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, April 19, 2009

Torture in America - Buckley v. Haddock

On March 17, 2004, Mr. Buckley was arrested after refusing to sign a traffic citation during a routine traffic stop. He was handcuffed and voluntarily exited his vehicle, obviously in emotional distress, then fell to the ground. The arresting officer was under no apparent threat, as documented by the police car-mounted camera, yet “tased” Mr. Buckley three separate times. Each tase lasted five seconds, leaving 16 burn marks on his skin, some severe enough to produce keloid scars. Although Mr. Buckley never once actively resisted arrest nor attempted to flee, the officer continued to tase him solely to cause pain. [LINK]

So - as I have already asked [LINK] - what's the flipping difference (ethical? moral? legal?) between using a taser, and using the glowing end of a lit cigarette, for pain compliance?

No replies to date - because there's no difference.

If one is unethical, then so is the other.
If one is immoral, then so is the other.
If one is illegal, then so is the other.
If one is evil, then so is the other.

And if the lower courts allow tasers to be used in this manner, then logically they're effectively permitting officers to also use the exactly-equivalent glowing end of a lit cigarette for the same purpose.

And could these flesh burns (!!!!!) have anything to do with the fact that the taser was designed to incapacitate, and the single-setting output has been designed for that purpose.

Which makes it some 2000 times stronger than required to cause intense pain. [LINK]

Note - the output is not changed from one mode to the other (incapacitation mode vs. Touch Torture mode). If anything, skipping the long wires is likely to make the net output higher (but perhaps less lethal if and only if the electrical discharge is not directed into the victim's chest).

Personally, I would say that the 2000x over-strength output for the Touch Torture mode (when compared to what might actually be required for pain compliance) is a huge design flaw.
Especially when Satan's little toy starts to burn flesh.

Who authorized this insanity?


The USA is better than this. Citizens deserve better. Hopefully the SCOTUS will sort it all out with a good ruling.

No comments: