Mission Statement - De-Spinning the Pro-Taser Propaganda

Yeah right, 'Excited Delirium' my ass...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

The primary purpose of this blog is to provide an outlet for my observations and analysis about tasers, taser "associated" deaths, and the behaviour exhibited by the management, employees and minions of Taser International. In general, everything is linked back to external sources, often via previous posts on the same topic, so that readers can fact-check to their heart's content. This blog was started in late-2007 when Canadians were enraged by the taser death of Robert Dziekanski and four others in a short three month period. The cocky attitude exhibited by the Taser International spokespuppet, and his preposterous proposal that Mr. Dziekanski coincidentally died of "excited delirium" at the time of his taser-death, led me to choose the blog name I did and provides my motivation. I have zero financial ties to this issue.

Monday, June 9, 2008

Statement from Stinger Systems...

I'm not a fan of Stinger Systems, but you have to acknowledge that sometimes what they say makes a great deal of sense.


Commenting on the $6M verdict against Taser International, delivered on June 6th, Ron Bellistri, C.E.O. of Stinger Systems, Inc., and James McNulty, acting in house counsel for Stinger System's, Inc., made the joint statement.

"No one has ever died proximate to being shocked by Stinger System, Inc.'s S-200 or any other Stinger product. Stinger System's, Inc., has never been sued for product defect or wrongful death."

"Stinger Systems, Inc. will continue to protect itself and its shareholders investment with socially responsible sales and advertising practices and by continuing to lead in the research and development of stun product safety innovations.

Stinger Systems, Inc. responsibly produces and sells its S-200 projectile stun gun as a firearm and dangerous weapon only for use by trained and experienced law enforcement officers. Stinger makes no warranty that its projectile stun guns cannot kill, but only that they are less likely to kill than conventional firearms, and therefore can be of life saving benefit when used responsibly by trained and experienced officers.

Furthermore, manufacturers of firearms, like the S-200 projectile stun gun, have the protections of the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, that is codified as 15 USC Section 7901 - 7903. The act prohibits the bringing of certain suits against firearms manufacturers for "damages, punitive damages" "in any Federal or State Court."

Taser International, Inc.'s X26 and M26 weapons and its consumer weapons are not classified as firearms. Moreover, in pleadings filed in federal court as recently as last year, Taser International, Inc. has continued to argue that it is justified in having characterized its Taser weapons as "non-lethal." Stinger Systems, Inc. sees no reason for placing its shareholders investment at potential risk with such, in its opinion, totally unnecessary warranties and failures to warn.

[LINK]

No matter what you think of Stinger, you have to admit that the above statements are pretty much aligned with common sense.

Taser, on the other hand, chose another path.

No comments: