home

New Taser Research

By TChris, Section Crime Policy
Posted on Wed May 24, 2006 at 07:12:35 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

The company that manufactures Tasers bases its safety claims on tests conducted on pigs. Pigs aren't people. Although a pig's heart and an adult human heart are similar in size, a thicker layer of fat and muscle protects the pig's heart.

A researcher who stripped away some of that fat and muscle to more closely replicate human anatomy found that Taser shocks kill pigs when the Taser dart delivers a shock within 17 millimeters from the heart. So much for the theory that Tasers are always safe -- a theory that has been debunked by the fatalities that have occurred when humans have been shot by Tasers.

Amnesty International has linked over 150 deaths to Tasers since 2001, according to one of its reports.

TalkLeft's Taser coverage is collected here.

< Fool Wants Kennard Conviction Reinstated | Primary Enforcement of Seat Belt Law Rejected by MA House >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    New Taser Research | 22 comments (22 topical)
    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#1)
    by HK on Wed May 24, 2006 at 08:03:45 AM EST
    Animal testing of any kind has always concerned me for exactly this reason, any moral arguments aside. Even human beings differ; older people or physically smaller people or those with medical conditions will be differently affected, whether by Tasers or drugs. To test on a different species, then, adds to these differences, as this study has shown. As far as testing goes, I don't know what the answer is; as far as tasers go, maybe, just maybe, we shouldn't be using them...

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#2)
    by Patrick on Wed May 24, 2006 at 08:22:51 AM EST
    OK, I promise not to open the chest cavities of persons I'm about to shoot with the taser and aim the probes closer that 1.7 centimeters from their heart.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#3)
    by soccerdad on Wed May 24, 2006 at 08:36:41 AM EST
    First this is only a first study and the researchers have more work planned in order to make some probabilitic statements about how Tasers can affect human cardiovascular system. Note also that the 1.7 cm distance is the average distance that always caused arrythmia in what are assumed to be procine hearts. But is should also be clear that testing tasers on intact pigs will predjudice the results towards no effect because of the anatomical differences in skin between pigs and humans. tasers dont always cause arrythmias in humans. So the real question is can tasers cause arrythmmias in people who may be morer susceptable, say those with prolonged ST segment durations. It seems completely plausible that tasers will cause arrythmias in humans with a predisposition to arrythmias, but the evidence still not definitive, but highly suggestive. It also seems certain that tests on intact pigs will underestimate the risk to humans. But since the latter are ciminals who are lower life forms who cares /sarcasm

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#4)
    by Dadler on Wed May 24, 2006 at 08:36:48 AM EST
    Patrick, Aren't we testy about our taser fetish today.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#5)
    by roy on Wed May 24, 2006 at 08:37:37 AM EST
    So much for the theory that Tasers are always safe...
    As a layman, I've never heard this theory except as a straw man. The theory we hear is that Tasers are safer than bullets, which still seems credible. Back when Tasers were new, they were supposed to be used only when bullets would otherwise be required. That sounds like a pretty good standard. Did that standard go away, or was it just a myth to start with?

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#6)
    by soccerdad on Wed May 24, 2006 at 08:39:42 AM EST
    aargh "probablistic" not probabilitic should be "healthy porcine hearts"

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Wed May 24, 2006 at 09:01:05 AM EST
    poor little pigs. I had heard that they were testing them on their own. Didn't know that pigs were that different than the rest of us, but it makes sense. As a job requirement their heart would have to be more insulated than it is for the rest of us.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#8)
    by Patrick on Wed May 24, 2006 at 09:02:32 AM EST
    Dadler, Not really...I thought the comparison in the study was a little comical. I've never been trained that tasers aren't dangerous. Hell, they're weapons, so it stands to reason they are dangerous. Many claim they are non-lethal, well I would argue they are less lethal, and as such have a place in the law enforcement world. I know from experience that when they are deployed properly, they work, and when they work, they save lives. So for those who want to remove the taser from law enforcement use, I say doing so will increase the likelihood that deadly force will be used in some instances where the taser would have been deployed. And that person has a greater likelihood of dying as a result than if they were susceptible to some arrhythmia or not.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#9)
    by soccerdad on Wed May 24, 2006 at 09:24:17 AM EST
    supporting the use of tasers using as the alternative what might be the inappropiate use of deadly force seems extreme and misleading. of course the real point here is that Tasers have not always been used properly and it can be argued that they been used inappropiayetly in part because of the misconception that they are always safe, as the company would have us believe. Thus, understanding that they are dangerous and can cause death might reduce their inappropiate use. Of course patrick would have us believe that police never make mistakes.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#10)
    by Patrick on Wed May 24, 2006 at 09:45:02 AM EST
    Soccerdad, the king of the strawman.. I've never said
    Of course patrick would have us believe that police never make mistakes.
    I also never said the alternative use of deadly force would be inappropriate.
    of course the real point here is that Tasers have not always been used properly and it can be argued that they been used inappropiayetly in part because of the misconception that they are always safe,
    True enough, but what weapon, process law etc has never been used improperly at one time or another. Abuse happens because humans are invovled. Wherever there are humans there will be instances of abuse. If perfection is the benchmark you are looking for to endorse something, good luck.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#11)
    by azbballfan on Wed May 24, 2006 at 09:45:23 AM EST
    I had the opportunity to witness a Taser demonstration that was made to a group of law enforcement officers. The demonstration was made by a company representative and a paid "medical expert". It was interesting to see the range of reactions from the officers. Some seemed interested in truly understanding how they could use the tool, asking questions in the group about the appropriate times to use it. A few officers seemed shocked that anyone would use something so tortuous. Unfortunately there were also a few who gleefully anticipated their ability to use the devices as soon as they could. Personally, I think that any officer who is issued one should receive a shock from the device before being allowed to administrate it.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#12)
    by soccerdad on Wed May 24, 2006 at 09:58:42 AM EST
    Patrick, try and stay with me. No one is looking for perfection thats your strawnman. The company says they are perfectly safe based on faulty research. The truth is likely that they do kill people. Accepting this point and making it well know might lead to more restricted use thereby saving lives. Or is it that you don't care about such lives. Throwing your hands up and saying well everything is misused, oh well, is really pathetic. BTW many things are comical to the ignorant

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 24, 2006 at 10:03:55 AM EST
    i can see both side of this coin. 150 deaths over 3-4 years is a lot, but I wouldn't be surprised if the death toll from physically wrestling subjects to the ground was very comparable. I have nothing to back up that suspicion but intuition. I think it would be an interesting comparison though. I think education is important to keep police from getting too trigger happy with it. But as an alternative to a gun or billy club, the Taser certainly has its place.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#14)
    by Slado on Wed May 24, 2006 at 10:32:11 AM EST
    Jack Bauer tasered both secret service agents and the helicopter pilot when he kidnapped the president and they didn't die. What more proof do you need that they're safe?

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#15)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed May 24, 2006 at 10:49:14 AM EST
    Yes, but Jack is a federal agent so his powers are more broad and it is in defense of the nation as opposed to a city so I have to say that Jack has more leeway.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#16)
    by Patrick on Wed May 24, 2006 at 11:15:23 AM EST
    Soccerdad, Try to stay with me.
    No one is looking for perfection thats your strawnman.
    No, that seems to be your point. If you'll notice, I agreed with the premise that since marketing claims they are harmless, officers may be more inclined to use them improperly, or believe they are being used properly. I think my statement was they are a weapon, and as such are inherently dangerous. You claimed I
    would have us believe that police never make mistakes.
    I have have never claimed that, in any thread in any forum.
    The truth is likely that they do kill people
    Who's truth is that? Bullets kill people too, and are more of a definable risk than tasers. Almost anything can kill people, given the appropriate set of circumstances. The argument, IMO, is where on the scale of force to they properly fall. All law enforcement weapons, including tasers, are restricted as to how and when they can be used. BTW, Ignorance seems to be your problem with regard to this issue, not mine. However, the nice part about that is it's cureable. Stupidity isn't. azbballfan,
    Personally, I think that any officer who is issued one should receive a shock from the device before being allowed to administrate it.
    I did, and agree it should be mandatory, although to my knowledge it is not. I will add, it was a bad decision on my part, but if I want to carry one, I should be able to testify to what it did to me.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#17)
    by soccerdad on Wed May 24, 2006 at 12:57:39 PM EST
    Ptrick, you need to join PPJ in a reading comprehension course.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#18)
    by Johnny on Wed May 24, 2006 at 03:14:14 PM EST
    Anyone who has even studied even a 101 level electronics class can tell you that Tazers are extremely dangerous. Electricity kills people, AC shocks as little as 2 milliamps can induce fibrillation in the heart, DC shocks as low as 2 milliamps can cause burning and scarring. From what I understand, the taser exceeds those levels. For anyone to argue that the taser is safe is ludicrous, ignoarnce of the highest order. The testing on pigs is flawed-pigs are not people, even though they are extremely close in many ways... Pigs probably have a higher resistance to a skin level shock than people. Besides, doesn't the taser company sound like Phillip-Morris? "I don't care how many people die, it has never been conclusively linked... blah blah blah..."

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#19)
    by Patrick on Wed May 24, 2006 at 04:24:03 PM EST
    Soccerdad, Fixations are unhealthy things.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#20)
    by Jo on Thu May 25, 2006 at 08:18:36 AM EST
    "...any officer who is issued one should receive a shock from the device before being allowed to administrate it..."
    Do we normally beat an officer with a baton before giving him/her a baton? Do the officers get shot with a gun before being issued a gun? Just curious where this line of reasoning is coming from.

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#21)
    by Johnny on Thu May 25, 2006 at 10:27:11 AM EST
    Do we normally beat an officer with a baton before giving him/her a baton? Do the officers get shot with a gun before being issued a gun?
    3 million years of data tells us striking people with sticks, clubs, or a baton is painful and sometimes lethal. Half a millenium of data tells us that being shot is painful and quite possibly lethal. But a few experiments on a different speecies tells us the taser is safe?

    Re: New Taser Research (none / 0) (#22)
    by Jo on Thu May 25, 2006 at 11:56:17 AM EST
    Johhny, granted. But the opinion made by azbballfan wasn't that we should use the taser on officers as an experiment to determine the taser's safety, his opinion was that being tasered should be required by an officer prior to allowing that officer to use a taser. But we don't shoot cops before allowing them to use their gun. That's all I'm saying.

    New Taser Research | 22 comments (22 topical)