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, July 28, 2010

Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) singing from Taser International song sheet

The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), with support from the Office of Community Oriented Policing (COPS), is convening an executive-level meeting on August 3, 2010 to review and consider revisions to PERF’s 2005 Conducted Energy Device (CED) guidelines. While PERF’s 2005 CED guidelines are generally considered strong, we believe it is time to revisit the guidelines and update them as necessary to reflect the current CED research, the experience of police departments that have been using CEDs, and recent legal developments. ...
[via TNT]

Their next paragraph uses the key-phrases "injury rates" and "injury risks". This is a classic trick, a simple redirection of the readers attention, so that the concept of DEATH is subtly replaced with 'injury'.

(By the way, on the subject of injuries, inherent taser dart injuries are arbitrarily defined to be insignificant, but a sprained finger would be counted.)

Anyway, it disturbs me that PERF is using the deceptive language of Taser International. I'll assume that it is innocent cut-and-paste, but I suspect it might be an indication of something more.

If any PERF people happen to be reading this, here's your homework: Google "Braidwood Inquiry".

Taser International doesn't want you to know about those two reports.

UPDATE: They've been around for decades. No obvious connection to Taser International. Their 2005 guidelines [PDF] include an explicit statement (4.) that multiple repeated or continuous taser cycles appear to increase risk of DEATH. Many of the other recommendations are in direct contradiction to the false and misleading safety claims made by Taser International et al.

Where have these guys been hiding?

And why aren't plaintiffs' lawyers using these guidelines to win lawsuits?

1 comment:

pdquick said...

I was at a recent San Francisco Police Commission meeting where PERF's research director supported the police chief's request to initiate a "study" to introduce CEDs in San Francisco. His testimony seemed far more enthusiastic than the measured language of their 2008 NIJ-funded study. PERF's website say that their financial support includes support from "industry," but it is not clear whether this includes support from Taser International. They offered no disclosure of any corporate support of the organization, and as far as I know, nobody in any official capacity has asked. They should be asked directly if they have any industry support from Taser International.