any kind. There are arguments for and against new weaponry, but the fact remains that *we will almost certainly see new weapons on a regular basis.* At least this one doesn't take a guy's head off with a slug the size of a soda-can. As far as the lobbying conspiracy-theories... well, there are thousands of other lobbying groups that affect policy, including representatives for makers of lethal weaponry, gun rights groups, home defense groups, etc. There are a million people and groups that pull opinion in the government to and fro via the diversion of cash. How many of you are upset that George Soros manages to manipulate policy in certain areas because he's massively wealthy? Probably not many, and those who are probably have a political reservation.
Saying Taser is evil because it manufactures less lethal weapons is ridiculous. Saying a trigger-happy pig with a Taser is evil makes a little more sense; I think it's foolish to assert that a company who makes a product should be on the hook for somebody abusing it. The makers of computer-duster spray aren't poison-mongers because some idiots like to huff their products for a cheap buzz; they're makers of an easily-abused product, and that's different. The intent is to incapacitate suspects, and there are minimum ranges, age, physical conditions, etc.- it does the job, obviously, but getting blasted by a pig in a bad mood with the maximum juice he can muster probably wasn't on the testing schedule.
So, no, Tasers (and the Taser company) aren't necessarily "evil", whatever the subjective definition to that might be. They're no different than any other corporation making dangerous products (*that's* the real shame). The onus is on the PDs that regard using them on handcuffed 9-year-olds and speeding old ladies as good public safety.
I had a lot of encounters with the cops in my youth (first one @ 4 years old!). I never hated them because most are objective and responsible. But some people... give 'em a badge and a gun and they think it's their town and their rules. They're quick to use whatever is in their holster. I got a .38 jammed in my ear, with "Don't swallow, Mr. Seeker!!" Gulp. Two caps of mescaline. That was some afternoon.
They don't ask "Are you a bully?" on applications, so some get in. PD's are slow to weed them out, so the abuse of power goes on, but more people survive because of the less-than-lethals, thank goodness. No one says tazers are perfect, but 'better' will have to do until 'perfect' is available.
http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/07/taser-x3-gets-media-savvy/
@GWH
...the issue that matters - would they have done XYZ with a baton or OC spray (or gun) if they had no Taser.
Tasers are not alternatives to batons or OC sprays. They are alternatives to firearms. That's why they're called 'less-lethal' and not 'non-lethal'. It's that kind of blurring that promotes the idea that tasers are phasers set to stun; that nobody really gets hurt, so cops feel free to use them in any situation.
It's great you have statistics to support a theory that fewer people are killed or injured because of Tasers. But I don't know how much help that'll be if one day the cop writing you a speeding ticket decides he's had enough of your lip, and uses what the UN has defined as a torture device.
a change is coming. Police are losing what little credibility they ever had. There must be a reaction.
What do you think about this technology?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/article726229.ece
High speed chases are my number one pet peeve with the police. So not safe. For anybody in the vicinity; suspects or bystanders.
radio made this possible decades ago. Most chases are police arrogance.
I kind of want to take issue with that characterization of the concept.
The thing about batons is that the wielder is perfectly aware that what they are using is a weapon that WILL kill someone if misused. If you bash someone in the skull with the thing, or just strike a feeble person too hard, everyone using the thing is perfectly aware that they might just kill someone with it.
A lot of individuals seem to fall into the mindset that tasers are not so hazardous, that they're designed to be perfectly safe and that as long as you don't tase a 90 year old man with a pacemaker, you're not going to kill anybody. It's wrong, hazardous, and honestly the Taser company fully encourages that misconception because they want to sell more product with claims that it's safe and effective.
steel clubs leave marks
a change is coming. Police are losing what little credibility they ever had. There must be a reaction.
Dear Tak! Always the optimist...
@79 Mother of the Wolf Boy said: "What do you think about this technology?" [air cannons shoot a transmitter into perp's car for tracking]
It is a good idea, Ma, especially if you've seen all the videos on TV where cops are chasing car thiefs who totally trash a stolen car (along with the property of innocents).
I think the day is coming when cops can shoot a signal at a car that kills the engine so it coasts to a stop. Perps might be able to disable it in their own car, but not in a stolen vehicle. The insurance lobby will love that, and you know they have more influence on our laws than we do!
Troof, how hard would it be to capture and duplicate that signal? It couldn't be terribly difficult or demanding, because otherwise the signal wouldn't work under field conditions.
Once you work out how to duplicate the signal, you can block police who are chasing you by pointing the signal-generating device behind you at the intervening civilian cars. They all coast to a stop, the police can't get through, and you're on your way.
That's only the beginning. Imagine what carjackers could do with one.
On the subject of police weapons, they're developing a gizmo so a policeman's weapon won't shoot unless it's close to another gizmo, like a ring that the cop wears, so if a perp gets ahold of a cop's gun, it won't fire. That's kinda cool.
I proposed a special round that penetrated an exterior wall with a fish-eye camera, so during a stand-off, SWAT officers can see inside a room and know exactly when to storm the building. It wouldn't work on brick, of course, but it would on drywall.
"Troof, how hard would it be to capture and duplicate that signal?"
Ooh boy, I'm not the one to answer that- I am not an electronics guy, at all! I can't even figure out how to do italics here! I can tell you this tho- who are these car thieves? Young hop-head dopes who don't have a car. Evil geniuses might always be with us, but in my experience, car thieves are pretty stupid. Many get tracked down by the LoJack systems these days.
TroofSeeker #86:
I proposed a special round that penetrated an exterior wall with a fish-eye camera, so during a stand-off, SWAT officers can see inside a room and know exactly when to storm the building. It wouldn't work on brick, of course, but it would on drywall.
Interesting idea, but I see a few big hurdles. For one, anything that can penetrate a wall can penetrate a hostage just as easily. Second, how do you make the camera bullet stop once it gets to where you want it? A fisheye lens won't do you much good if it's embedded in a wall on the opposite side of the room. Finally, if it's a tense standoff situation, the last thing you want is to get the perp riled up by sending bullets whizzing through his walls.
Better to get a camera into the room in a less dramatic way, such as by feeding a fiber optic cable under a door.
Whenever lethal force is justified, cops use the real deal. Why shouldn't they? Cops do not use tasers instead of firearms. Cops use tasers in addition to firearms, to discipline suspects who piss them off. Any other basis of discussion is fantasy. Or intentional disinformation.
http://www.gizmag.com/go/5417/
http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/18/irobots-military-ember-bots-are-tiny-treaded-hotspots/
Mr. Spore,
The "Peek-a-Bullet" has a cover that protects the lens during penetration, then it falls off inside, exposing the lens. There is a flange near the rear that limits penetration to about 5 inches, so the camera doesn't fly into the room- it's sticking into the room by about half an inch. Remember that cameras can be smaller than 1/8". It's small enough that it might not be noticed, especially if there is some noisy diversion that occurs at the same time, distracting occupants' attention. It might have a wireless transmitter, or it might be cheaper to have it teathered to a cable with a display monitor at the other end.
I thought of this because I'm sick and tired of SWAT standoffs that last for hours and hours, with the cops not knowing if there's even any hostages involved, or how many perps there are.
Sure, they have cameras that "see thru walls", right? How come I don't see them using them?? They never seem to know what's going on inside.
if you can see what is going on inside it's harder to explain why you shot everyone.
Really not a fan of cops, are you Tac? I'm curious as to what you think might work better, short of every-man-for-himself anarchy.
police that obeyed the law?
BTW, Taser Steve Tuttle posted the same exact thing at http://www.popsci.com/gear-amp-gadgets/article/2009-07/taser-rolls-out-shocking-devices-shotty
Good job Stevie. You've successfully demonstrated the extent of Taser's willingness to engage the issues: CTRL-C, CTRL-V.
The taser is a beautiful idea. It is supposed to be used on people you have to shoot but would prefer not to kill. For instance if someone is running at you with a knife. When used this way it can sometimes be even more effective than a gun as a hit anywhere on the body with a taser should take a person down; and there is even a chance they won't be killed in the process. It is not a magic wand to make people obey you. The problem is police misuse this wonderful tool to torture people. Safety testing taser weapons will only decrease the empathy of those who misuse them by making them believe it dose no real harm. A taser is a weapon and should be treated as such. If a taser is used properly and a person just happens to survive being taken down by such a weapon, all the better.
"Tasers are not alternatives to batons or OC sprays. They are alternatives to firearms."
If you mean Tasers [i]should be[/i] alternatives to firearms, I agree.
But what I'm seeing on the street are officers with a Taser holstered to one hip and the familiar old Glock 16 or 18 holstered to the other hip. (And the Capsicum spray is on the back of the belt, alongside the cuffs.)
What got displaced by the Taser is the baton/nightstick/billyclub. What [i]should[/i] have been displaced is the damn gun.
"That's why they're called 'less-lethal' and not 'non-lethal'. It's that kind of blurring that promotes the idea that tasers are phasers set to stun; that nobody really gets hurt, so cops feel free to use them in any situation."
Absolutely!
@Takuan: "...police that obeyed the law?"
Um... you got me there.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090813/taser_lawsuit_090813/20090813?hub=Canada
AirPillo, July 10, 2009 5:21 PM
-----I fail to see how some hillbilly/uneducated/jackboot thug cop misusing the device negates its legitimate purpose.
------Unless police are trained to only ever aim this at someone if it would be justified to use a lethal payload instead, this weapon is not a legitimate or responsible item to be purchased. If you fire something at someone from a shotgun, there is a chance that they will die, regardless of its intended lethality
Two things....
Yes I am the a fore mentioned hillbilly/ jackboot/uneducated police officer that is about to complete his masters. So thanks for that generalization... I won't call you a liberal hippie if you don't insult me. Fair enough?
And second, Although I agree that there are plenty of people out there that wear a badge that shouldn't be, I can't stop that. I can only strive to be as professional as possible and get back home at the end of the day to see my wife and kids again after spending all night dealing with the "bad guys" so maybe, just maybe no one will kick your door in and commit ___enter any crime here____. If I could put a bullet in someone instead of using my taser then the world would be very different (and one that I wouldn't want to live in!) We are trained to use our Tasers on combative suspects that we would otherwise have to fight (i.e. baton). This isn't a replacement for O.C. nor is it a replacement for weapons... I am a little insulted (as if you care haha) that you think that I should put down my lethal (i.e. pistol/rifle/shotgun) and trade it in for a Taser. Until you have been in a gunfight, or had to fight a 350lb man that just did some PCP or another hallucinogen and doesn't feel any pain. I don't think that is fair for anyone that hasn't been put in a dangerous situation and left to protect life to tell me what I need to do my job. I will put my guns down when the bad guys do. Our use of force has gone down considerably and to be honest more often than not, the suspect sees the Taser and complies with out it ever being taken out of the holster. Every weapon has an appropriate time / place for use. In Oklahoma, If a man runs at you with a knife, you do not go for a Taser. DEADLY FORCE IS TO BE MET WITH DEADLY FORCE. I have carried my Taser for almost two years and have yet to have to deploy it. If I never have to then that is great. By the same token If i never have to fire my weapon again, then that is great too. But if the situation is presented, then believe me I can and will win the fight no matter what. I will end this tirade like I started it. There are a lot of bad people out there. Unfortunately some of them share my profession. We are not all the above mentioned "inbred three toed banjo picking sloths". Some of us actually care about what we do. Something that my LT. told me when I was a rookie was this. "I never laid a hand on Rodney King, but as far as anyone was concerned, I might as well have been handing them more sticks to beat him with. We live our life in a fishbowl and although you may save 1000 lives, you will be remembered for the 1 wrong that you did".
Just my opinion though......