Arguments against taser use in law enforcement

¶ … Tasers in Law Enforcement

The use of Tasers, dart-firing weapons designed to cause instant immobility by delivering a high voltage shock, has gained widespread use in recent times among the law enforcement agencies, particularly in the U.S.A. Its supporters claim that they are a safer, non-lethal alternative to many conventional weapons in controlling dangerous or combative individuals and have resulted in bringing down the injuries to police officers and suspects since their introduction. A closer look at the pro-taser arguments, the use of the weapon by the law enforcers, and its effects, however, gives a contrary picture. Consider the following.

Replacement of Lethal Weapons or a Routine Force Option?

The main argument in favor of Tasers is that it is a non-lethal replacement for firearms and impact weapons such as batons and hence a more humane alternative for controlling violent individuals. This would have been an acceptable line of reasoning if the law enforcers were using Tasers solely as replacements for more lethal firearms. Unfortunately, this is not so. The Amnesty International, for example, has observed: "far from being used to avoid lethal force, many U.S. police agencies are deploying Tasers as a routine force option to subdue non-compliant or disturbed individuals who do not pose a serious danger to themselves or others." ("Excessive and Lethal Force?" p. 2) This clearly shows that Tasers are NOT being used as a replacement for more lethal weapons but rather as a "routine force option" in addition to other weapons. Police departments in the U.S. are generally much more relaxed in allowing the use of Tasers as compared to lethal firearms. In fact, they readily allow the use of Tasers in situations that would not even justify the use of batons or other impact weapons. Hence, the claim by the manufacturers of Tasers and its supporters that the use of Tasers has resulted in reduction of police shootings and serious injury does not convey the entire picture.

Overuse

Moreover, because of their portability, ease of use and the capacity to "inflict severe pain at the push of a button without leaving substantial marks," Tasers are particularly prone to abuse and over-use. Numerous examples of such over-use have been reported in the press. The Orlando Sentinel in its issue of July 29, 2002 revealed that while police use of chemical sprays, police dogs, physical force and firearms in Orange County dropped by about 21% in the year after Tasers were introduced, the overall number of times force was used by Orange County deputies actually increased by 37%. (Ripple) Similarly, Local 6.com reported the "trigger happiness" of taser-equipped police officer in a May 2004 broadcast by noting that "three of the top Orlando police officers have used their weapons a combined total of 77 times, in just the last 13 months" ("Police Taser Use Grows...") and that the weapon is most often used to prevent nonviolent offenses, such as littering, jaywalking, and failure to obey an officer. The situation regarding the increasing use of Tasers is no different in Phoenix, which was one of the first cities to equip its entire police force with Tasers. Its Police Department proudly reported that police shootings in Phoenix fell from 28 to 13 in 2003 after the introduction of Tasers. ("Excessive and Lethal Force?" p. 10) The statistic seems impressive until we consider the second part of the data; in the same year Tasers were used in as many as 354 incidents -- far more than would have been needed to avoid a resort to lethal force.

Causes Severe Pain

The claim by the manufacturers of Taser that the latest models of their shock-guns do not inflict much pain is also highly dubious. Police officers subjected to even a fraction of the normal Taser "dose" during training sessions have reported feeling acute pain. A police officer who was subjected to the "Taser treatment" for a five-second burst a part of his training, recalled later: "It is the most profound pain I have ever felt." (Quoted in "Excessive and Lethal Force?" p. 6) Another officer who was tased by accident, testified in court: "Suddenly I feel like my eyeballs were popping out of my head...I was in a lot of pain and having a lot of difficulty focusing on anything." (Budnick) The impression about the effect of a Taser burst being completely transitory may not be so accurate too. The same officer who got tased by accident, recalled that after the incident, "all I wanted to do was get to the hospital," and a resulting neck strain forced him to miss work for a couple of days. A journalist who volunteered to take a 50,000-volt hit from a Taser reported his experience in these words: "Taking the jolt, my knees gave out and the quick blast felt like it lasted 10 minutes. All I could see was red, and the pain was like an extreme migraine headache and how I imagine a whack in the back with a baseball bat would feel." (Argus).

Stun Function Mode

Such pain is even less transitory when it is applied repeatedly, as is often the case, when the Taser is used in its stun function mode. Although the Taser can be used for giving repeated electric shocks in both modes, its repeated use is more common in the stun mode. Moreover, as the touch stun function only acts on a small part of the body, it is designed to cause pain and debilitation rather than total incapacitation. Even a Taser International training manual acknowledges the pain-inflicting quality of its product when used in the stun mode by stating: "If only the stun mode is used, the M26 becomes a pain compliance technique..." (Quoted in "Excessive and Lethal Force?" p. 6) and advises an "aggressive" application of the probe to sensitive areas, including the neck and groin. Another disturbing function of the Taser is that the electrical charge continues beyond its normal 5-second burst if the trigger on the gun is kept depressed; the effect of a prolonged "shot" being progressively more painful.

Since Tasers are particularly easy to use in the stun gun mode, there being no need to load or reload a cartridge, their potential for abuse becomes even more common. The manufacturers insist that there is a built-in memory chip in the gun that records the time and date of each firing; thus guarding against its misuse. But, according to research by ACLU, the function is by no means foolproof, particularly when used in the stun mode. (Ibid. 26) As the Taser can be used in its stun function mode through touch stunning a subject's skin or clothing at close range, it has the potential for being used against individuals who are already in custody. As a result, Tasers in stun gun mode have most often been used to shock or threaten individuals restrained in police cars, hospitals and in local jails. The use of high voltage electrical shocks against people who are restrained and pose no serious physical threat, clearly amounts to an excessive use of force, and can arguably be termed "torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment," which is a violation of the "United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment."

Lethal Weapon

Most of all, the claim of Tasers' manufacturers and its supporters that the weapon is "non-lethal" has been proved wrong. The U.S. Justice Department has finally taken note of an increasing number of deaths caused by the use of Tasers, and its research arm, the National Institute of Justice, has noted 184 such deaths since 1986, most of them since 2000. ("Feds Probe Stun Gun Deaths") The Amnesty International says there have been roughly 160 deaths caused by the use of Tasers in the past five years. The Justice Department has, therefore, decided to carry out a comprehensive study, to be conducted by medical examiners, pathologists, cardiologists and other experts aimed at probing the possibility whether the use of Taser actually caused these deaths and to get a better understanding of how the body reacts when hit by electricity from the devices. (Ibid.)