Canadian Province of Nova Scotia heading in correct direction

The province and policing partners agree that the use of conducted energy weapons should only occur when a person’s behaviour is aggressive or violent and could harm the person or the public or the police officer. [LINK]

Geesh. Basic Common Sense 101.

File under: Duh!

I've stated several times that if the subject is actually violent, then I don't care of the police are forced to use "a fricken flamethrower" on the subject. That statement is, I readily admit, a vast overstatement. Hopefully the brave police would display restraint and heroism, and would struggle to find a way to defuse the situation rather than mindlessly meet mindless violence with more mindless violence. Especially in the cases where the subject is probably mentally ill.

...it speaks volumes that the use of the stun guns has already dropped by over 70 per cent since Hyde’s death in 2007

Not a bad start.

But it's still about thirty times the historical rate of police use of lethal force.

That ratio should be more like about five (roughly) to achieve an ethical balance.

Jerry Staton explains "excited delirium"

"As a Senior Master TASER® Instructor..." [LINK]

Mr. Staton links to IPICD and an "excited delirium" website, but fails to disclose that those links are directly connected to Taser International.

He mentions the old crock of sh_t that "excited delirium" has been killing people for 150 years, but fails to disclose that the historical victims died a slow death over weeks due to lack of appetite. Hardly the same thing as tasered_and_died.

Perhaps he can explain the taser's 'Curious Temporal Asymmetry'?

--

Why is nearly everyone that is pushing "excited delirium" either directly connected to Taser International, or still keeping the connections under wraps.

Remember when IPICD pretended to be fully independent of Taser International? Then it was noted that principal Micheal Brave was also Taser International's own lawyer. And then it was revealed that Taser International provided seed money to IPICD.

This blogger uncovered Internet connections from Mr. Brave to UoM's Dr. Mash. Brave had accidentally or over-ethusiastically redirected one of his domain names to land directly on the UoM website.

Marion, Indiana police use electro-torture weapon on naughty school child

Police: Officer Stunned Student After Hissing, Cursing Episode [LINK]

A brave and dedicated Marion, Indiana police officer used his electro-shock stun gun torture weapon on a 15-year-old child at Marion High School last Friday after the naughty boy hissed and cursed him. ...the teen didn't follow directions [OMG! "Zee Must Obey!!"] and began making a loud hissing sound and cursing. When the officer tried to arrest the boy [WTF?!?! Arrest? For hissing and cursing?], the child tried to run away. And so the police [applied life-endangering, electro-torture to the child.] ...

All aboard the hand-basket. Next stop is Hell.

If you don't see the problem here, then it must be because you can't see clearly. Perhaps it's because you're already sliding down 'the slippery slope' at such a high rate of speed it makes your eyes water.

Any moral society has to have certain fundamental common sense lines in the sand.

Electro-shocking disobedient school children is waaay over the line. By *any* rational standard, left or right, it doesn't matter.

Leland Keane gamely tries to ignore the lessons of Dziekanski & Braidwood

Leland Keane (member, B.C. Mounted Police Professional Association) wrote a letter to the Chilliwack Times to complain that they'd used the headline "Taser Death" to described the Knipstrom death. Rather than repeat the whole letter here, you can read it [via TNT] or at source [LINK].

My concern is the misleading and sensational headline. ...The use of the phrase, "Taser death" portrays [most?] BCMPPA members in a negative and incorrect light.

[Please note that I have correct his obviously-incorrect statement by adding the word "most" where it is so-obviously required. I wonder if the BCMPPA have a formal position on the evil problem of The Blue Brotherhood of Silence where many (perhaps even most?) officers will remain passive and silent when they have witnessed their brother officers violating policy and even the law. If they do have such a position, then I'd be pleased as punch to celebrate it by publishing a copy on this blog, and publicly acknowledging the fact. Seriously, send me a copy. Please...]

Leland Keane (assuming that I've found the same person, see [LINK]) is a "Training Consultant at RCMP"; from February 2007 to present "Basic Firearms Instructor and Police and Public Safety Instructor at the Pacific Region Training Center". [Note that Mr. Robert Dziekanski was killed by taser-happy RCMP officers at Vancouver airport on 14 October 2007; but there's no information to suggest that Keane was in any way associated with the clearly-defective training of those four officers that behaved so atrociously as documented by the Braidwood Inquiry.] It's an interesting coincidence that Keane's bio mentions that he recently attended the University of Phoenix (that's essentially the home town of Taser International, but perhaps it was one of those remote-learning courses).


Getting back to the main point...

Here is my reaction [LINK] to Keane's letter:

Tasers are quite often not (officially) found to be a cause of death, even in cases where the use of the taser CLEARLY played a significant role. One clear example is the case of Robert Dziekanski, where it required a multi-million dollar inquiry (!) to peel away the bald-face lies and failed attempts at deception. Some even suggested that Mr. Dziekanski might have died of "excited delirium" (**), but this "explanation" (it really isn't an explanation) was rejected as unhelpful by Braidwood. After the inquiry, the taser was implicated as the most significant cause of his death.

** REJECTED THEORY [CBC] where Dr. Mash was wheeled-out on a dolly by Taser International:

And while the B.C. coroner’s service has not yet determined what killed Dziekanski — an autopsy failed to reveal a clear cause — RCMP have speculated the 40-year-old was also suffering from excited delirium. "This is not due to a Taser," says Deborah Mash, a neurology professor at the University of Miami who has been studying excited delirium for 20 years. "This is in the brain and they die because the mechanisms that control the heart and the lungs fail."

"Excited Delirium" as a theory to explain-away taser-associated deaths can be linked to Taser International via connections from the University of Miami, incompetently-whitewashed through the IPICD and Taser-lawyer Brave, and then directly to Taser International.

It's still an open question about what percentage of the 500+ taser-associated deaths should be fairly attributed to the taser. Amnesty International reviewed as many autopsy reports (for taser-associated deaths) as they could obtain and found that about one-third mentioned the taser as a cause or contributor to death. And I believe that one-third ratio MUST BE a low-ball number, due to the inherent lack of direct evidence associated with taser deaths, and the extraordinary efforts made by Taser International with the goal of minimizing the body-count linked to them.

And if anyone is still under the misconception that tasers-R-safe, then they need to catch-up on the latest legal warnings issued 1 May 2010 by Taser International where they finally acknowledge what we've been saying for years, that taser CAN affect the heart and those effects include risk of death.

If "Taser Death" is not exactly correct in one particular case, then at least it is not as inaccurate and deceptive as a phrase as "excited delirium".

"Is Excited Delirium Killing Coked-Up, Stun-Gunned Miamians?"

Miami New Times News (12 July 2010) - Is Excited Delirium Killing Coked-Up, Stun-Gunned Miamians? [LINK], By Gus Garcia-Roberts

One unimportant factual error is describing Taser International as a "2-billion dollar company" (unless it's liability you're referring to, then it might be an understatement). The market capitalization of Taser International (TASR), maker of stun guns that are far more dangerous than they admit, is about $250M.

Otherwise, the article is very, very good. It exposes some of the bizarre snake-oil history of "excited delirium", and how such excuses have been used in the past.

More later, especially a review of the relationships from Taser International, via their lawyer Mr. Brave, the Taser International funded "IPICD", their various "excited delirium" URLs, and links to the University of Miami and Dr. Mash. Not all of these connections were above-board.

Causes of Death - Hatchel Pate Adams III

A man who died in police custody in December 2009 died from a combination of excited delirium, mental illness, methamphetamine use, obesity and subdual by police, medical examiners said Tuesday. Hatchel Pate Adams III, 36, died in the hospital after police responded to a complaint at his residence in the first block of Overlook Court in Hampton at about 11 p.m. December 10. Officers tried to talk to Adams, but he would not come to the door. When police were able to get inside the residence, Adams began swinging a Samurai sword at them. In response to the sword threat, officers tased Adams, but he was able to free himself from the taser probes. Officers tased him again and attempted to place him in custody, but he then stopped breathing. [LINK]

Let's review the causes of death listed above...

1) Excited delirium - nothing but meaningless words. A place-holder for ignorance. Too often associated with taser-associated deaths. The holistic-medicine of the In-Custody Death explanation-for-hire industry.
2) Mental illness is obviously not a direct cause of death. It's plain crazy to suggest otherwise.
3) I'd buy "methamphetamine use" provided it is of a lethal does and time-aligned with the death. Even it's use can be certainly be considered to be a contributing factor even in the absence of the dose and timing factors.
4) Obesity - at most a contributing factor, obviously not a cause of death.
5) Subdual by police - they used a taser, twice. Why is this listed in last place? WTF is with THAT?!

UPDATE - I've noticed that the five purported "causes" are listed in strict alphabetical order. Perhaps the choice of words (e.g. "subdual...", an odd choice) is intentional to achieve the ordering desired, while supporting the 'alphabetical' explanation. Or perhaps I'm reading too much into it...

Based on the report, only one of these factors (#5) is minute-by-minute time-aligned with the point where Mr. Adams stopped breathing. The others would have been going on for hours to years.


...the Taser shooting didn't violate any department policies and was ruled justified. "They were defending themselves from someone wielding a samurai sword at them." [LINK]

If that's true, then I agree. I'm not here to debate the rational and justification for responding as they did. I'm just curious about the taser deployments and the reported causes of death.


A Hampton police press release said the police and the medical examiner's office enlisted experts on excited delirium at the University of Miami to help investigate the death. [LINK]

Ah, that'll be Dr. Mash et al.

Some too-close connections have been uncovered between Taser International, via their sometimes-lawyer / sometimes ICD "expert" Mr. Micheal Brave, and Dr. "Excited Delirium" Mash at the University of Miami. If anyone is interested in these ethically-questionable Taser Internation-to-UoM connections, then review the following posts:


Tuesday, April 7, 2009 - Be Brave and Mash yer brain [LINK]

Saturday, April 18, 2009 - The University of Miami connection to Taser International [LINK]

These sorts of connections do little to enhance the on-stand credibility of Taser International's own bought-and-paid-for "experts", and the "external" "experts" at the UoM.

Taser ineffective (twice!), and gun doesn't kill

This post might look like a repost of a previous post titled "Taser doesn't work (twice), gun doesn't kill (twice)" [LINK].

But no, it's yet another example of the sort of real world incident where tasers are ineffective for various reasons. And the police revolver worked fine, its use appears to be perfectly justified (according to the report), the subject was stopped, the officer protected (no thanks to the ineffective taser), and the injured subject will reportedly recover to face charges.

...The man (Richard Anthony Malczewski Jr.) jumped to the pavement and ran toward the officer. ...the officer deployed a Taser, but the man pulled the prongs from his skin and continued to charge. ...[etc.]... The officer ordered the man to stop. When the man continued to assault the woman, the officer deployed a Taser for a second time. And again, the electrical charge from the Taser did not seem to affect the man. Police said he pulled the prongs from his body and picked up an unknown object. The man began waving the object over his head and ran toward theseveral times, the officer fired his gun several times, striking the man at least once. [LINK]

See also the AP story on the Washington Post [LINK].

Repeat after me: 'Unreliable and ineffective P.o.S.'

Putting the lives of our brave police officers in danger.

Report states that he pulled the prongs out. Prongs (plural). Implies a good two-dart hit.

Any advertising is good advertising, eh?

Nice semi-advertising, light-weight, puff-piece on Taser International at The Economist. [LINK]

It's good free advertising.

Too bad about the comments: [LINK]

Even with the mention of the "controversy", this article is a bit of a puff-piece. Allow me to be specific.

"The device’s success has been electrifying. In the 15 years since it first came on the market..."

First, the M26 taser was introduced in 1999, and the X26 taser was introduced in 2003. The company touted the M26 as safe "because" the output waveform was high frequency and very low duty cycle. But the X26 taser waveform contains a DC pulse after the arc phase. This DC pulse repeats at 19 Hz and is thus more dangerous low frequency and is continuous 100% duty cycle. This makes the X26 taser significantly more dangerous than the older M26.

The monthly taser "associated" death rate shows a clear ramp up from just several per YEAR to a running average of SEVEN per MONTH starting in, guess when... ...2003. It's an extraordinary outbreak of taser associated deaths (often a.k.a. "excited delirium") starting coincident with the introduction of the X26 taser in 2003.

Mr. Smith is quoted as saying of the XREP "...it won’t kill you." Funny, they said the exact same thing about the X26 taser that has been firmly linked to numerous deaths, and suspected in hundreds more (it leaves no postmortem evidence). The US AMA concluded that tasers can kill, "directly or indirectly". The huge $4M Braidwood Inquiry in Canada (which heard from Taser International) concluded that tasers can kill, through a variety of mechanisms, even with healthy adults. The Maryland Attorney General recently issued a report that concluded that Taser International has "significantly" understated the risk of taser use.

The XREP contains a feature, the Hand Trap, that encourages the subject to grab the device and thereby be more-fully shocked via his hand. This intentional design feature directly contradicts the recent advice given by Taser International to "avoid aiming at the chest" to avoid trans cardiac paths. The arm (especially the left) being the worst case of such a path.

Regarding their new X3: They've never admitted that the X26 was a huge mistake, forgetting Fourier transforms and accidentally dropping two key safety features, but it's worth highlighting that the new X3 reportedly emits about 40% less electrical charge than the X26.

With respect to the [taser associated] death toll, standing at 450+, [primarily associated with] the X26 taser.

1) The device leaves little postmortem clues. None that anyone has identified as being reliable.
2) Taser International has sued Coroners that dare to find the taser as a cause. It's been described as a "chill" on free and honest findings.
3) They promote (*) "excited delirium" as an alternate explanation for the taser associated deaths.

[* Their own lawyer, Micheal Brave, has registered dozens of Internet domain names with the words "excited" and "delirium" in the URLs. He has then pointed these URLs to an outfit that is studying "in-custody" (strangely: only in-custody) deaths via "excited delirium".]

In spite of these efforts, a review of 150 autopsy reports found about one-third had mentioned the taser as a cause or contributor to the death. I don't see any reason why this one-third ratio cannot be extrapolated to the entire 450. And it can only be a low-ball ratio given the factors mentioned above.

We have several cases where healthy young men were tasered and died essentially immediately. Even the famous Dziekanski cases at Vancouver, an incident that rocked Canada to its foundation, was a death by "cardiac arrest" perfectly coincident with the application of the taser for 5 cycles and 31 seconds.

Prof Savard has noted a linear correlation in the real world risk of death with the length of the taser application. More taser duration, more risk of death. The NIJ noted the same unexplained trend.

I've notice the taser's 'Curious Temporal Asymmetry' in that the taser associated deaths occur at a vastly higher rate in the seconds to minutes AFTER the deployment than in the seconds to minutes after the taser is drawn but BEFORE it is fired. You essentially NEVER read about a person dropping dead at the verbal warning before the taser hit.

It's also been noted that the taser associated death rate PER DEPLOYMENT with the X26 taser appears to be much higher than with the older (safer?) M26. In Canada the complete data is being withheld, but overlapping data sets indicate that there was a period of several years (2004...) when the M26 was still being used by the RCMP THREE TIMES more often than the newer X26, but ALL deaths in Canada (where the information is available) were associated with the X26. My question is: Where's the data to support this simple sanity check of their claims of safety?

At this point, the taser debate newbies chime in with such nonsense as:

"It's better than being shot with a gun! Duh!"

In fact, in many jurisdictions the taser is used at a rate about one-hundred times (100x) higher than the historical rate of police gun fire. This is obviously a round number, but it's a good round number.

This issue is that, exactly as concluded by the Maryland Attorney General, Taser International has significantly understated the risks.

This raises an issue with procurement of these devices. What are they buying?

The vendor explicitly claims (and maintains the deception) that tasers are "non-lethal", to quote Mr. Smith "...it won’t kill you...". Sometimes they use the term "less-than-lethal", but one wag quipped that term should be corrected to "less-than-OR-EQUAL-TO-lethal".

But the UN, the US AMA, the ACLU, the Canadian RCMP, the various inquiries, and even some researchers that Taser International likes to selectively quote - they all acknowledge that tasers can kill.

Is it legal for government departments to procure items where there is no common understanding of the prime characteristic? This is not just basic contract law, it is very very dangerous territory and can have real-world negative impacts.

Other recent news is that the 9th Circuit Court with jurisdiction over the western states has just explicitly ruled that a perfectly-typical taser deployment was a violation of the subject's constitutional rights. They explicitly ruled that the taser needs to be moved to the very top of the "non-lethal" (sic) list. They characterize the taser as "the most intrusive form of force" that they have ever encountered.

Taser International has characterized this ruling as essentially insignificant. Their spokes-puppets are spreading lies about the record of the 9th Court (it's not "the most overturned" by any reasonable measure). Meanwhile, legal experts and scholars have universally concluded it is a very significant ruling.

Hopefully this ruling is the begining of the end for the overuse, misuse and abuse of tasers, all committed by officers that have been fully trained and certified by Taser International's vertically integrated propaganda and law enforcement infiltration scheme.

In front of a Canadian House of Commons committee (SECU), the other Smith brother testified that Taser International does not provide draft Taser Use Policy. Meanwhile a survey by ACLU-NC found that 95% of jurisdictions were using policy provided by Taser International.

In Canada, the CBC (public media) undertook a survey of tasers in field use. They found that about 10% were out of tolerance. Various jurisdictions across Canada followed up and they all found a failure rate of about 10-12%. One or more units were emitting MORE output than specified. Most were underpowered.

Underpowered tasers are characterized as "failing safe" by Taser International. In fact, during a stand-off, escalating a non-violent situation relying on an ineffective tasers can lead directly to a death by shooting when the taser fails to be effective. In theory, it could also lead to the death of the officer putting his faith in it. There's no such thing as failing safe with weapons. The stungun salesmen aren't always being completely honest.

I could, quite literally, go on all day.

My blog at Excited-Delirium (don't forget the dash) now has 1500 posts on the subject. Everything is linked back to sources to facilitate independent fact checking. My own ideas and opinions are based upon these facts. My interest in the subject is purely as an interested citizen of Canada - I was outraged by the death of Mr. Dziekanski and several others in quick succession in late-2007 which is when I started the blog.

My blog also links to other blogs providing reliable coverage of the taser-related news.

If you want balance, then head on over to the company's website. Don't miss their 'Cardiac Safety' webpage where their in-house expert compares a 5-second taser hit to being hit with a ping-pong (table tennis) ball. Seriously.

Happy New Year.

PS: Local storage of officer-captured video would potentially be much cheaper. Uploading several GB per day PER OFFICER to some remote underground lair seems like a ploy to convert an equipment purchase into a 'service" with associated monthly fees. The phrase 'better, faster, cheaper' seems to apply to the local storage option, and 'worse, slower, more dear' to their money-making scheme.

"...beam the recordings instantly back to the higher-ups at headquarters..."

That must be an optional extra. The existing system described a docking station back at base. "Beaming" the video "instantly" is not part of the basic feature set presently on offer. And it would obviously require 3G/4G hardware and MORE monthly fees.

Cleaning up the connections, too late...

According to this report [LINK], Taser International's clumsy lawyer Micheal Brave has excused himself from the IPICD(L). It's the "Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Death (Lawsuits) (*)".

"Brave, now listed as an inactive director, says he remains a legal adviser at IPICD."

(* They don't actually include the word "...Lawsuits" in their name, but let's be honest - it's the true purpose.)

Peters sees nothing inappropriate about his Taser connections. "We are not aligned with them at all," he says, although "we did not distinguish ourselves enough" at the start.

No. The mistake was allowing Mr. Brave to do the IT work, leaving a trail of clues, firmly linking IPICD(L) to Taser International, ...evidence that could be seen from orbit (literally, since the ISS has access to the Internet).

Critics of Taser International have been vastly "misunderestimated".

Taser International and taser use policy

"TASER International does not create, recommend, or endorse policy."

Extracted from a presentation dated 07-16-07 by Michael Brave, Esq., M.S., F.A., C.L.S.3, C.L.E.T., C.P.S., C.S.T. National Litigation Counsel, TASER International, Inc.

And 'Whois' Michael Brave? See [LINK] and try not to LOL and ROTFLYAO.

"...over 95% of surveyed police departments rely on use policies supplied entirely by the manufacturer." [LINK]

Taser International is asking the court to quash the conclusions and/or resultant recommendations made by Braidwood. [LINK]

"...the fact that it's a policy piece he's been asked to write and not a hearing...'' said University of B.C. law professor Cristie Ford. [ibid]

Hatcher said, "...she ran into traffic..."

More on the 14-year-old girl tasered into the skull [LINK].

This is an example of how perfectly safe (sic) tasers can be. "...a Taser dart penetrated the girl's skull causing a wound that took 18 staples and six stitches to close." [LINK]


Police dash cam video [VIDEO] (<- follow link for video)

Screen capture...


Notice how the video prevented (?) this outrageous example of taser abuse from occurring. Oh, no, I guess it didn't...


Hatcher said. "She was running from police across traffic without looking." [LINK]

Look at the girl running "across traffic without looking". [ibid]

1) What traffic? Do you see any traffic? There's no traffic visible (although perhaps there is some just out of view, but why not let the video roll to show us...?). I doubt it. Small town, probably no traffic.

2) The girl had every opportunity to examine the street in both directions. She was already walking one way and could undoubtedly see that the street was empty in that direction. Then she turned and ran the other way with a clear view of the opposite direction. So the story that the girl had, or was about to, run across traffic without looking is revealed to be (probably) completely untrue. Typical ill-conceived spin...

3) And, from the available video, it appears she was already pretty much (at the least) clear across the street before brave and dedicated Chief Roger not-a-rabbit Hatcher took her down, hard. So the dangerous (?) crossing of the street was over when he fired the oh-so-safe (sic) taser.

"...across traffic without looking...", my ass.


This incident is a clear cut case of the overuse of the taser. The piss-poor taser training (a.k.a. propaganda) led to this very very dangerous encounter.


And some taser-morons still parrot the old taser lie that tasers replace guns. They could watch this video a hundred times, and then still parrot the same old lie.

Banging one's head against a very thick Wall...

"Tasers are not the problem" (sic) [LINK] [LINK]

By Allison Wall, the Lloydminster Meridian Booster (Alberta, Canada)


Okay - stand back just a bit.


OK I’ve watched these stories bounce around in the headlines and stir up controversy and debate – even a column in the Booster – for almost two years. Everyone has an opinion on Tasers, and so do I.

But is your opinion an informed opinion?

Let's see...


Obviously, I’m a journalist – not a cop – and have never seen, touched, used or been stunned with a Taser (nor do I ever want to be), but I believe this controversial weapon is 100 per cent acceptable. If I was doing something warranting police intervention, I’m pretty certain I would rather be stunned with a Taser than shot with a gun.

This is completely stupid. Police intervention equals only gun or taser? No other option?

You are so ill-informed that you believe that every taser incident is an averted police shooting? Didn't notice that the taser incidents outnumber the historical and accepted rate of police gun fire by about ONE HUNDRED to ONE? Don't follow the news, much, eh?

And you also missed the whole Dziekanski controversy? Still have some thoughts that perhaps Mr. Dziekanski presented such a threat that it justified an RCMP bullet?

Please - get a brain and have it installed.

This guns-vs.-tasers argument has been shredded over and over again. It is not consistent with even the most basic facts. It reveals only that you are a taser-issue newbie. And certainly not qualified to spout-off in a newspaper.

It's such a pathetic argument that we don't normally even bother to address it beyond offering up your badge [LINK].

It's not normally worth the effort, but we've made a special exception for this rebuttal.


Perhaps underlying health conditions or an agitated state from drugs and alcohol could increase my chances of death from a Taser (or perhaps not), but a bullet in the chest will lead to an almost certain demise. I’m not good at math, but I think my odds of surviving a Taser stun far outweigh the other grisly option.

"The other grisly option." Oh, please try to keep up.

And there have been more and more cases where young and otherwise perfectly-healthy young men are tasered and drop dead. Taser International and their scum-sucking minions try to muddle the issues with red-herring distractions of "individual susceptibilities" and drug use.

Are tasers only to be used on people in perfect health? Not on the real-world subjects including drug users and drunks?

And even when they are used on people in perfect health, people still 'mysteriously' die.

Especially when used repeatedly. Strange correlation if there's no correlation.


Yes, we hear always hear about people who die after being Tasered, but we don’t hear of the many, many cases of people who are subdued by the Taser and live a long and healthy life (although) perhaps in jail).

Taser saves? Sure we do. Taser International loves to issue press releases about such saves. Such press releases aren't as common as you might expect.

[There will be one issued shortly, guaranteed.]

But Taser International has never, as far as I can see, issued as much as a memo about even the most obvious cases of taser abuse, misuse, and overuse. If such a guidance document exists, then they've hidden it very well.

And you may wish to consider the moral and karma issue surrounding the institution of a street-level death lottery. [LINK]


Unfortunately, Robert Dziekanski was Tasered and died at the Vancouver International Airport on Oct. 14, 2007, and now four Mounties are under fire for allegations they acted improperly and tried to cover up their actions. Says who?

Mr. Dziekanski didn't "die". He was killed; cause and effect. The only argument left is about exactly what killed him. Most reasonable people know exactly what killed him.


Many of you may have seen the video, but a simple viewing doesn’t mean we were there and doesn’t mean we have first-hand knowledge of what these officers were thinking and feeling and how they were reacting.

We know quite a bit about what they were thinking and feeling and reacting. And it does not reflect well upon them as RCMP officers, or even as humans.

And it is an indictment of the clearly-defective taser training. The four officers couldn't even comprehend that Mr. Dziekanski was in serious medical distress because they had been so badly brainwashed by the propaganda from Taser International. They didn't believe their own eyes.


The allegations against one officer include improperly assessing the situation and failing to react appropriately when confronting Dziekanski, misrepresenting Dziekanski’s behaviour in the notes and statements given to homicide investigators, continuing to misrepresent the events while testifying during the inquiry and offering a misleading and self-serving interpretation of his notes during the inquiry.

Yes, this is the first paragraph you've written that is reasonably accurate...


Let me reiterate. I am not a cop and most likely, neither are you. These brave men and women put themselves in danger every single day to keep us safe. They are on the streets fighting – sometimes very violent – crime and need to be able guard themselves. Why should the alleged criminal have the upper hand? Until we are in the situation and can understand the peril, I don’t think any of us can judge the actions of those who use Tasers.

Police work isn't even in the Top 10 list of the most dangerous jobs in Canada. More police are killed in automobile and other accidents than through violence. The number killed in airplane crashes defies explanation.

Police have guns. If they are in serious danger, they have my full permission (as if that were even required) to plug the assailant with a .45 slug. Most of the time it won't really get to that point (just drawing a gun is a good deterrent). Of course, they'll have to be able to fully justify their actions. And if they've over-reacted, they may face manslaughter or murder charges - not to mention living with themselves.

Police gun-fire in Canada has never really presented itself as a major issue. I'm prepared to trust the police and I've never felt nervous around police with guns because they've consistently proven themselves to be perfectly (99.999+%) responsible. The root-cause of this inherent responsibility is that the effects from gun-fire are so clear-cut and easy to predict. There's no shirking of responsibility.

Tasers are not so clear. Because they're trained that tasers-R-safe and they're unfortunately not as safe as is claimed. That discrepancy is THE issue. And they're about one hundred times as likely to shoot a taser as shoot a gun (taser trigger-happy). And that combination makes me nervous.


Sure, police should be held accountable for their actions when necessary, but we’ve got to realize – as in any other situation – there will always be that select group of people who abuse the use of Tasers, which should be the real crux of the controversy.

No - that is just ONE of the two primary taser issues. The other side of the issue is actually more important because it is a partial cause of the abuse issue.

The fundamental issue is that Taser International and their minions claim that tasers are essentially inherently safe with respect to internal risk factors (such as cardiac effects of any sort). "Safer than Tylenol" is one variation of their safety claim.

Some of us taser critics 'smell a rat', regarding these claims. We've detected manipulative and clearly unethical behaviour by some pro-taser forces. The numbers don't add-up. There are clear logical errors in the arguments. There are signs of technical errors in the design of their products.

The simplest explanation is that tasers are not as inherently safe as is claimed by Taser International and their minions.

And the safety gap is many orders of magnitude.

The second part of the taser issue is the abuse, misuse, and over-use of tasers. This evil springs, in part, from the faith-like belief that tasers-R-safe. If we can get it through the thick heads of the police policy writers that tasers can occasionally kill, then perhaps the abuse issue will sort itself out at least partially.

As evidence of this, I present the fact that taser use is down in Canada by about half since Mr. Dziekanski was killed (along with four or five others in the same late-2007 period). By HALF! But we're not done. The vast majority of the other half is not acceptable either.

Also, Line-Of-Duty death of police officers in Canada has flat-lined to zero since that same point in time (late-2007). Deescalation techniques are the opposite of violence. Well worth putting away the tasers and using the safer-for-all old-school techniques.


I know there is a lot about Tasers I don’t understand,...

Yes, we're in perfect agreement on that point...


...but I believe police have my best interest at heart.

In general that is true. Believe it or not, I do not 'hate' police.

I hate that they've been played like a trumpet by an unethical company. I dislike their naive approach to the stun-gun marketing.

I hate the real-world outcomes where tasers are used - plain and simple - to torture. And any police officer that uses his taser to repeatedly torture has some serious issues.

The police can do much better. But they won't unless they're forced. Their first reaction is to close ranks and protect the guilty-as-hell. And that first reaction of the Blue Code of Silence is pure evil (and should be explicitly listed as a criminal offense).

A politically-imposed taser moratorium appears to be required - if for no other reason than to capture their attention and break the spell cast by the stun-gun salesmen.



The rebuttal presented above is just the bare-bones. Please avail yourself of the information on this blog.

This blog has more than 1000 posts where all the pro-taser arguments have been carefully examined and systematically shredded. I'm not aware of a single solitary pro-taser argument left standing. Not one. If you know of one, send it in and we'll shred it for you.

Everything on this blog is referenced back to sources (sometimes via internal links to previous posts on the same subject), so you can fact-check to your heart's content.

"Conflict of Interest" (ref. TNT)

The Truth ... Not Tasers blog has posted an open letter to the Chair and Members of the Guelph Police Services Board. [LINK]

Selected related posts found on this blog:

1. So who is pushing 'Excited Delirium'? [LINK]
   
2. So, 'Whois' pushing "Excited Delirium" ?? [LINK]
   
3. Be Brave and Mash yer brain [LINK]
   
4. Taser International admits they sponsored IPICD [LINK]
   

I believe that item 4 happened because we uncovered the links (Taser - their lawyer Micheal Brave - IPICD - 'excited delirium') and reported them here. I've not found any evidence that they had previously been open about their back-room links (but I'm willing to be proven incorrect). Even now, Taser International is still not listed as a (founding?) sponsor on the IPICD sponsors' page.

This blog has more than 900 posts. You can search the blog (top left) for related keywords such as IPICD and 'Micheal Brave'. Almost every post is linked, either directly or indirectly via previous related posts, to external sources.

You might also want to browse. There's more than enough material here to make a Micheal Moore movie about these clowns.

Taser International admits they sponsored IPICD

Surprise surprise. Why - you could have knocked me over with a feather when I saw this:

"...spokesperson Steve Tuttle confirmed that Taser International gave 'setup grants' to John Peters' firm [IPICD]..."  [LINK]


The Institute for Prevention of In-Custody Death (Lawsuits) website proudly mentions two sponsors: US Armor and LAAW (Mr. Brave's company). But Taser International is not mentioned on the sponsor's page (even now).


Now - this is where they start to pretend that they weren't intentionally trying to obscure the indirect links from Taser International to those that promote 'excited delirium' as a convenient excuse for mysterious in-custody deaths often associated with taser use.

Let's Google:

http://www.google.com/search?q=IPICD+"Taser+International"

They mentioned each other in passing. But the first Google hit that connects the dots is this blog.


So guys. Does it feel better to finally be out of the closet? Hey! ...not that there's anything wrong with that!

The University of Miami connection to Taser International

On Tuesday, April 7, 2009, I posted Be Brave and Mash yer brain [LINK] about the strange connection from the offending webpage at Excited-Delirium.org (registered by sometimes-Taser lawyer Mr. Brave *), to the University of Miami's Brain Contract Services and Dr. Deborah Mash - who specialize in postmortem detection of 'excited delirium' (especially 'in-custody deaths' - I'm quoting the above website).

[* Mr. Brave has, at various times, purported to have been National Litigation Counsel, Legal Executive, and/or National Litigation Specialist, all for Taser International, Inc.]

This link clearly demonstrated the connections from Taser International to those that are involved with 'Excited Delirium' as an excuse for "in-custody" deaths.


Well, it appears that someone got their pee-pee slapped.

The Excited-Delirium.org URL now points (back... [ahem]) to the Institute for Prevention of In-Custody Death [Lawsuits?] (or something like that...) instead of UM Brain Contract Services as it did on 7 April 2009.

UPDATE2: They've cleaned-up the mess. At this point, everything is squeaky-clean.

So, there are no back-room connections from Taser International to the UM Brain Contracting Services - none at all. They're totally independent. No connections. Any former weblinks were just an out-of-control webpage administrator making unauthorized links to random webpages. Now move along, there's nothing to see here.

See also 'Whois' pushing "Excited Delirium" ?? [LINK]

UPDATE1:

CBC: And while the B.C. coroner’s service has not yet determined what killed Dziekanski — an autopsy failed to reveal a clear cause — RCMP have speculated the 40-year-old was also suffering from excited delirium.  "This is not due to a Taser," says Deborah Mash, a neurology professor at the University of Miami who has been studying excited delirium for 20 years. "This is in the brain and they die because the mechanisms that control the heart and the lungs fail." [LINK]

Be Brave and Mash yer brain

UPDATE - Excited-Delirium.org (with a dash and an .org) no longer lands directly on the UM Brain Contract Services webpage as it did at the time that I posted the following. The reason it doesn't is that these people are reacting to these posts.

The Internet Whois record [LINK] (extract below) for Excited-delirium.org (note the .org) leads straight back to a certain lawyer known to be closely connected [LINK][LINK] to Taser International:

Domain Name:EXCITED-DELIRIUM.ORG
Registrant Name: Michael Brave
Registrant Organization: LAAW International, Inc.
Registrant Street1: 8362 Tamarack VLG
Registrant Street2: Suite 119-311
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City: Saint Paul
Registrant State/Province: MN
Registrant Postal Code: 55125


But when you visit the Excited-Delirium.org website, it's all about Dr. Deborah Mash and the University of Miami Brain Contract Services:

UM BRAIN CONTRACT SERVICES - The University of Miami Brain program (under the direction of Dr. Deborah Mash) has developed the largest collection of postmortem specimens linked to autopsy and forensic information from in-custody excited delirium deaths. [Fair Use claimed]

This outfit provides support for postmortem determination of in-custody excited delirium deaths. So, if you have a brain, send it in!!


Summary: Excited Delirium <-> Dr. Mash <-> Excited-Delirium.org <-> Michael Brave <-> Taser International <-> Excited Delirium

And thus the circle is complete


The question to ask here is the following: Why the fricken' hell is sometimes-Taser lawyer Mr. Michael Brave the registrant for a website which appears to be associated with Dr. Mash's brain examination outfit (associated with the University of Miami) which specializes in assisting with the postmortem determination of in-custody excited delirium deaths?

Perhaps there's an innocent explanation for this strangely-close connection from Taser International's (sometimes-?) lawyer Mr. Brave to one of the world's leading consultants for finding you some potentially-useful postmortem proof of excited delirium.


Oops! Make that "...proof of in-custody excited delirium..." I almost forgot the 'in-custody' part. Sorry about that.

They claim to have the "...largest collection of postmortem specimens linked to autopsy and forensic information from in-custody excited delirium deaths." [Fair Use claimed]

So do they have any postmortem samples from any NON-in-custody excited delirium deaths? Perhaps they've never seen such a thing.

Hey! I'm just making observations and asking obvious questions.

[update: link summary added]

So, 'Whois' pushing "Excited Delirium" ??

Mr. Michael Brave is (or 'was') connected directly to Taser International - he is (or perhaps 'was') Taser International's "National Litigation" lawyer [LINK].

He is also involved with an outfit called "LAAW International, Inc."
[JOKE: "Laaw"... I guess they specialize in stretching the laaw?].

The following 'Excited Delirium'-named websites are registered to, or associated with, Mr. Brave - and thus, indirectly, have connections to Taser International. I've provided links to the 'WhoIs' inquiries so that these registrations can be fact-checked.


URL's linked (indirectly thru Brave/LAAW) to Taser International:

Exciteddelirium.com [Whois]
Exciteddelirium.us [Whois]
Excited-delirium.net [Whois]
Excited-delirium.org [Whois]
Excited-delirium.info [Whois]
Excited-delirium.us [Whois]
Exciteddeliriumsyndrome.com [Whois]


And for bonus points:
Exciteddelirium.info is 'privately registered' [Whois] by 1and1.com and also links to IPICD.

1and1.com are the same outfit that has registered all of the above public registrations for Laaw.


Draw your own conclusions.

You're either in on it, or you're being played like a trumpet.


On the Canadian news, every now and then, one hears about a really stupid and mindbogglingly moronic individual that commits some minor crime, and then walks straight back to his house - leaving his footprints in the freshly fallen snow.

Minor updates 15 Feb 2009.

Taser insanity - headlines du jour

Police taser two students [Girls!] to break up school fight [LINK]

I guess that without the taser this brave police officer would have been forced to shoot them both dead [?]. As it happens, neither girl was killed by the taser - so all's well that ends well. The girl-fight was broken up, nobody died, and the wussy puffter pansy powder-puff (not that there's anything wrong with that) police officer in question is the laughing stock of the entire civilized world.


Taser malfunction impedes drug arrest - "...due to a taser malfunction..."[LINK]


Modesto speeding biker - "...it did not appear the taser was effective..." [LINK]


Taser fundraiser - Police Chief Steven Wulgaert, who will [soon] retire as police chief of the Outagamie County, ...agreed to take a jolt from the stun gun if the other officers could raise $500 for Special Olympics. [LINK]

Oh please do. But first, turn around and take the taser hit directly on the chest (as opposed to your back) with the taser-barbs arranged so that maximum current flows in the vicinity of the heart. Repeat the 5-second taser cycle about 5 or 10 times. Don't worry - it's 'perfectly safe'. Good luck.

'We don't like brown people....we have a taser.'

Joke of the Day: Officer motions for motorist to open their car window. Motorist complies. Officer asks, "Good afternoon. Do you know why I pulled you over today?" Motorists offers, "Perhaps it's because you got straight 'D's all through high school?" Sorry. It's just a joke and it certainly does not apply to very many officers.

But when you read yet another news story about a group of knuckle-headed off-duty police officers getting all drunk, stupid, and racist, it makes you wonder.

This time it is not drunk Halifax police in Digby, NS. This time it's slice-of-life morons-in-blue in the Vancouver area.

They said 'We don't like brown people. ... We are the police. You don't need help. If you don't behave … we have a taser.' ...

Three off-duty officers were arrested by Vancouver police as a result of the altercation. The officers belong with the West Vancouver, New Westminster and Delta police departments. [LINK]


Did three drunk off-duty police officer really have a taser in their possession?

If they did, then they MUST be sentenced to something like two years in prison if The Rule of Law is to survive in Canada. Seriously! If these twits really were packing a taser under these circumstances, then they must go directly to jail, and do not pass Go, and do not collect $200.

And that's in addition to all the other criminal charges that must be brought.

Even those in the law enforcement community must agree with this self-obvious conclusion (assuming they take their oath more seriously than their misplaced loyalty to those so-called 'brothers' that would besmirch what little remains of the tattered reputation of policing in Canada).

It's simple: If these slimeballs walk, then this country is doomed. It's that serious.


Next think about the old maxim. If you walk past a haystack and happen to spot three needles, then it's very likely that the haystack contains many more than just three needles.

So obviously, in any group of seemingly fine up-standing brave and dedicated police officers, we apparently have some percentage of idiots that are weekend drunks and closet racists, ready-to-abuse the innocent, walking talking human rights nightmares.

Since the police system is obviously incapable of weeding them out, then they're out there even now.

Hundreds.

Thousands?

And armed with their police-state wetdream weapon, tasers.

And almost certainly more than willing to press charges against their victims as legal cover for their abusive behaviour.

Do you see the problem?

Honestly, good old fashioned guns have a certain seriousness attached to them that taser torture toys lack. Police guns have not really ever been an on-going problem in Canada.

Tasers in this environment are an obvious problem.

Innocent people will be tortured for the amusement of not-yet-detected racist thugs-in-blue, and then those innocent people will be criminally charged as legal cover. And we'll never know about the real story unless it just so happens that an unnoticed camera was across the street.

The only soultion is an immediate taser moratorium until the training and accountablility and ethical standards are brought up to modern standards.

2008 - a year in review...

The Year 2008 In Review

(And this is just a sample. It's not even all the major highlights.)


We started the year 2008 with a review of an "article" in IEEE Spectrum written by Taser's leading braintrust member, Dr. Mark Kroll. We more-fully exposed Dr. Kroll's extreme financial ties to Taser. [LINK] & [LINK] Then we dissected his Taser mouthpiece article more fully. [LINK] It was also noted that Dr. Kroll is a serial non-discloser of his close ties to Taser. [LINK]

Also very early this year, we noted that the X26 taser has a electrical waveform with characteristics that are the exact opposite of those characteristics that were claimed to be the reason that the M26 taser was 'safe'. The older 1999-era M26 taser is high frequency and low duty cycle. The 2003-era X26 taser is low frequency and very high continuous 100% duty cycle. I've not seen this critical technical distinction high-lighted in any other source. Taser's own data sheets mention the raw information, but not a word about this critical change to the waveform. [LINK] [LINK] and [LINK]. See also [LINK].

Some of the basics of Canadian law jumped out at me. I'm not a lawyer, and perhaps there is 'case law' that has taken away some of our fundamental rights (I doubt it). But some of the mistakes being made are (quite literally) elementary. Lawful 'force' is a noun. It's not a damn verb. Police officers and officials that think that they're allowed to use painful electric shock as a form of on-the-spot torture to coerce (force - verb) someone to obey are morons. Let me repeat - morons. The language used to forbid such behaviour is crystal clear. If 'failure to obey' is an offense, then add it to the list of charges and bring the subject before the court. You're not allowed to torture. And Tasers-R-Torture. [LINK]

By the 6th day, it had been noted that former Taser Board of Director member Mr. Bernie Kerik was facing charges that might result in him being jailed for up to 142 years. [LINK] [LINK] (Update: now facing just 28 years. [LINK]) In Canada, we have Sgt Darren Laur (Victoria, BC) and his 'apparent and perceived conflict of interest' [LINK], and coroner James Cairns' jaunts [LINK]. There are quite a few more ethical lapses associated with Taser and/or Taser-associated folks - eg. [LINK] - review the whole blog for more.

Shooting holes in Taser propaganda is a continuing theme of this blog. After Smith's appearance before SECU, I blasted away at the pure BS Taser propaganda. [LINK][LINK][LINK] There is so much propaganda from Taser that is so weak that almost anyone with a modicum of skepticism can instantly see the logical and technical flaws.

By early February, I'd tracked down a certain Taser fan-boy, (apparently) named David E. Zuskin, who (it seems) had been spamming the Internet with his nonsense trademark 'TASERS SAVE LIVES EVERYDAY' (in all caps) - which is both factually and grammatically incorrect. He has since installed a brain and now keeps a much lower profile (now he's 'Bob'). But he's still out there spamming the Internet - and nursing his investments [smirk...]. He got his bum smacked by his ISP [LINK] after clumsily entering my blog e-mail address into many investment-related news letters as some sort of punishment. Typical... ...these law and order (sic) folks are the ones that will break the law to maintain their order. LOL.

Another theme of this blog is taser abuse, misuse and overuse. For some reason [LINK], tasers are constantly being used where there is little to zero justification. Honestly, I don't care if the police are equipped with flame-throwers, so long as everyone is being perfectly honest. But if the manufacturer of flame-throwers starts claiming that they're perfectly safe, and that the burnt-to-a-crisp subjects are simply examples of Spontaneous Human Combustion, then those flame-throwers need to be put away until the brains are reinstalled and lawsuits settled.

By March, we had had a visit from Grettir, who may or may not be Dr. Mark Kroll himself (it certainly sounded like him). [LINK] The flawed thinking by Grettir was crystal clear - some of the logical errors were shocking in their simplicity - such as double-dipping for the natural protection of everybody's shared anatomical characteristics. The other points were equally easy to shred. It's clear that even self-styled big thinkers sometimes make small mistakes.

I note with interest that as these sorts of pro-taser arguments have been shredded by this blog, they tend to disappear from the Taser PR machine. The only argument that they've been using recently has been the 'reduces injuries to the police officers'. Yeah, so would a 'shoot first and let God figure it out' policy. They've very few arguments left standing.

By April, I had noticed that the higher RMS current values had been expunged from the later data sheets. [LINK] Taser would probably say that it was to reduce confusion. Yeah thanks for thinking of us. Nothing to do with ~160 milliamperes RMS being well above the safety limits, eh?

BC Transit Police revealed their empty-headed policies in April. Tasering fare-cheats for gawd's sake. [LINK] Idiots!

Safety margins were examined here [LINK]. They didn't stand-up very well to even a modest application of scrutiny.

But the most important contribution of this blog might be highlighting the relationship between the M26 waveform, and the X26 waveform, and the potentially huge impact of the seemingly-minor change to the waveform. A little DC offset changes everything - it lowers frequency (more dangerous), and it VASTLY increases duty cycle (to 100% continuous). It really seems that Taser forgot about Fourier. [LINK]

See also the guesstimated spectrograms [LINK].

We started plotting the number of taser-associated deaths per month, by month. The running average jumped up from much less than 1 per month before the introduction of the X26 taser in 2003, to a fairly steady 7 per month after that point. Perhaps it's just a coincidence. Perhaps all these deaths are just coincidences. [LINK] and others... [LINK]

In May, the brave BC Mounties tasered an 82-year old man in his hospital bed. Because he had a knife. It was 'a very dangerous situation'. So the frightened officer walked up really, really close to the elderly man and zapped him at close (zero) range. Yeah, it makes no sense to me either. [LINK]

Taser chairman Tom Smith more-or-less accidentally admitted that tasers takes one life for every 70 'lives saved'. [LINK] Well - ah - that's nice. Except that they claim that almost every time a taser is deployed, it counts as a life saved. Which is nonsense. And that just leaves the lives lost. Not to mention the Karma issue [LINK] of saving some lives at the expense of instituting a street level "death lottery" [LINK] on everyday citizens that do not deserve such risks.

We've reported incidents where diabetics in comas [LINK], people sleeping [LINK], and those having epileptic episodes [LINK] are tasered. These sorts of examples, which are almost endless in number, shred the old stale argument about 'just obey the police and you won't be tasered'. If you see that argument, please be gentle to the weak and ill-informed mind that houses it.

Another theme is the extraordinarily bad Taser-certified training. Given the actual behaviour of some supposedly-trained police officers, the only possible explanation is that the Taser-certified Trainers are brainwashed numskulls, and the Taser-certified training material is so poor as to be considered evil. [LINK] How else can you explain this nonsense? [LINK] !!!

This issue is (far and away) more than sufficient to fully justify a moratorium to allow time to surgically removed all the Taser propaganda from the skulls of those that have been Taser-certifiably brainwashed. It might take a year or two to sort out.

It's probably time to remind the readers that this taser issue is not just in the cross-hairs of a few outrage civilian bloggers. People with PhDs are also pointing out that some of Taser's so-called studies are useless. [LINK] And a more skeptical mind might ask, 'Wouldn't the pro-taser 'researchers' be familiar with the basics of Statistics 101?' Are these uselessly-small sample sizes an innocent mistake? ...or a sign of deeper issues?

Inconvenient facts like this [LINK] must annoy Taser: "...people with heart problems are about 5% of the general population (2% to 8% averages to 5%), but they represent 54% of the (tasered-then-dead) victims. That's about an 11-to-1 ratio that needs to be explained. Well obviously [sic] there's no connection [sic] between the taser and the heart. None at all...[ROLLS EYES]..."

Mid-way through 2008, the NIJ released a report that found no evidence of a high risk from tasers. Well DUH! What about low to moderate risk? And NIJ excluded huge swaths of the population, which add up to most of the population. [LINK]

Then a truth-stretcher named Billo turned the NIJ statement around to claim that this proved that Tasers-R-Safe. [LINK] Which it doesn't. [LINK]

Oh my! Then it was noted by another blogger that Billo the Blogger is a certain William Oliver and he is sitting on the same damn NIJ Taser Study panel!! Oh my gawd. [LINK][LINK] and especially [LINK] !!! Isn't that amazing!! This unabashed taser fan-boy is sitting on the NIJ panel "studying" tasers. And then he systematically twists the NIJ findings to suit Taser. What a bunch of clumsy clots.

On the subject of clumsy clots - I discovered by accident that Taser's lawyer Micheal Brave was registering domain names that promote "Excited Delirium" and he points these URLs to a seeming-front organization. Read it here [LINK] and [LINK] You're either in on it, or you're being played like a trumpet.

Taser likes to highlight its legal record, but not that fact that they actually settled many cases to make them go away. [LINK] [LINK]

By September, the RCMP had been body-slammed by an independent report [LINK]. But by mid-December, the RCMP thumbed their noses at the Parliamentary committee SECU that directed that the RCMP recategorize tasers as impact weapons (to cut back on the abuse, misuse, and overuse). [LINK][LINK] I guess the RCMP doesn't take them seriously, but they should... [LINK]

Still in September, the Canadian Police Research Center (seemingly acting as a branch of Taser sometimes, sat beside Taser at SECU for gosh sakes!) report failed to note that tasers are already considered to be firearms. [LINK] You'd think that might be worth noting. They had their chain yanked in August [LINK].

Taser's French distributor got himself arrested. [LINK] For some reason, Taser seems to be occasionally associated with people (Di Zazzo, Kerik) that are not as far above the law as they thought.


There is so much more. The above tidbits are just a sample of the issues that we've discussed. I've made some very interesting findings along the way.

It's been a crazy year for Taser. Their stock has tanked "due to oil prices", but I believe that the next year is when the perfect storm of cold hard facts will intersect with the legal system to make the year 2009 even more interesting for them.