Mission Statement - De-Spinning the Pro-Taser Propaganda

Yeah right, 'Excited Delirium' my ass...


The primary purpose of this blog is to provide an outlet for my observations and analysis about tasers, taser "associated" deaths, and the behaviour exhibited by the management, employees and minions of Taser International. In general, everything is linked back to external sources, often via previous posts on the same topic, so that readers can fact-check to their heart's content. This blog was started in late-2007 when Canadians were enraged by the taser death of Robert Dziekanski and four others in a short three month period. The cocky attitude exhibited by the Taser International spokespuppet, and his preposterous proposal that Mr. Dziekanski coincidentally died of "excited delirium" at the time of his taser-death, led me to choose the blog name I did and provides my motivation. I have zero financial ties to this issue.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Taser-associated increase in ICD underestimated?

A major study found that in-custody deaths (ICD) increased (by 6.4x) when tasers were added to the police officers' tool belts. Further details indicate that this might be an underestimate.

From a previous post: The rate of in-custody sudden death increased 6.4-fold (95% confidence interval 3.2-12.8, p = 0.006) and the rate of firearm death increased 2.3-fold (95% confidence interval 1.3–4.0, p = 0.003) in the in the first full year after Taser deployment compared with the average rate in the 5 years before deployment. [LINK]

More info: In our anecdotal experience, several cities with highly publicized Taser-related sudden death events declined to provide data and we speculate that other cities with more Taser-related deaths may similarly have been less likely to return our survey. Thus, the observed association of Taser deployment with an early increase in in-custody sudden deaths in this study may actually be an underestimate because under-reporting would tend to attenuate any such association. [LINK]

Now - stop and think.

Do you think for one second that the self-styled "Institutes" for "Prevention" of In-Custody Deaths (...Lawsuits?) will move quickly to use this information in accordance with their name? Or will they either ignore it, or actively work against it?

Imagine the worst, and bet on it.

No comments: