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.

Sunday, July 11, 2010

Coroner speaking in tongues

"Tasers-R-Safe."

Here's what they mean:

An autopsy revealed that Owens suffered from heart disease and had a pacemaker. A deputy state medical examiner said the electric shock from the Taser stun gun would not have killed a healthy person.
[LINK]

NOTE: The woman was tasered with a trans-cardiac vector (left arm to hip), was "immediately" (!) unconscious and unresponsive, and did not recover.

The coroner, with an incredible ability to ignore what the close temporal sequence is screaming at him, claims that cause of death is a pre-existing "heart condition".

Let's follow this "logic" forward a few more steps...

According to the coroner, the taser was not a cause of death. Therefore, this was not a taser-caused death. I've not seen even an admission that the taser might even be considered a contributing factor.

"Therefore" (sic) this incident doesn't indicate that tasers are potentially deadly. It's not an example of an elderly subject at extremely high risk if exposed to the taser.

It was just "heart disease".

No lessons to learn.

It doesn't indicate any risk.

The older the subject, the less the chance that their death would be attributed to the taser.

The take-away is that the elderly are a Taser Free-Fire Zone 'because' it's 'impossible' to kill them with a taser.

Right? {ROLLS-EYES}

Nothing to see, move along.



Actually, this is a good example of 'something'...

No comments: