You are viewing this article in the AnnArbor.com archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see MLive.com/ann-arbor
Posted on Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 6 a.m.

Cops see Tasers as an effective tool for quelling violent encounters

By Rich Kinsey

Tasers are extremely effective tools for law enforcement. In the communities that have equipped their officers with Tasers, officer injuries and suspect injuries have been greatly reduced.

Taser use has become so widespread, and its effects have become so well-known, that the mere presence of a Taser at the scene of potentially violent encounters can be enough to de-escalate situations where officers would previously have been forced to fight or use deadly force.

TASER is an acronym for Thomas A. Swift Electric Rifle. Thomas A. Swift was a science fiction comic book character in the 1930s. That character caught the imagination of Taser inventor Jack Cover. Cover was a former NASA scientist and invented the Taser in 1974. 

Thumbnail image for Taser.jpeg

Tasers are considered a less-lethal weapon.

Since 1974, the Taser has been studied, modified and improved, and is now in widespread use throughout the United States. The latest models of the Taser will be a semiautomatic unit capable of engaging three different targets at once.

Officers receive extensive training in the use of Tasers. They are taught when a Taser should be deployed and when it should not be, just like the “shoot/don’t shoot” training scenarios with their firearms. Part of the training for many officers includes “exposure” to the effects of the weapon (in other words, being shot with a Taser).

Consider the number of Taser “exposures” in the training of officers. Based on my experience, that number far exceeds the number of actual Taser deployments on citizens. These tools must be safe or the police officers, corrections officers and soldiers who use them would not voluntarily submit to an “exposure.”

I was “exposed” to the Taser, and it completely and instantly incapacitates a person by overwhelming the neuromuscular systems in the body. While it is activated, it sends shocks that vibrate through your body, and all you can think is: “Please make it stop!” When it is turned off, there is no pain - all that's left is a deep abiding respect for the weapon and overwhelming urge to do what you are told by the person holding the Taser.

The “shocks” are normally delivered by an air cartridge. Two prongs attach to a very thin wire that leads back to the Taser delivering the electricity. These prongs will leave small pinpricks that look like beestings. Other than that, there are no injuries from the Taser itself. Once the Taser is deactivated, there is no lasting pain. 

A risk of secondary injury exists, like in the case of a person falling a great distance and injuring himself or herself due to the fall. However, the risk of injury always exists for officers and citizens when criminals decide to fight, flee, resist, hinder and oppose the police.

One of the most effective and lifesaving uses of the Taser is on suicidal subjects armed with knives or other edged weapons. In the past, many of these subjects were shot as they advanced toward officers because the officer had no safe realistic defense against a knife other than using his or her firearm. 

Enter the Taser, which works well with these individuals in one of two ways. Either the Taser is deployed, the knife is dropped and the subject falls - or the subject drops the knife after seeing the Taser's red dot laser sight on his or her torso. Most subjects who see the red dot and hear the officer’s warnings to drop their weapon will do so to avoid being “tazed” (a cop term) or “riding the chair” as in electric chair (a criminal’s term).

For aggressive individuals, the Taser is much more effective than a nightstick/baton or chemical mace/pepper spray. Nightsticks can leave permanent injuries and depend on accurate and powerful delivery to be effective. Mace and pepper spray carry the warning on the label that they may not be effective on enraged, deranged, drugged or intoxicated individuals. Terrific - who else would an officer be more apt to need to incapacitate?

Furthermore, when chemical sprays are administered, “friendly fire” accidents are the overwhelming norm. When tearing agents are administered, all the officers around the incident are impacted. Even officers in the booking area later feel the effects of the tearing agent when maced suspects are brought in.

One comical friendly fire incident occurred when the Ann Arbor Police Department deployed tear gas during the 1992 NCAA basketball celebrations/civil disturbance on South University. When officers got back to the locker room, we coughed, laughed and cried as the tearing agents captured in the (artificial) furry collars of our jackets were shaken around the room when we pulled off our coats.

Tasers have become a standard in law enforcement because they have saved so many officers and citizens from injury and death. Like any “less lethal” weapon, their deployment coincides with incidents where the risk of injury or death to suspects, citizens or officers is extremely high. Taser use in these situations isn't the proximate cause of death when one occurs as the media may portray - it is the suspect’s bad decisions and actions that cause injury or death.

Lock it up, don't leave it unattended, be aware and watch out for your neighbors.

Rich Kinsey is a retired Ann Arbor police detective sergeant who now blogs about crime and safety for AnnArbor.com.

Comments

Michael Schils

Sun, Sep 12, 2010 : 1:45 p.m.

Mr. Kinsey, when I first looked at your latest "correction", my first thought was that perhaps you had reconsidered and that you had now realized the inappropriateness of publishing your opinion piece (which was wholly unsupported by any sources yet presented as fact) in the wake of the Stanley Jackson incident. That would have been a noble gesture on your part, especially considering that the autopsy report has not even been made public yet. But no, when I read further, it became apparent that you were simply using your relatively irrelevant "correction" as an opportunity to plug your friend's bookfest. Regarding your attributing the taser as a "secondary" cause of death, coroners accross the nation have become quite fond of that practice. Coroners have learned to word their reports to make it sound like the death was the victim's own fault: "If he'd taken care of himself, he wouldn't have high blood pressure, and the taser wouldn't have killed him." "If he hadn't smoked for all those years, he wouldn't have heart disease, and the taser wouldn't have killed him." And of course: "If he hadn't been using drugs, the taser wouldn't have killed him." I predict we will hear something at least similar to one or more of the above when Dr. Bader Cassin releases his autopsy report regarding the death of Stanley Jackson. Cassin's office said the toxicology report would be available "in at least 7 to 10 days" and it has now been over 3 weeks and still no word. This delay makes me tend to believe that the toxicology results do not support the "he was using drugs" cause of death. If it has been determined that the deceased was "cranked up on meth" when he was tazed, we probably would have already heard by now. Several years ago, when Cassin released his findings regarding the death of Clifton Lee Jr., he included "overweight", "enlarged heart"(from sleep apnea) and "high blood pressure" as contributing factors. Cassin also cited "the caffeine and high-carbohydrate meal Lee had in his system at the time". I believe it deserves to be said again that Cassin declined to attribute Lee's asphyxiation to Deputy Joseph Eberle, who was captured on tape punching Lee in the back of the head/neck and forcing Lee's face into the ground with his forearm (after spraying pepper spray into his mouth). http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2008/11/deputy_trial_medical_examiner.html For an extensive discussion of the Clifton Lee Jr. incident: http://arborupdate.com/article/1788/west-willow-incident-videos-released#comment

Rich Kinsey

Wed, Sep 8, 2010 : 12:04 a.m.

Correction on the TASER article: A friend of mine, award winning mystery and western novelist Loren D. Estelman informed me that Thomas A. Swift was not a science fiction comic book character from the 1930s as I stated. Tom Swift was actually a young hero in a series of boys books written by Victor Appleton at the turn of the 20th century. Incidently Loren will be appearing Thursday Sept. 9 at the Ann Arbor Downtown Library Multi-Purpose Room from 7-8:30 pm to kick off the 2010 Kerrytown Bookfest. Thanks for the clarification and correction my friend.

Michael Schils

Thu, Sep 2, 2010 : 1:33 p.m.

Oh, the sound of silence. Mr. Kinsey, your column reads as if it could have been written by "Taser International", the manufacturer of the weapon you are so fond of. But defending the taser as a "secondary" cause of death when a person falls is a difficult argument to make. It's sort of akin to saying that a speed-boater who runs over a couple of skiers is only the *secondary cause of death. (The "drowning by water" being the first.) (The times are off that show when these comments were posted. And I left a note several days ago, asking that the duplicate posting of my previous comment be removed. Then my note was removed, but the dupe remains. Strange.)

Michael Schils

Sun, Aug 29, 2010 : 12:46 p.m.

Well I thank you for responding and I am encouraged by your preference for accountability in regards to taser usage. If I may be so bold as to ask you another question-- I notice you refer to a person falling and getting injured after being tasered as a "secondary" injury. Please clarify. Are you saying that if a person falls and fatally breaks their neck after being tasered, that you think it was "the fall" that caused the death and not the taser? My second related question--Would you hold an officer accountable who deployed his taser against someone who was standing near the ledge of a tall building? (Assuming the officer was fully aware of the possible result of using his weapon--that the subject might fall to injury/death.)

Rich Kinsey

Sun, Aug 29, 2010 : 12:11 p.m.

I am in favor of taser-cams. I think this would save a lot of officers and departments from civil litigation and complaints. Furthermore if there were questions about when a Taser should be used, the video would realistically guide police administrators in making their decisions guiding the use of Tasers in their departments. For the officers on the street that is a better way to set policy, than knee jerk reactions to uninformed emotional public outcry.

Michael Schils

Sun, Aug 29, 2010 : 12:11 p.m.

That should be "and BLAMES the "suspects bad decisions"" (mistakenly omitted word in caps)

Michael Schils

Sun, Aug 29, 2010 : 11:30 a.m.

I will assume that my comment was removed because it contained a response to another comment that was deemed to be inappropriate. That removed comment exonerated the taser and blamed the deceased Superior Township suspect BY NAME. (In contrast to the writer of this column, who also exonerates the taser and the "suspects bad decisions" but doesn't actually include a reference to the deceased suspect BY NAME.) I am reposting my question to Rich Kinsey, which would seem important and "on topic", considering his ringing endorsement of the taser. Mr. Kinsey, what do you think about "taser-cams"?--cameras mounted on the tasers that would record the situation every time the taser is deployed. It would seem that departments would welcome this as a way to quell allegations (and lawsuits) against their officers regarding their use of tasers.

snapshot

Fri, Aug 27, 2010 : 11:33 p.m.

Hey Mr. Kinsey, Did you see the link posted by Tresspass? My goodness man. I read your column every issue and it always has nothing but good things to say about our trusted police officers. I must admit I don't pay attention to the crime stuff usually but the data on this site is offensive to my sense of police ethics. What do you think? I wonder shat happened to the officers who tasered the naked guy to his death. What do you think they were thinking? Did they get fired or commendated for their negligent actions. Their lives, nor anyone elses were threatened and they still tasered the guy, and he fell to his death. Do you consider this to be proper use of this device?

trespass

Fri, Aug 27, 2010 : 4:47 p.m.

Since we are waiting to see if Mr. Jackson death was caused by being tasered, let's look at the death this week of a Livonia man from head injuries he sustained as a result of being tasered. http://www.detnews.com/article/20100825/METRO01/8250368/1409/?source=nletter-news The idea that a taser is proven safe because officers are themselves tased during training ignores the fact that two other officers are standing at his side waiting to catch him when he falls. Look at this video and you will see just how well trained officers are to only use a taser when it can be done safely and as a last resort. This man was killed for being naked on a fire escape. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdSXri6yaCU

Cash

Fri, Aug 27, 2010 : 1:27 p.m.

Nephilim, At least a police officer wouldn't be using a "control" weapon that can kill someone who may or may not be guilty of a crime. I have to believe the goal is to control the person. He may be on drugs or not, he may be having a seizure...but the police officer wants to get the person under control. If a safe way to do that can be found, why would any one oppose that?

Nephilim

Fri, Aug 27, 2010 : 1:10 p.m.

How about one of those guns that shoots a net out? They can start netting criminals after they consult their supervisor, who consults the Chief, who runs it by the citizen review board, who engages in an open discussion with the community to see how they feel about netting criminals. Then there might need to be a study to make sure one group isn't getting "netted" more than another group. I'm sure at some point, "mission creep" would kick in and some overzealous cop with an attitude that day decides to throw good common sense to the wind and "net" someone that just doesn't comply fast enough. It start to be known as Tudenetting. "Watch out bro, you'll catch a net from the cops" then there will be, "Dont net me bro!" Meanwhile, that cop is still there thinking, should I net? Shouldn't I net? Wow I bet he wishes he knew how to do his job as well as a citizen review board does.

Speechless

Fri, Aug 27, 2010 : 12:54 p.m.

I'd like to 'second' or 'third' a view expressed in recent comments. Maintaining a strong, independent citizen review of police work is a really important aspect of a civil and open society. So much everyday authority has been embedded in law enforcement that checks and balances are essential. Voting for politicians who will oversee enforcement is not enough by itself. Taser use has become another example of why citizen input and vigilance is necessary. On one hand, there's going to be a number of situations where firing a taser will likely be an officer's best option to control an aggressive situation while also causing the least probable amount of physical harm to all those directly involved. Yet these situations apparently act as a springboard for "mission creep," where the practice of tasering gradually expands to all-purpose use within police departments. When this happens, a community needs to have a firm, direct way to say "No" to such tendencies. I also 'second' the idea of investing in research on replacement technologies with less dangerous side effects. Maybe tasers will one day soon be seen as a crude, transitional means of response to aggressive or violent individuals.

bigblue

Fri, Aug 27, 2010 : 8:25 a.m.

the reality is that cops have a get out of jail free card. it's the "i thought my life was in danger" card. they use it all the time and it usually works out for them.

Cash

Fri, Aug 27, 2010 : 6:25 a.m.

Maybe it's my old age but when I think of WSCD (What Should Cops Do) on my behalf as a citizen, I think that they should use the least possible force to resolve a situation. Working as agent for me, the taxpayer, I think they should always be thinking in those terms. I think we have enough background to determine that tasers used in certain situations can harm or kill. Now, what are the alternatives to tasers? That's the big question. I posted somewhere else and still think that if there was big money in it, a safer alternative could be found. What about a spider net like Spiderman used? Or that cool lariat type device that Batman used? Seriously, couldn't something similar be developed? Is law enforcement at any level asking for something safer? I think this is a role of government. Distrust of police and lawsuits stemming from taser use...should bring about the search for something better. IF that call went out....I'm guessing inventors would begin the work needed to replace the taser.

Awakened

Fri, Aug 27, 2010 : 5:16 a.m.

Good point Snapshot. Unless we start hiring perfect people as cops we are going to have mistakes and over-reactions. As an informed citizenry we need to insure that proper policies and proper oversight is being done over our police forces. In the end it is OUR choice if or how Tasers are used because they work for us. If people are concerned contact your County Commissioner, Township manager, and/or City counselperson. Organize and change things for the better. For me, I choose to comply when surrounded by people with guns and tasers. This leaves me alive to settle things later in court. But if they make a mistake and over-react I'd rather take my chance with a taser than with a.40 bullet or a club to the head.

snapshot

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 10:57 p.m.

I would like to believe it is a perfect world, but it isn't. It is a documented fact that police officers can over react, lose their temper, and sometimes enjoy hurting those they believe to be deserving. It is also documented that police officers falsify police reports, lie under oath, and cover up their mistakes. Why would anyone think that these public servants are immune from the perils that affect the general population? Many cities have independent "citizen" review boards to ensure objectivity in investagations. This citizen intervention impedes unethical traditions of "protect our own". There are many good and dedicated police officers who perform and function to the best of their abilities and training, and there are too many who don't. For these reasons, taser use should be reviewed just as deadly force is reviewed. It's sad, but history has shown us that it is sometimes necessary to "police" the police.

Chuck

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:43 p.m.

@Matt Cooper1: Because there is a brotherhood and cops don't arrest cops unless they have to.

John Hritz

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:39 p.m.

Here's the link to Amnesty Internationals report on taser use. I would note a few things. Submitting to being shot with a taser is increasingly voluntary for officers. Officers are generally given a very short short pulse (2 secs) and caught before falling to the floor during training. AI's guidelines point out that people shot with tasers may not be able to comply with orders during and for several minutes after having been shocked. That said, there are many tools and techniques that have been available to law enforcement that creep up the use-of-force continuum and get taken away due to abuse by small numbers of officers and/or incur problems of public perception. Improper use of impact weapons (targeting the skull instead of nerve junctions, use of flashlights) and carotid chokes (still a fixture of MMA fights) spring to mind. Tasers may soon fall into this category. http://www.amnestyusa.org/us-human-rights/taser-abuse/page.do?id=1021202

Matt Cooper1

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 8:36 p.m.

@ rusty: "So, to expand that, for example: if a suspect comes charging at an officer, Taser use is potentially appropriate. On the other hand, a suspect simply refusing an order without physically threatening anyone is not a reason to "tase" someone. (A cop recently killed a man with a Taser in Washington state after he refused to get out of his car, which the police had blocked and was not capable of driving off.)" So, in your example of the driver tyhat refused to get out of his vehicle when lawfully ordered to do so by the police officers, what should the officers in question do? Open the car door having no idea what weapons, if any, the suspect might have hidden? Knife in hand...gun under the dash...fully automatic firearm stuck between the seats...just waiting to whack some cop who is just doing his job, and you would have him reach in and attempt to use physical force to remove him from the car? Or maybe they should just stand there saying "Pretty please, Mr. X, please get out of the car...pretty please with sugar on top!" until such time as the suspect decides to get himself out? Or maybe they just sneak up on him and throw a punch to his face in the hopes that they can incapacitate him long enough to use other means? Secondly, in those scenarios you pointed out..where did you get your information? Were you there? Did you see what both the officers and the suspects did to provoke the use of the taser? Did you read firsthand the police reports? As a matter of record, any time the police go hand-to-hand, or use a weapon as a means of restraint of a suspect they are required to file a full and complete report to their superiors. They don't get to just deploy their firearms or their tasers and just walk away and act as if nobdoy heard or saw anything. "Here is the thing, cops need to take taser as seriously as a gun. They should have to justify it after the fact in writing every time they use it." Well guess what. THEY DO! And finally, you said "Many many MANY of the taser deaths have been elderly people or incapacitated people who presented no legitimate threat to officers, as well as suspects who were already subdued". Got a legitimate article to prove your point? And what you think is a threat or non-threat, from reading an article in a newspaper or magazine article in the comfort of your living room, is in no way an intelligent comparison to what is perceived as a threat to a cop trying to subdue a violent attacker on the street. Do you have any idea of the legal boundaries and restraints that are placed in the police use of any kind of weapon? Have you a single shred of understanding of the training that police go through not only in the academy but also in ongoing inservice training regarding weapons, officer safety and the use of force? I'm thinking probably not.

Nephilim

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 8:36 p.m.

Taser use. Amnesty International has documented over 334 deaths that occurred after the use of Tasers between 2001 and 2008. 1379..........that's the number of cops that lost their lives during that same period. Hey no big deal, only a little over a thousand more than all the poor poor souls that were so unmercifully attacked for probably just jay walking or something. Why does it seem the same people that scream foul by the police are usually the same ones that scream for help when they hear something go bump in the night, same ones that routinely have to remind that they do "pay their salaries" and are typically the same ones that always seem to have "good advice" on how they could do their job better. Of course after everything is over and there is absolutely no threat to them whatsoever.

Lokalisierung

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 4:34 p.m.

"But you also get the same money and better benefits than lets say a pharmacist or resident physician who deal with deadly microbes and viruses while they use a huge chunk of their cash to repay the college debt police DON'T accrue in the Academy." Ummm...do you know what pharmacist makes per year? They start at like 90k...tad more than a cop. And actually they don't work with any "deadly microbs," whatever that means. "If your safety and the illusion you create to justify lethal force for incidents of loud noise where "maybe it could be or we thought he might have something in his hand" or "lack of speedy compliance or attempting to flee is manifested in the initial reports of the last two Taser Deaths, I don't see it." You lost me. No idea what your point is here. First of all I assume you mean the last 2 stories on aa.com about tazers. One was a drug raid that tunred into a felony fleeing. And there has been NO proof that the tazer was the casue of his death, as stated here again and again.

greg formella

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 3:56 p.m.

O.k. so you would rather use less lethal force...isn't lethal force supposed to be a reaction to ACTUAL events? I respect all life. I sell glass. I have and will get injured. There are 33 people miles down in a Chilean mine..won't be home for Christmas...the hazards you portray are as real as any other job. But you also get the same money and better benefits than lets say a pharmacist or resident physician who deal with deadly microbes and viruses while they use a huge chunk of their cash to repay the college debt police DON'T accrue in the Academy. If your safety and the illusion you create to justify lethal force for incidents of loud noise where "maybe it could be or we thought he might have something in his hand" or "lack of speedy compliance or attempting to flee is manifested in the initial reports of the last two Taser Deaths, I don't see it. The people expect to get to trial. But this mentality has executed hundreds of people in most recent memory...but it's the dead guys fault??? There are jobs that don't require the risks one accepts in mining, medicine,demolition,police work,soldier,etc. There is a career for each person. Perhaps a citizen review board would be a more realistic option to the upcoming self investigations for the last two recent incidents in Metro Detroit. When a statement as "they caused the action" is made, I almost perceive that the writer takes an odd pleasure in having the power of the proven lethal Taser and the discretionary power to use it. The old saying..can't stand the heat stay out of the Kitchen

Lokalisierung

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 3:47 p.m.

Or if a gun and a tazer are "the same thing" why not look at all the gun deaths and say "they should have used a tazer there." Or look at all the lifelong injuries sustained by suspects/criminals and think "A tazer there might have ended the situation before it came to the use of such force."

Lokalisierung

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 3:39 p.m.

Right. So then we have to add in another judgement call of "This person looked to be under in the influence of crack so i couldn't taze them." Instead, you could shoot them, give them the baton, kick and punch them etc...and it goes on and on. All we here is "look at these tazer deaths, this is crazy!" Let's start looking at other ways people have died by police force and judge them against that. Again it comes down to the decision to use what kind of force at what level. Absolutly somtimes police use a tazer too long, just like they keep their knee on a suspect neck too long sometimes. It's a rough job.

Ricebrnr

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 3:27 p.m.

Exactly! Are Taser dangerous to a large portion of the GENERAL population OR are Tasers more dangerous to a large portion of the CRIMINAL population? If to the latter does not using it mean that criminals should be considered a protected class so as to justify its use?

Lokalisierung

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 2:55 p.m.

"Here is the thing, cops need to take taser as seriously as a gun." I agree they do need to take it seriously, but no where near the level of a gun. They are not in the same catagory. "Many of the deaths have involved people who simply did not comply quickly enough (though they were in the process of doing so), said something rude, or were black." Many of the deaths i've seen listed are form drug addicts who are high on meth and other stimulants. I of course think these people have rights just as much as other people, and do not think they deserve to lose their lives in anyway, but it makes it harder to judge a situation.

rusty shackelford

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 2:46 p.m.

So, to expand that, for example: if a suspect comes charging at an officer, Taser use is potentially appropriate. On the other hand, a suspect simply refusing an order without physically threatening anyone is not a reason to "tase" someone. (A cop recently killed a man with a Taser in Washington state after he refused to get out of his car, which the police had blocked and was not capable of driving off.)

rusty shackelford

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 2:42 p.m.

Here is the thing, cops need to take taser as seriously as a gun. They should have to justify it after the fact in writing every time they use it. Many many MANY of the taser deaths have been elderly people or incapacitated people who presented no legitimate threat to officers, as well as suspects who were already subdued. Mouthing off can no longer be a legitimate reason to be shocked. Many of the deaths have involved people who simply did not comply quickly enough (though they were in the process of doing so), said something rude, or were black. It's clear that tasers can be deadly for a large portion of the population, and they need to be treated as potentially deadly firearms, not toys for tough guys to get kicks.

Michael Schils

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 12:09 p.m.

One of my comments was deleted because I made an assumption that there was a connection between the use of the taser and the death of Stanley Jackson Jr. Apparently the moderator felt that such a statement was premature considering that the results of the autopsy had not yet been made public. But now, with this column, the exact opposite and equally premature opinion is being expressed--that it wasn't the taser, but it was "the suspects bad decisions" that caused the death. I mean, sure, this cop didn't actually mention the deceased by name...but come on. (And it even got filed as "News".)

Nona

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 11:47 a.m.

"These tools must be safe or the police officers, corrections officers and soldiers who use them would not voluntarily submit to an exposure. These exposures build an unreasonable expectation of how the subect will respond. Here's a more realistic test for officers: the person should lie face down on a mattress (no risk of falling) with their hands under them. The shooter holds the button on the taser down until they produce their hands for cuffing. This has happened too many times.

tmo

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 11:42 a.m.

Amalie: To find this column, AA.com files it under News > Crime, in the navigation bar. There is another navigation heading News > Opinion (which is a conundrum if you ask me) where it would be more appropriately filed. I can hear my old journalism teachers rolling over in their grave with such disregard for distinctions between what is news and opinion and how it is presented to the readership. Regarding the taser incident story you refer to - it contains a statistic on the number of deaths per year. How is that a thorough analysis to educate the readers on the issue. To make any sense of the risk, I'd need to know what fraction of uses this amounts to.

JSA

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 11:13 a.m.

A lot of people seem to be forgetting that the other option might be a 9mm pistol. It seems the taser is the preferable alternative. You also seem to forget the officers have a right to protect themselves. The people being tased are not saints.

krc

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 11:10 a.m.

Another excellent and well-balanced article, Mr. Kinsey.

tmo

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 10:54 a.m.

I also am concerned about the timing of this piece but blame AA.com. If the idea is to educate the readers on the issues, stick to a factual article, with statistics on usage, % of deaths or injuries caused by tasers, reductions in gun usage since they've been used, ya da ya da ya da. This type of 'news' article (not even labeled opinion), at least in the absence of a factual article and given the timing, makes a sad sad sad statement about the yellow journalism we are left with.

Michael Schils

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:58 a.m.

I join those who question the sensitivity of publishing this unsupported defense of the taser in the wake of the recent tragedy.

bunnyabbot

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:55 a.m.

How do people figure that tasers are being overly used? If less criminals are being shot I would think that would be a good thing. I also think if less officers are being injured due to less physical contact with combative subjects than that is a good thing. Furthermore officers in a scuffle are in danger of thier firearm being taken and used against them. Addionally, many drugged out subjects are not easily subdued and can exhibet superman like stregth and have a low tolerence for pain. I for one don't care, if someone who chose to break the law and needs to be tased, is. They chose to be personally irresponsible. On the otherhand, if an officer is injured, misses work or can no longer work I have a problem with that. I think the statistics of use of taser to fatalities would be reletively low, the number of cases where the taser was used which would have been firearm years ago and resulted in more fatalities would also be an interesting number.

R. Dumas

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:49 a.m.

It's easy for a cop to say a tazer is safe. What if the person has a medical condition, let's say heart problems? What happened to the young man who died last week? He was a father, who died for a little weed, because he was tazed. I'll keep saying it, "DON'T TAZE ME, BRO!" There has got to be a better way!

Carpenter Ant

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:45 a.m.

I enjoy and value Detective Kinsey's columns, but in this column he seriously downplays both 1) the extent to which police are using Tasers in situations where they should not use them, and 2) the number of deaths that have been caused by Tasers. Chuck Early and Atticus F. are both right. Tasers are being used too often. And they're killing people who don't deserve to die. I looked around the Internet a bit and in just a few minutes found items indicating that police have used Tasers on merely uncooperative persons (neither armed nor in any way threatening), fleeing unarmed persons, naked unarmed persons, very elderly unarmed persons, unarmed persons in wheelchairs, and unarmed blind persons. I did a Google search for "taser deaths" and got approximately 188,000 hits. What does that tell us? If you go to YouTube and search for "Taser," you'll be able to watch a whole slew of short videos in which police use Tasers unnecessarily, and a whole slew of videos about Taser-caused deaths. My favorite is the video titled "Naked psych case tasered to death in New York City."

Atticus F.

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:44 a.m.

DFsmith, the penalty for resisting arrest is not death, nor is that the penalty for most crimes. So please don't use the reasoning 'if he hadn't resisted, he would still be alive'... because this would ignore safety issues, and other contributing factors.

Michael Schils

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:39 a.m.

From the article, "Consider the number of Taser exposures in the training of officers. Based on my experience, that number far exceeds the number of actual Taser deployments on citizens." So this guy thinks the cops taser each other more than they do the citizens?! I'd like to see a source for that one. It should be noted that the officer/on/officer "exposures" occur in a much more controlled setting than is afforded in the field when the taser is used on citizens. The officers know they will only have to endure a single short "zap" and that their fellow officers will make sure that they don't fall and hit their noggins on a hard surface.

DFSmith

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:30 a.m.

I amnot surprised, but all the previous commnets critical oftheuse of tasers by cops seem to neglect one crucial fact- that is, the role played by the criminal suspect who got tasered. If said individual hadnt broken the law, and had not resisted arrest, or attempted to fight the officers, they wouldnt be tasered. How about that, huh? Seems some kind of mass cognitive dissonance is going on in our fair city- where the criminal elements are held up as innocent paragons of virtue, whereas cops, who keep us safe from the criminal hordes are portrayed as the "bad guys".

racerx

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:22 a.m.

@Steve Hendel-would you really expect a retired cop, or any cop, ever deviate from the "party line"? Really? Most police officers appear as though they are more than mighty and always righteous. To think they would even admit actions that goes against them is rare. Though it's interesting that Mr. Kinsey would compose a triad in lieu of the recent passing of Mr. Stanley Jackson, Jr. Even if the caused of Mr. Jackson's death has not been determined, if by taser or other means. The sensitivity and timing is suspect. Especially his opening sentence. Still, as with most local news, if it bleeds it leads.

Ricebrnr

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 9:18 a.m.

1) Tasers used appropriately and within "reasonable" continuum of force guidelines are not the problem. Combative arrestees as reported in the recent case are. Place the blame on the appropriate party. As Richard indicated the alternative to tasering is usually brute force or death. 2) Tasers used outside of those guidelines do require examination of those using them inappropriately. Compliance due to disrespect of cop is not a valid reason for example. "Mission creep" is a constant problem with any device or government entity as the recent Royal Oak controversy indicates. Thus is our great system of government with checks and balances. There will always be those at extreme opposite ends of any issue. Disregard those as you will but those extremist do help to define the middle road. As with many of my arguments do not blame tools for those using them or those requiring their use.

Atticus F.

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 8:25 a.m.

I have no problem with the police using a taser against a combative suspect. But the problem is they are now being over used, and being used against suspects that are fleeing, or simply not following orders properly.

Steve Hendel

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 8:25 a.m.

@Matt Cooper1-Kinsey is a RETIRED officer, so he has no more official standing than you or I. Granted, his knowledge and experience ARE greater than ours-still, it would be nice if he went beyond the 'party line' once in a while.

Steve Bean

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 8:22 a.m.

"These tools must be safe or the police officers, corrections officers and soldiers who use them would not voluntarily submit to an exposure." That's fallacious. Certainly, as other commenters have suggested, the deaths that have resulted, along with the clear description of the Taser as a "less-lethal weapon" contradict the conclusion. "While it is activated, it sends shocks that vibrate through your body, and all you can think is: Please make it stop! When it is turned off, there is no pain - all that's left is a deep abiding respect for the weapon and overwhelming urge to do what you are told by the person holding the Taser." Sounds like a description of torture. When the evidence indicates that we've gone off the deep end, it's time to reconsider our approach.

Steve Hendel

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 7:17 a.m.

@Matt Cooper1-Kinsey is a RETIRED officer, so he has no more official standing than you or I. Granted, his knowledge and experience ARE greater than ours-still, it would be nice if he went beyond the 'party line' once in a while.

Rasputin

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 7:03 a.m.

Tazers save lives (most of the time).

Matt Cooper1

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 7 a.m.

@Chuck Early: If that's true, then why aren't there a lot more cops being charged with criminal offences? Why aren't there more cops being disciplined? And let's not forget that the ones who are ultimately responsible for any advanced techniques of restraint that the police use falls squarely on the shoulders of those who would resist and fight the police. It is not the cops fault that Mr. Jackson chose to run and then fight with the police. The use of a taser is only in response to the escalating of violence by the suspect.

Chuck

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 6:42 a.m.

Are you sure they don't see it as a tool for their amusement? They seem to enjoy using the WAY too much, and all the data isn't in on them yet either. These things are killing people all over the U.S.

Matt Cooper1

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 6:38 a.m.

Any why should he check in on an investigation or situation he has no part of and is not involved in? That would be somewhast irresponsible, don't you think?

Matt Cooper1

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 6:37 a.m.

Or perhaps no "misuse" occurred?

Steve Hendel

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 6:26 a.m.

No mention of the incident the other day of a death subsequent to tasing? I know the incident is still "up in the air," but surely Officer Kinsey might at least have noted it, and perhaps mentioned the possibility of misuse.

Matt Cooper1

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 : 5:30 a.m.

Great article, Detective Kinsey!