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, August 24, 2009

How to resolve the "safety" "question"

There are two possible approaches for sorting out this so-called "question" once and for all.

1) Compare the M26 taser death rate per full deployment (darts hitting real world subjects, not volunteers) against the X26 taser death rate per deployment (same real world data, no FAKE demos). If the ratio of these two rates is not very close to unity, then that would be clear evidence of an effect from the device itself.

Prediction: X26 will exceed M26. Anyone got complete data?


2) Review the death rate per unit time just BEFORE the taser would have been fired, and AFTER it has actually been fired. Google the taser's "Curious Temporal Asymmetry" for details. Basically we're seeking many hundreds, or even thousands, of reports where the taser was drawn, but then was put away because the victim died of "excited delirium" before the officer had a chance to fire, or during the period of attempted negotiation.

Prediction: 'After' will exceed 'before' per unit time, by a significant margin.


This debate is no longer a philosophical game. It is no longer a semantic game decorated with Latin phrases. These are very simple and straightforward methods of dividing the existing data sets, where ever they may be squirreled away, into the 'effect' and the experimental controls.

Both of these proposals have been repeatedly discussed on this blog.

No comments: