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.

How many people die just BEFORE being tasered?

There are 400-some people that have "coincidentally" died in what seems to be a temporally-ordered, cause-and-effect relationship. But some would deny the causality. If that world-view of non-causality is true, then wouldn't one expect to see an approximately equal number of people dying just BEFORE the police officer deploys the taser?

So where are the reports like this? "I was just about to taser the subject, when he went into medical distress. The taser was not deployed, although I was preparing the CED for use. I had just yelled the taser warning, 'Taser taser taser' - and the subject at that point became unresponsive and subsequently died."

I've not seen any such reports.

But logically [sic], there should be hundreds.


I first asked this question more than a year ago (9 May 2008): What's the "Taser taser taser" death rate? [LINK]

Tuttle stands on hind legs and speaks...

Taser International responds to yesterday's needless taser-associated death of Brian Cardall. [LINK]

"Although exposure to CED is not risk free, there is no conclusive medical evidence within the state of current research that indicates a high risk of serious injury or death from the direct effects of CED exposure. Field experience with CED use indicates that exposure is safe in the vast majority of cases. Therefore, law enforcement need not refrain from deploying CEDs, provided the devices are used in accordance with accepted national guidelines." Steve Tuttle, Vice President of Communications and Propaganda, Taser International.

Questions:

1) "...not risk-free..." Does Taser acknowledge that tasers can occasionally DIRECTLY KILL via internal risk factors such as cardiac effects of any sort? Let's be perfectly clear about "falling down and banging head", "individual susceptibilities", and plain-and-simple dangerous.

2) "...[no evidence of] high risk..." 'High' risk? That's a strawman argument there Steve-4-brains. What about a low to moderate risk (low end of single digits, RISK OF DEATH)? Does Taser International acknowledge that there exists a low to moderate risk of death once the taser darts happen to land on the chest?

3) "...safe in the vast majority of cases..." Do you think it is morally acceptable to turn day-to-day police work into a street level death lottery? Should ANYONE be exposed to a low to moderate RISK OF DEATH because the police officer doesn't want to bother trying other methods? How much of the safety factor is from external factors such as random dart placement (not on chest)?

4) "...accepted national guidelines..." Huh? Does such a thing actually exist? Reference please. Do police actually follow it? Has Taser International ever (EVER!) issued even a small gently-worded press release in those cases where an officer violated these (mythical?) guidelines?

This ruling will have an impact...

An Edmonton man has been acquitted of assaulting a police officer, which reportedly even included a kick to the groin, because the officer(s) were too quick to use their tasers. [LINK]

Think about it. This is huge.

Delicious irony...

Ocean City, MD - ...The Town's Police Chief is pushing to outlaw tasers and stun guns, because they could be used against police officers. The proposed law would ban the sale, possession, and use of a stun gun. Violators could face up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. [LINK]

Well I don't blame him. Those damn things can be dangerous!

Must
...Not
......Laugh.

Taser folks nervously checking ?

Blog hit minutes ago (about 8PM EDT, 9 June 2009):

Scottsdale, Arizona arrived from google.com on "www.Excited-Delirium.com" by searching for "Brian Cardall" + taser.

Geesh. Google is fast. I only posted [LINK] minutes before.

Ready, Aim, ... ...Fired (?)

Check out the tentative wording regarding misconduct: [LINK]

Tick-tock-tick-tock-tick-tock...


I hope that nobody starts drinking (and driving) while nervously awaiting the outcome of the Hail Mary appeal to the BC Supreme Court asking for a 'Federal Bail-out'.

More, many more, defective tasers (80% now?)

British Columbia's Solicitor General Rich Coleman ordered the RCMP in B.C. to yank more than 570 older-model [M-26] Tasers from deployment after 80% [!!!] of identical models used by other law-enforcement agencies failed routine performance tests. The tests showed the $1,500 [junk] were not generating the required amount of sustained output... [LINK]

They're right to pull these defective peices of junk off the street. Taser's idiot spokespuppet once tried to claim that failing low was failing safe. I was one of the first to point out that such "failing safe" claims were utter crap. [LINK] [LINK] [LINK]


But I'd still like to point out that I feel that the X-26 taser is the one that appears to be more-commonly associated with taser-associated deaths. The M-26 taser provides a potentially useful experimental control. [LINK]

Where's the fricken' M-26 vs. X-26 data? [LINK] [LINK]


With a price tag of $1,500 to replace the weapon, and an apparently abysmal life span (three years since purchase) one can't help but wonder - never mind the controversy around its use - how cost-effective the Tasers are to begin with. [ibdi]

Would he have died anyway?

Brian Cardall, the 32-year old son of KSL (Salt Lake City, Utah) Editorial Director Duane Cardall, dies after being tasered by police. Condolences to the family.

The Washington County (Utah) Undersheriff Jake Adams says that after being hit by the taser, the man became unconscious. Paramedics treated him, but he was pronounced dead at a hospital. [LINK] [LINK]


So, would he have died ~ right then ~ if the taser had not been used? I think it's an obvious question. And I think that the true answer is pretty obvious too. Examine the timeline. Do the math. What are the odds?

But this tragic death will probably be marked down as yet another 'Excited Delirium' death. It happens all the time, especially when tasers are involved.

Tasering 72-year old grandmother (in an expert manner)

72-year old Winkfein responded with "...Go ahead and tase me. I dare you." [LINK]

I guess that's good enough reason. 'She asked for it.'


Deputy Beize is the Taser instructor for Precinct 3. We're told he would know if tasering Winkfein could have been a hazard to her health.

I call a Bullsh_t on that claim. Taser Instructors, being almost at the very bottom of the taser propaganda food-chain (long past the point where 'it' could still considered to be food), will be amongst the very last people on Earth to learn about the safety concerns swirling around tasers.

They've less than useful amounts of knowledge. Worse than useless.

The only possible value in listening to anything that they have to say would be if investigators into the larger Taser Issue would like to interview them for posterity, and for laughs and giggles.

The oldest taser lie...

Moronic headline reads: "Better to be Tasered than shot" [LINK]

And thus, Rhett Watson, The Daily Telegraph (Australia), earns his badge.
(Hint - tasers are used about 100x as often as guns ever were.)

Misleading headline: "Mounties want..."

Mounties want B.C. court to prevent Taser inquiry from finding misconduct [LINK]

No, it's not THE Mounties (the RCMP, the organization). It's just the four particular Mounties, and their lawyers.

I haven't seen anything to indicate what THE Mounties would want included in the scope of the Braidwood Inquiry. But I suspect that they wouldn't mind if their hand was forced.

The 'Moth + Light' taser deployment model

Brooksville, FL -- The [taser] knocked [Justin Robert Miller] to his knees. When Miller tried to get up, the deputy [activated] the taser a second time, then a third time, and once more. When Miller tried to lunge at another deputy, Cari Grasso, Junker sprayed him with pepper spray, finally subduing him. [LINK]

So the five-second taser bursts are not actually being used provide an opportunity for the police to move in and hand-cuff the subject (as has been more-or-less promised on the tin). The five-second taser hits are simply being used, even in this dart deployment mode example, as a form of pain compliance - repeated until the moths get tired of banging into the light bulb (four times in the case).

Decision makers that may have been left with the impression that the purpose of the taser is to incapacitate the subject, with the subject neatly hand-cuffed at the end of the first deployment cycle (or maybe the second), may wish to consider if that is actually how tasers are being used.

Apparently not, judging by reports such as these.

And judging by the many examples of repetitive taserings (strangely correlated with taser-associated deaths, considering that there's supposedly zero connection [rolls-eyes]).


Is this how the taser training says to do it?

'Taser the subject until he stops moving.' [??]

(See previous post on the same subject: [LINK].)

Do you see any problems with this Moth + Light deployment model?

"Tasers are deadly..."

"Tasers are deadly, anything else anyone says about it is a sham."

Tim King, Salem-News.com [LINK]



Note: Mr. King is also a former U.S. Marine. Good luck there Steve. Wear clean shorts... ...in case you come back wearing them pulled-up and over your head.

QOTW - by Taser CEO Rick Smith

Taser International CEO Rick Smith on the real-world results:

"I've sat at the defense table at trials where these officers are being called killers and their integrity is questioned, their honor is questioned. It's a very difficult process for them and a very expensive process for their agencies." [LINK]


It's very nice to see that even the CEO of Taser International realizes that his primary product, so full of promise, actually causes endless problems in the real word. Especially the part about being called "killers" - not good. You might want to look into that...


A big thank-you very much from a Canadian tax-payer. I've paid for your defective products, the mounting legal costs, the evil outcomes from the defective training, and the endless federal and provincial inquiries. Millions and millions. Thanks a lot... ...a$$hole.


Smith-4-brains then goes on to advertise their new video service, where you have to pay to store the videos off-site. Because, as we all know, storage is - ah - 'expensive'. It's not as if you could simply burn the critical incident videos off to a pair of DVD's, load the video into an NAS, and enter the details into a flat-file DB. Why spend $40 when you can spend so much more? Yawn...


Thing is... In Canada, the Pritchard video of the Dziekanski killing is what turned the tide. [LINK] Yes - video is good. But $5k a pop (for a $500 gadget), and endless service fees is stupid.

The Police IQ test continues...


And if the police think that if they have the video, they therefore control the video, then they're not thinking clearly. Seriously, I'll bet that some dim-wits decision makers are actually thinking along those lines. But duh!, the other public videos captured by a dozen mobile phones will still exist. They'll still be on YouTube within minutes, and the evening news later the same day.


In summary:

Video? Yes. Sure. Good thing.

More products from Taser International? Yuck. Gag. Puke. What, are you really that stupid?

Taser demo - and NOT in the back

The Chronicle (Centralia, WA) police reporter Andy Campbell (young and expendable) volunteered to be zapped by a taser.

Most such idiot demonstrations are shot into the volunteer's back. But this one was applied to Mr. Campbell's front. [LINK][VIDEO]

I use the word 'front', not chest, because it is hilarious how the taser wires were attached to Mr. Campbell's far upper right shoulder, and left thigh. Neither taser wire is actually on his chest. This is not a coincidence. Taser International and their minions are still running chicken-sh_t scared to death of advising that volunteers be tasered directly across the chest.


The next thing about this video is the duration. Mr. Campbell apes for the camera while signing the release (may we see the release?). He indicates a willingness to be tasered for five seconds. Didn't happen. It was about two seconds. It wasn't five seconds even in the slow-motion replay.


The Chronicle, thus having paid the minimal, but still painful, entry fee to the Church of Taser, writes a glowing propaganda piece repeating some of the same old stale lies.

"...only 50 [taser-associated deaths] could be traced to the use of a Taser, and even those ones are classified as the Taser “contributing” to the death."

Autopsy reports are notoriously difficult to obtain. AI made strenuous efforts and was able to obtain some number of reports. Of that sample, 50 mentioned the taser as a contributing factor. The percentage was 27% or 37% (let's call it 'one-third'). This rate can probably be extrapolated to all taser-associated deaths. So it's not "50", it's about one-third of all taser-associated deaths. And this is in spite of best efforts at containment.

"...Overall statistics lead us to believe that Tasers, when properly used, do way more good than harm."

Failing grade for basic ethics. If you put any reasonable weighting on the significance of the unexpected deaths of those that simply did not deserve to die, then it's a difficult argument to make that the benefits outweigh the costs. Perhaps in some ideal world where the taser training doesn't gloss over the risk of death, then in that imaginary world perhaps the argument could be made. But not on this planet. Not with the evil propaganda being foisted on the unsuspecting public.


As for cub reporter Campbell?

He had better wipe the saliva off. He's been played like a trumpet.

Tasers shunned in Victoria, Australia

Victoria (Australia) Chief Commissioner Simon Overland has announced that there will be no widespread roll out of Taser stun guns across the force. [LINK]

Instead, the police police will be provided with new, powerful .40-calibre semi-automatic pistols, and (basically) training on how to avoid using them!

Following an internal review of 11 recent police shootings, including December's fatal shooting of teenager Tyler Cassidy, dramatic changes will be made to procedures for confrontations. It is the first overhaul of Victoria Police procedures in a decade. Mr Overland says current police practice, such as shouting at a mentally ill armed person, can escalate situations. New police training will reverse current protocols of rushing to secure an early resolution, which police chiefs say risks the safety of officers and the community. Officers will be retrained in how to identify and speak to vulnerable people and those affected by alcohol or drugs.

Excellent!

"Tasers are effective 50 or 60 percent of the time."

This is my taser quote of the week:

Boulder County Sheriff Joe Pelle, "(Tasers) are effective 50 or 60 percent of the time." [LINK]

Nothing like a bit of uncertainty and randomness to make the day more interesting.

Does any other device in common use by the police get away with having such a poor track record? Imagine 50-60% applied to other police hardware. With 'friends' like this, who needs enemies?


By the way, the subject in this incident was shot with a gun. Right in the torso. He'll be fine.

RCMP pull the wrong taser model

There are two models of tasers still in common use: The older M26 was introduced in 1999. The newer X26 taser was introduced in 2003. They have different waveforms. The M26 waveform is high frequency and very low duty cycle. The X26 waveform contains a DC pulse that creates (is) low frequency and thus is 100% continuous duty cycle. I've explained all this many time before on this blog.

Recent news:
RCMP pull M26 tasers for testing [LINK]
B.C. orders M26 tasers off street [LINK]
N.S. RCMP pulls M26 tasers [LINK]

All the evidence that I've seen indicates that the newer X26 taser is the model that is actually involved with more taser-associated deaths (per deployment) than the older M26.

And here the police go, pulling all the older (apparently safer) M26 tasers.


Please refer to my previous post X26-bias in taser-associated deaths? [LINK] and please read it very carefully.

According to the CPC report, during the period 2002-2007 the older M26 taser was actually used by the RCMP three times more often than the newer X26. And yet, the Canadian taser-associated deaths are 100% X26 - at least for all cases where the taser model is identified. That's pretty strange. [ibid] 

Is anyone going to follow-up on this? This is all just hints and suspicions at this point. And most of the available data for taser-associated deaths strangely omits any mention of the taser model used.


It's not just about meeting the manufacturer's specifications. The fact is that it appears that Taser International and their minions failed to notice the implications of the new X26 waveform and its DC pulse. They've (accidentally) given-up their explicitly-stated safety factors of high frequency and low duty cycle. And they continued to claim these safety factors even after they were long gone with the introduction of the X26.


The X26 was introduced in 2003. Find the year 2003 on the following graphic.

"Just obey..." - even while sleeping?

York (Toronto / GTA) police burst into hotel and put a massive beating on two young men. They were tasered numerous times. [LINK] [LINK]

Sick. Disgusting. 'Lawful force' my ass. There is no excuse for such behaviour by the police in this case. Just because they're 'scared' and 'frightened' does not permit them go in and beat people half-to-death.

The pair were charged with obstruction - a classic 'cover charge'.

A complaint and a civil action has been launched. Good. I hope that GTA is forced to pay a 7-figure settlement.

SCOTUS fails 'force' noun/verb distinction

Ref. Torture in America - Buckley v. Haddock [LINK]

The US Supreme Court declined to take up the case of a handcuffed Florida motorist who was tased three times because he disobeyed a deputy sheriff's command to stand up and walk to a patrol car. [LINK][LINK]

If you examine the issue closely, you'll notice that there is a clear distinction between force the verb (The deputy tased him three times before...) and force the noun (...backup arrived, and the two officers walked Buckley to the patrol car.)

The former is clearly torture; pain intended to force (verb) compliance. The latter is reasonable force (noun).

Perhaps three unwarranted (and completely useless) taserings isn't enough. How about 20? How about 50? The batteries will be dead before 200, so if you're going to pick a number, better make it less than that.

Roadside water-boardings anyone?

Maybe some pliers applied to sensitive body parts?


Nobody - and I mean nobody - has ever answered the Cigarette Challenge.

Why can't the police just use the glowing end of a lit cigarette to cause pain? Both the taser and a lit cigarette can leave minor burns. Both cause more-than-intense pain. The cigarette might be safer. They seem to be perfectly equivalent from a functional point of view. Please explain what's the legal, moral, and ethical difference? Well?

And this in spite of the many pro-taser, law-and-order (sic) taser fan-boys that frequent this blog. They're all mouthy, but go strangely silent when presented with the Cigarette Challenge (it's because there is NO difference). I'll bet that not even the Justices on SCOTUS could answer that very simple question. [LINK][LINK]


Tasers used in this mode, and for this sort of application, are clearly an instrument of torture.

Former Taser International board member indicted

The Excited-Delirium blog has learned that former Taser International board member Bernard Kerik has been indicted by a federal grand jury in Washington on charges of making false statements to White House officials during his vetting for the position of Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. [LINK]


Lying to the Bush White House?

Coal to Newcastle.

Forensic Video Analyst 'flames out'

Wow... A bad day on the witness stand. [LINK] [LINK]

VANCOUVER, B.C. — A forensic video analyst who told a public inquiry that Robert Dziekanski was acting aggressively toward Mounties before he was shocked by a Taser, conceded under repeated questioning Monday that his organization lists Taser International as a corporate sponsor. ...

Fredericks, who graduated with a degree in Broadcast Communications from Gonzaga University (Spokane, Washington) and launched Forensic Video Solutions in the 1980s, admitted on the stand that he has no training in photogrammetry and no more expertise in the science of making measurements by use of photographs than the average layperson.

Mark Hird-Rutter, a certified photogrammetrist who took the stand after Fredericks, said there were numerous flaws in the testimony of the RCMP witness.

Ouch.

Is the financial equation shifting?

Way back when, back in the golden days of the Church of Taser (when almost everyone had faith in the savior Taser) [about two years ago], you didn't see very many news reports about settlements.

Now they're coming thick and fast.

On the It all goes here blog, one recent post called More Tasers Being Expensive [LINK] listed three recent settlements of various amounts up to $2M.

Today there's another one...

Relatives Settle Stun Gun Wrongful Death Suit Against LAPD [LINK]

Trial had been scheduled to begin today in the case filed in Los Angeles Superior Court in October 2007 on behalf of the family of Jesus Mejia.

The terms of the settlement were not released, so my placeholder guess will be something around $1M. Got more info?


My instincts are telling me that the winds of change are upon us. The taser-wielding defendants are caving. Perhaps because they're frightened of the new evidence that has been emerging recently. They're obviously getting advice to settle.

Therefore, time to turn up the settlement figures. Six-figure settlements are so last year. 7-figure settlements are now in fashion. If anyone has a very strong case, why not hold out for 8-figures ($10M+)?

If this trend continues, and it ends up costing a small fortune to legally debate the merits of tasers with each deployment, then the financial equation about how tasers save money may become yet another stale pro-taser argument (if it isn't already).


PS: I went to the TNT List of the Dead [LINK] and tried to do a quick search on the name Jesus (as in Jesus Mejia). The Find on Page search found THREE people with the name Jesus on that page. Mr. Mejia in listed in an addendum to The List. THREE!

Reminds me of the FIVE Wilsons I stumbled across on another similar search. [LINK].

These numbers of Jesus (3!) and Wilson (5!) on The List of the Dead should help to put the issue into perspective. It's not a short list.

John Alexander on "Non-Lethal" (sic) weapons

In the Symposium’s keynote speech, former US army colonel and long time advocate of non-lethal weapons, John Alexander issued a dire warning against the ‘flawed logic’ of opponents to less lethal weapons. He said that if we were to focus on the repressive capabilities of technology, then recent revelations about Guantanamo interrogations would require a prohibition on water exports. Alexander's view is that people, not technology, are to blame when things go wrong. [LINK]

I might be convinced to buy that twisted logic (at least in part), provided that we acknowledge that a major part of the problem with tasers are the false claims of essentially-perfect safety with respect to inherent internal risk factors (such as cardiac effects of any sort).


If the manufacturer of flame-thowers pinned the blame for the fried humans on 'spontaneous human combustion', then that's a big problem. In my view, and this view is widely held, 'excited delirium' is in the same category.

Where the technology has gone wrong is that it isn't as safe as they claim. It appears to be many orders of magnitude more dangerous (but that's just my opinion).


Let's think about another example that might help to clarify some thoughts:

Imagine that some idiot-genius invented a foam ball that could be fired at people and it would expand on contact and envelop the subject in a sticky mess. They claim that it is perfectly safe. They conduct some trials and it seems to work.

But then, when it starts to be used in the real-world, the manufacturer slowly turns up the power of the "non-lethal" weapon. Eventually the ball of sticky foam expands to about ten feet in diameter. People begin to suffocate (to death). The non-lethal foam-ball has become more and more lethal with each passing version.

Is this just a 'people problem'?

I agree.

But those 'people' should be bankrupted and put in prison.


PS: The "dire warning" from John Alexander is pure crap. One major study showed that gun-fire deaths went UP when tasers (and taser training) was introduced. And I've noted that the public uproar in Canada against tasers (starting in late-2007) has apparently saved many police lives. If you're new to the blog, I'll leave it up to you to scroll down and down to find the back-up for these claims.

And this just in: 'They Don't Know...'

Nobel prize winning physicist Richard Feynman [WIKI] was very clear that 'naming' and 'knowing' are two different things.

Some of the most muddled thinking on Earth comes from people that don't distinguish between putting a more-or-less meaningless name on something, and actually knowing how it really works. It's a point I've mentioned before: [LINK]

Once you understand what Feynman is on about, you see this sort of fundamental confusion all the time. By keeping this 'naming/knowing' distinction clear in your own mind, you'll be much better prepared to be able to see what things are really known, and which are merely named.

There are a lot of people that are 'experts' with the names of things, but are otherwise completely inept technically. Such so-called experts are sometimes even found in the witness box. The trick to detecting them is to carefully monitor the ratio of technical names to actual explanations.


There's an old joke about such technically-inept people:

Q: What time is it at their house?
A: Twelve O'clock, Twelve O'clock, Twelve O'clock, Twelve O'clock...

(They've incapable of setting their digital clocks which blink "12:00" endlessly.)


Here's today related news:

Despite the Taser being one of the most heavily researched [only because Taser International has been plugging-up the plumbing...] less-lethal weapons in the world, its operational mechanism remains a mystery, a conference on non-lethal weapons was told.

Explanations for the electro stun weapon's apparent ability to stiffen the whole of the human body without (usually) causing any physiological damage remain unclear, inconsistent and contradictory, and it might be that psychological factors play a more important role in its effect than previously thought. These were the conclusions of researchers at the Bundeswehr Medical Centre, who presented their research at the 5th Symposium on Non Lethal Weapons in Ettlingen, Germany earlier this month.

In a special forum on Tasers, scientists from the University of Military Forces in Germany reported that published research into the Taser’s effect on heart tissue was also inconsistent. [LINK]


In other words, the minions at Taser International have put the rather-meaningless name on the taser mechanism "Neuromuscular Incapacitation", and they even toss out the 'essential' Three-Letter Acronym "(NMI)" because having an acronym tends to mask the obvious fact that they just made it up.


But, apparently, they can't explain how it actually works.

And there's a strange tendency to provide computer models that understate the complexity of the human body by an approximately ratio of 100,000-to-1 (my guess).

Ding Ding Ding - Warning bells for lack of 'knowing'.


This point also ties back into another previous point where I suggested that they combined some taser experiments with some evil-minded acupuncture. [LINK]


Once everyone agrees that the so-called "science" of tasers is ill-developed and being 'used' for legal purposes, then the actual ignorance of the subject becomes more clear.

And that reveals who to put more faith in...

Do you believe those that claim that something is impossible given the state of ignorance?

Or those that are still struggling to connect the dots to provide a rational explanation that would match the real-world results.


Once you've through the grind of such debates many times over, it all becomes perfectly obvious what's going on.

Salem, OR man tasered and/or beaten to death

Salem, OR - Gregory Rold, 37, died at Salem Hospital shortly before 9:30 p.m., Lt. Dave Okada of the Salem Police said today. ... Officers were called to an apartment in the 1200 block of Royvonne Avenue Southeast in Salem about 7:38 p.m. following a report of a man who was trespassing. They encountered Rold, who Okada said "violently" resisted arrest. That prompted officers to shoot him with a Taser and strike him with their batons. After he was handcuffed, officers realized Rold was unconscious. According to Okada, they immediately called for medical help and gave emergency aid to Rold. Rold was then taken to Salem Hospital where he died. [LINK]

The manufacturer of the police batons has notably not issued a public statement indicating that the subject was exhibiting signs of excited delirium. They have also apparently failed to issue a press release claiming that batons are perfectly safe unless you banged your head on the ground after being clubbed unconscious.


UPDATE: "Still no cause of death in Ore. stun gun case" [LINK]

Notice that it's a "stun gun case". I guess that batons would generally leave better postmortem clues; and if those clues are absent, it actually proves something. As opposed to tasers...

Anyone bother with a postmortem test for VF?

Braidwood Inquiry Phase 2 drawing to a close

The Briadwood Inquiry [LINK] into the death of Robert Dziekanski is drawing to a close. [LINK]

The Government of British Columbia has appointed the Honourable Thomas R. Braidwood, QC as the head of two inquiries. The first commission of inquiry is a "study" commission to report on the use of conducted energy weapons (Tasers) in British Columbia, and to make recommendations respecting their appropriate use. The second commission of inquiry is a "hearing and study" commission to provide the Dziekanski family and the public with a complete record of the circumstances of Mr. Robert Dziekanski’s death and to make recommendations the Commissioner considers necessary and appropriate. Thomas R. Braidwood, QC, the sole commissioner for these inquiries, is a former judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia and the Court of Appeal of British Columbia and Yukon Territory. ...

The report from the first phase, a study commission broadly examining Taser use, is apparently due by the end of June. [LINK]

For the second inquiry into the death (killing) of Mr. Dziekanski, lawyers will make closing submissions in mid-June. Braidwood will then write his final report, which could be ready by the fall.


For some reason, the word "scathing" just popped into my mind. I'm not sure why...

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Here is some old news that I recently found on Jonathan Turley's legal blog.

"In June 1998, Long Beach Superior Court Judge Joan Comparet-Cassani ordered a deputy to shock [with a stun belt] defendant Ronnie Hawkins, after he repeatedly interrupted her. A judicial review board refused to impose disciplinary action on the judge, who continues to try cases in California." [LINK]


The above incident was involving a stun-belt, not a taser. But the legal and philpsophical concepts are exactly the same.


I once mentioned that tasers as punishment was something that even the courts would not be permitted to apply. This reported example of a stun-belt being used for on-the-spot (judicially-sanctioned?) torture is an example of where things are headed if we allow it to continue.


For those (hopefully few) readers that might not understand the point, mentally replace the stun-belt with:
- a taser used in touch-torture mode
- an electric cattle-prod
- the glowing end of a lit cigarette
- a red hot branding iron
- pulling of fingernails
- pliers squeezing sensitive body parts
- 'The Rack'
- etc.

Once you step over the line, there are no further boundaries to slow your descent straight to Hell. And that's why there is a line that shall not be crossed.

False safety claims result in RICO conviction

I heard this news today, and for some reason it seemed to resonate with me.

The court, in a closely-watched RICO case, found 'Big Tobacco' liable in a decades-long conspiracy to deceive consumers about the adverse health effects of smoking. [LINK]

I'm not exactly sure why this news, that has absolutely nothing to do with the taser debate, captured my attention. I simply can't explain it.

Welcome ShadowSurf readers...

One of the intriguing parts of this job is reviewing the Internet records of the who, the what, the where, the when, the how, and sometimes even the why (!), of those that are accessing this blog.

The multiple methodologies available to me are sometimes highly revealing and provide some slivers of insight into the murky world of the pro-taser folks.

One can almost track the pro-taser network communications paths as Internet users (in locations where prominent minions or fan-boys are known to either live or work) read a particular post, then you can almost see them generating an e-mail (this part is a guess), and then others in similarly-known locations directly access the same post over the following hours.

Sometimes they even arrive directly from their "super secret" untraceable off-site webmail server that absolutely nobody knows about (it's at www.secureserver.net in case you're interested).

The latest thing is one or more people half-heartedly using an anonymous proxy to access this blog. Because they didn't read the manual, it's not working very well.


One reason that I'm posting this information is that their inept Internet clumsiness is resulting in so many interesting factoids that it's becoming a bit of a distraction, and certainly a time-sink that I can't afford.

I'd honestly rather that they either go away, or learn how to use the Internet without leaving quite so many tantalizing clues in their wake.

What value do you put on this 'expert opinion'?

Dorin Panescu, (a popular Google search topic [LINK]) an electrical engineer who received $92,896 from Taser International last year for his 'consulting work', opined "With a high degree of scientific certitude, it is my opinion that Mr. Dziekanski's death was not caused by, and not contributed by, the use of a TASER X26." [LINK]

Wow. He sounds pretty sure of himself doesn't he?

Self-evident cause-and-effect be damned? [LINK] [LINK]


Let's review:

1) No mention that he has any medical training, but he is offering an expert medical opinion on a cause of death? Where the hell is Mr. Daubert when you need him? [LINK]

2) I assume, and this is only an assumption, that his expert medical opinion is based on (for example) his computerized model of a perfectly-typical human being (see green uni-leg man below). [LINK] [LINK]

3) He's been paid nearly $100k (US) by Taser International (in one year?) for his consulting work. [ibid]

Let me ask the obvious question again: Does this computer model explain why people that are being tasered are either held-up by their fraternal brothers, or they fall down because their legs are knocked-out from under them? Now I'm no expert, but the computer model appears to show that the current distribution is tightly confined to the immediate area above the heart in this example. Thus resulting in a constriction of just one or two muscles in the chest directly above the heart. So why do people being tasered fall down? Does a dart have to hit an ankle to knock the legs out from under them?

It is because they just have one green uni-leg and they find it difficult to remain balanced? Inverted Weebles wobble and they DO fall down?

I thought that the claim was that the taser affected the muscles throughout the human body (except, of course, the heart [magic]), not just the exact muscles between the darts. How does that claim relate to this computer model which was intended prove how tightly limited the current distribution is?

I'd say listen to his expert medical opinion, but weight it by about (1/92,896).

"Taser Death" poll closed - a runaway result...

I've decided to close the "Taser Death" poll a bit early; it was a runaway result anyway. I certainly hope that this unannounced wrap-up doesn't affect anyone's plans to vote at the very last minute...

The raw results (including attempted fraud by an unknown taser fan-boy) were as follows:



As was previously discussed here [San Jose taser fan-boy stuffs ballot box], this poll was clumsily and fraudulantly manipulated by someone accessing the Internet from the vicinity of San Jose, CA and who was searching for the name Dorin Panescu.

Evidence suggests that this unknown Internet user repeatedly cleared his Internet cache and cookies, and repeatedly voted within a period of several minutes. The vote count associated with this clearly-unethical stuffing of the ballot box was between 7 and 9 (let's call it 8), and those votes were all submitted to the "No, impossible!" count.

Therefore the actual (more likely to be honest) results would be as follows:

Question: Do you think that tasers can cause a death?

Answers:
Yes, obviously! = 35 (~80%)
Maybe... = 1 (~ 2%)
No, impossible! = 7 (~16%)
Don't know. = 1 (~ 2%)


This poll is not scientific. But it supports the assumption that the world-view of Taser International, their minions, and their brainwashed fan-boys is a world-view that is simply not shared by the majority of clear-thinking people.


Honorable mention to those that voted in the 'Maybe...' and 'Don't know.' categories. I have a great deal of respect for those that hold those opinions. I hope that they continue to follow the issue closely, and that they will share what they learn along the way.

Post # 1000 - Attention: Taser International

This is published Post # 1000.

It is dedicated to the unanswered 2008 Taser Challenge [LINK]. They've never answered this challenge, and it has been more than a year.

Taser International more-or-less completely controls the taser training. For years, they recommended that trainees be tasered as part of the training. But they've always arranged for those taser training hits to be into the trainees' backs (never the chest). [LINK]

I believe that this is because they're scared sh_tless of the possible cardiac effects (whatever those may be) of so many taser hits to so many healthy subjects (their customers). There is no other reason that I can think of for their "backs only" policy for taser training hits.

What other reason would that have for the bass-ackwards taser training? So turn around the trainees and have them take it in the chest, like a real man. Not in the back like some sort of frightened school girl.

If they're worried about the darts, then trainees could wear a face mask and a protective cup. They could even clip the wires to the subject (arranged for maximum current vector through the chest) - there's really no need for flying darts.

That they have failed to avail themselves of the opportunity to prove my suspicions wrong is highly indicative.

So I will repeat this challenge to Taser International.

Turn the trainees around. Chest hits only.

It's "safe", right?


And no more 2-second hits either. Minimum 5 seconds. Trainers must take at least 10 seconds. Master Trainers, at least 15 seconds. Any staff from Taser International must take 30 seconds. Anything less is pure fakery. Especially when you claim that these training hits are evidence of safety.

Studies not asking the right questions...

We're getting swamped with little tiny 'studies' of this city or that city. They're rubbish.

Look - if anyone wants to conduct a study then conduct one of the following studies:

1) How does the real-world M26 death rate compare to the real-world X26 death rate? Also, previous lower power tasers? Does the lethality correlate to the model?

2) How does the real-world death rate compare to darts hitting chest or not? Does the death rate correlate to where the current vector runs? We know that the back is very safe (all those FAKE training shots, almost always in to the back). But why do I keep seeing the word "chest" in many of the lethal incidents being reported?

Until this real-world data is provided, then all these made-to-order studies of selected data sets are not to be considered useful.

And someone should answer why the data to answer these obvious questions isn't readily available? Why does the RCMP's data exclude the type of taser used?

Why hasn't anyone looked at the autopsy reports to see the rate of taser darts on chest (for those that died), and compare it the overall rate of taser use.

It is blatantly obvious that these are the questions to ask.

"Studies" be damned.

Open message to 'Bethany' from Flint, MI

Find Michael Moore [LINK], the famous film-maker who was born in Flint, MI. When you finally are able to contact him, then tell him that he should make a documentary film about Taser International.

Tell him to move quickly, otherwise it'll just be a historical-review.

Bethany Flint, a report from Bay City

This is regarding 15-year old Brett Elder, who was killed by 'a combination of alcohol and the taser.'

Posted by BethanyFlint on 05/17/09 at 11:50AM [LINK]

Taser's kill. Dewy was my friend and no one can bring him back. Something has to change. Everyone who says they are justified, you just wait! Wait till it is someone that means something to you! All it takes to change your opinion is one death to someone that is close to you. He was 15 and he didn't deserve to die! Please these police officers need to take more training. They shot him right in the heart, and left him there to die. No CPR just turned on his side! So you tell me! Then when we have a peaceful protest, the police drove by and laughed at us. I was there and I seen it 1st hand. I have lost all respect for Bay City Police officers. They could have drove by and not even reacted. Trigger happy Punks! I hope the man that pulled the trigger enjoys every bit of time with his children and thinks about Dewy's face when he looks at them. Because every time I look at Dewy's picture I think about why he isn't here!

Love you and think about you always Brett,

Bethany

I was wrong... ;-)

Lacking any detailed information at the time, I'd guessed that UCLA had settled with taser-tortured student Mostafa Tabatabainejad for about $75,000. [LINK]

My placeholder guess was wrong.

According to the LA Times, the settlement was actually $220,000 [LINK]

Ouch!!

That'll learn 'em.


The positive implications of this settlement amount are tremendous. It's an amount that is difficult to ignore. It's sufficiently large to capture the attention of even the thickest-headed decision maker. It's large enough to cause the plaintiff lawyers to start circling around any further examples of taser Touch Torture. It's large enough to make those that provide insurance cover very nervous.

What a great way to be wrong.

Taser-associated deaths by month

It's been a while since I updated the plot of taser-associated deaths by month. There is a definite down-turn in the monthly rate, from about 7 per month to about 4 per month starting in late-2008.

Absolutely positively this is a direct result of the increase public attention and the resultant rub-off onto how police actually use tasers (in spite of their training).

Wake Forest Taser study - 0 (or 2?) out of 5

~UPDATED~ The summary that I read at the Advocate didn't indicate that they'd found anything significant (à la Ho). I had to dig further to find that there actually were two fatalities included in the study, but they were barely worth mentioning. Given the Taser Proof Issue, they shouldn't be quite so quick to sideline fatality data.


Advocate staff writer Mr. Steven Ward wrote an article [LINK] contrasting the use of tasers in Baton Rouge and other parts of Louisiana, to the Wake Forest University School of Medicine 2009 study, "Safety And Injury Profile of Conducted Electrical Weapons Used By Law Enforcement Officers Against Criminal Suspects."

The Wake Forest study is a bit weird in that they gathered data from just six law enforcement agencies (quite lazy in my opinion) over the period June 2005 to June 2008.

They found very little to report on in the way of taser-induced injuries and deaths, which indicates 'something'. But what does it indicate? Taser safety? Or a flawed study?

Let's check...

UPDATED: The study included two taser-associated deaths, but these were discounted because the autopsy reports didn't link them to the taser. Duh! I guess that's good enough for those that haven't been following the news lately.

According to the List of The Dead [LINK] at the Truth ... Not Tasers blog, there were about 230 (#124 to #354) taser-associated deaths in North America during this period (including 11 or 12 people in Canada).

Let's focus on just the USA for this post. 230 subtract 12 in Canada = about 218 taser-associated deaths in the USA during the period June 2005 to June 2008 (inclusive). Let's round it down to 200 just in case we've included an extra month at one end or the other.

So we have (at most) two of these about 200 taser-associated deaths that made it into the Wake Forest study. Only two? [ding ding ding - sound of alarm bells going off...] What's going on with the Wake Forest study?

Is the study truly representative?


The six law enforcement agencies included in the report cover a total population of just a bit over eight million (8,059,001 according to the numbers provided in the left column summary here [IBID]).

US population during this period is about 305 million. So the study covers about 2.6% (8M/305M) of the US population. If the study was large enough to be representative, then we would expect that they'd also have about 2.6% of the taser-associated deaths included in their study. 2.6% of about 200 is about 5.2 (let's call it 'five').

A truly representative study would therefore be expected to include about FIVE taser-associated deaths in the data set.

But they have just two, and both were discounted into the disregarded column.

Ding ding ding.

Obviously the Wake Forest study may have been honestly randomized at the outset, but the intermediate results clearly indicate that the data is not representative of the much-larger, all-encompassing experiment that is being performed on the entire population of the USA.

Two isn't five. And given that AI reported that something like 37% of all taser-associated autopsy reports DID mention that the taser was a contributing factor, it seems strange that they would structure the study to avoid stumbling across this same ratio. [LINK]

Anybody have a parrot cage that needs some paper to line the bottom?


Many statistical analysis will include the mathematical disclaimer "...(19 times out of 20)".

The most generous interpretation of this Wake Forest Taser Study is that it just happens to be the 20th.


Advocate writer Mr. Ward then goes on to review some of the egregious taser incidents that have occurred in Louisiana, including the Winnfield incident where 21-year-old Baron 'Scooter' Pikes was alledgedly tasered-to-death. ("The coroner found the death of Mr. Pikes to be homicide by Taser." [LINK])

Winnfield, LA was not obviously included in the Wake Forest study.


Update details - Ah, they did have 'two'. Not the expected five, but two. "Two subjects died, but autopsy reports indicate that neither death was related to the Taser." [LINK] Given the Taser Proof Issue, then this may be an example of circular logic of the highest possible order.

Furthermore, I wonder how much denominator washing this study includes in the "nearly 1000 incidents" studied? How many were full-on taser hits to the chest? How did the details of the taser hits correlate to the 'un-related' deaths?


Commentary - It well past time to start discounting these sorts of studies with such limited input data. There exists a much larger experiment happening all across the USA and Canada and beyond. Hundreds and hundreds of taser-associated deaths. Autopsy reports reportedly mentioned tasers as a contributing factor in as many as 37% of the reports studied. Prof Savard plotted increased risk of death is linearly proportional to taser exposure. I'll bet that the X26 is more dangerous than previous taser models. I'll bet that taser hits to the chest are not-coincidentally far more lethal than hits to the back or extremities. Let's get the complete data and run the numbers.