"TASER International does not create, recommend, or endorse policy."
Extracted from a presentation dated 07-16-07 by Michael Brave, Esq., M.S., C.L.S.3, C.L.E.T., C.P.S., C.S.T. National Litigation Counsel, TASER International, Inc.
[Check-out the alphabet soup... geesh.]
Compare and contrast the above claim to this news report extract:
Glens Falls (NY) Police use the policy recommended by stun gun maker Taser International to guide when and how the tasers are used. Bethel would not release that policy, saying City Lawyer Ronald Newell's opinion was that the policy should not be released, for safety reasons... [LINK]
Other reports ([LINK]*) say 95% of agencies do the same thing: use policies recommended by Taser.
(* ACLU-NC: The company continues to downplay safety concerns and bills its product as “non-lethal.” Taser’s reluctance to acknowledge potential dangers is particularly disturbing as over 95% of surveyed police departments rely on use policies supplied entirely by the manufacturer.)
So what is the actual truth?
Either the news reports are incorrect (seems unlikely), or Taser is not telling the truth (?), or perhaps Mr. Brave is unaware of what the Smith Bros. have been up to (?).
Please feel free to leave comments explaining this discrepancy. I'm very open to getting some additional information regarding this discrepancy.
This is potentially huge...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This post is a crystal clear example where this blogger invited those involved in the discrepancy (obviously a matter of public interest) to leave a comment explaining themselves. Nothing. Silence.
Not to mention that the post is 100% factually-based and provides links to sources to permit relatively simple fact checking.
Readers can make up their own mind about the ethical implications of these facts. I'm not here to call people names, even those that are slick-talking, truth-stretching, ethically-challenged, stun gun salesmen.
Post a Comment