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.

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Note carefully Taser's shrinking claims

Taser likes to play word games. They use wording that has been chosen with excrutiating care to slip in subtle misdirection that many people would not notice.

November 05, 2008 - Radio 660 News Staff Calgary The company that produces taser devices is commenting on the fear mongering that they say is dominating the debate on the policing devices. The Calgary Sun is reporting that a spokesperson for Taser International says the hysteria gripping the country about the device is bordering on insanity. In addition, he says that not one coroner in Canada has ever blamed a death on a taser, and that only one has ever contributed to a person's death. [LINK]

Once upon a time, they could make the same claim covering the entire world. No longer. Now they must restrict their claims of "not one coroner" to Canada only. Because this sort of claim is no longer true in the USA.

Note my words: ...no longer... Anyone care to predict a trend? Will a coroner in Canada eventually be forced to conclude the obvious - in the face of the device leaving no physical evidence?

No comments: