The Taser as a Less Lethal Force Alternative: Findings on Use and Effectiveness in a Large Metropolitan Police Agency

By the late 1800s, police officers were issued firearms to counteract the better equipped criminal. In recent years, there have been resurgences in the importance of non-lethal and less-than-lethal weapons for law enforcement use. However, the devices in use today are worlds away from in terms of technology compared to what their police forefathers used. Generally, the use of force by law enforcement officers is permitted and often necessary under certain circumstances, such as in self-defense or in the defense of another individual or group.

The research topic we have chosen to research is Tasers. The use of Tasers has been a very controversial topic in the last few years. Reporters, doctors, and human rights groups have all expressed concern that police officers will use a Taser in situations when no weapon is required and concern has also been expressed over if the Taser is really a less-lethal option. No one claims the use of Tasers to be risk-free but studies have found them comparatively safe. We believe that people opposed to Tasers ignore a body of the reports showing the technology is safe and effective. The research question we hope to answer is: Is the deployment of a Taser a safe and viable

The Court in Bryan v. MacPherson stated that when the officer used the Taser with the probes, aluminum darts tipped with stainless tell barbs connected to the Taser insulated wires, toward the target at a rate of over 160 feet per second. MacPherson, 630 F.3d at 824. The Court noted that once a person is struck, the Taser delivers a 1200-volt into the individual’s muscles, making the impact powerful. Id. at 824. The electrical impulse instantly overrides the victim’s central nervous system paralyzing the muscles throughout the body, rendering the target limp and helpless making the person experience excruciating pain that radiates throughout the body. Id.; see Draper v. Reynolds, 369 F.3d 1270, 1273 (11th Cir. 2004); see also Lewis v. Downey, 581 F.3d 467, 475 (7th Cir. 2009). Although the uses of Tasers by law enforcement can help defuse a dangerous situation, the force must be justified by the governmental interest

Taser International, Inc. v. Ward, Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 1, May 13, 2010

In 2009 the death of Antonio Galeano, a Queensland man with a mental health condition sparked a joint review by the Crime Misconduct Commission and the Queensland Police of Taser Policy and training. The review was concerned with many aspects of Taser use especially with the over use of Tasers by the Queensland Police against those with an underlying mental health condition and those under the influence of drug and/or alcohol. Although the report has successfully implemented 24 recommendations a further assessment was conducted by the Crime Misconduct and Commission in 2011. It released an independent review of the Queensland Police Services policies and practices, where it found that a number of key concerns remained. These key concerns were related to the over use of Tasers and especially the use of Tasers upon those who are believed to have a mental health condition and/ or are believed to under the influence of alcohol and drugs. The following will provide a discussing of the introduction and development of the Queensland Police Service Taser police, where it will reflect upon these concerns regarding these ‘at risk’ groups.

According to Use of Tasers by Law Enforcement agencies, the intention of the Taser program is to encourage deviation from killing a violent offender to simply immobilizing a violent offender until all parties are safe and that specific area has been secured. The decision to use such force is left to the discretion of the officer to dictate the intent of the individual in question and to determine what the meaning of safety is at that particular time. This cultural change can be achieved through education of all of the previously mentioned: the weapon itself, the effects the weapon can have on a human body and discretion.

A specialist will also be hired to inform the department of new technological advances, and these will be taken into consideration during any training. Revised training will also be considered annually, based on the event of aforementioned new developments. Training will focus on dispelling myths about the use and effect of Tasers, communication with the community concerning their use, and their place in the force continuum.

In a study questioning two different police departments, Orange County’s Sheriff’s Office and the Orlando Police department weighed in on what less lethal weapons their officers are equipped with within the field. Both are equipped with pepper spray, containing five percent capsicum, TASER model M26, impact weapons such as ASP model F21 and F26. Compressed air weapons such as the pepperball, 12- gauge bean bags and for felony offenders or offenses, canines. The darts of a fired TASER can reach from fifteen feet away if it is a civilian model but can reach as far as twenty five feet away if it is a law enforcement model. For a TASER to be fully effective in attaining a suspect, both of the TASERs probes must make contact with their intended target. In a random sample of fifty scenarios where the TASER was deemed as ineffective and void, thirty-eight percent could be justified of of the facts that both of the probes did not make full contact with the target or both of the probes missed the target in its entirety. Of these thirty-eight percent, majority ejected the probes of the TASER at a distance greater the fifteen feet. Yes, law enforcement issued TASERs can reach twenty-five feet but fifteen feet is optimal in trying to subdue a suspect. In this particular scenario, the probes spread out as they traveled further, getting

As crime and criminals have evolved over time, so have the police strategies with having to deal with criminal behavior. A less-than-lethal force strategy is one that the police have been focusing on. As stated in an article by Trostle (1990), there are several types of less-than-lethal force weapons. These range from; electrical devices, such as the TASER gun; chemical devices, such as tear gas; impact devices, such as the baton; and other rifle-launched soft projectiles impact devices, such as rubber and PVC bullets. For close proximity encounters, the TASER is frequently used. The TASER’s purpose is to incapacitate, temporarily, the suspect in order for police to regain control of the situation. Research has shown that a TASER has had an

Use of fire arms as the choice weapon by police officers have been around since the late 1800s. Police departments started issuing firearms to police officers in a response to better-armed criminal populations, (Bulman, 2010). Recent studies have shown that less lethal weapons decrease the rate of police officers and suspect injuries. Because evidence supports less lethal weapons for police officer, many law enforcement agencies have agencies are stressing the use of less-lethal weapons. In the early 19th century, the less than lethal weapon of choice was the wooden club, (Bulman, 2010). Less than lethal weapons have evolved to technology such as conductive energy devices (CEDs), commonly known as the Taser.

Such excessive use of force with a taser can: "... contribute to cumulative exhaustion, stress, and associated medical risk(s). Severe exhaustion and/or over-exertion from physical struggle, drug intoxication, use of restraint devices, etc. may result in serious injury or death. THE TASER DEVICE CAUSES STRONG MUSCLE CONTRACTIONS, USUALLY RENDERING A SUBJECT TEMPORARILY UNABLE TO CONTROL HIS OR HER MUSCLE MOVEMENTS. Under certain circumstances, these contractions may impair a subject’s ability to breathe. If a person’s system is already compromised by overexertion, drug intoxication, stress, pre-existing medical or psychological condition(s), etc., any physical exertion, including the use of a TASER device, may have an additive effect in contributing to cumulative exhaustion,

The authors are: Dr. Anthony J. Pinizzotto, former senior scientist/clinical forensic psychologist for the Behavioral Science Unit of the FBI. Edward F. Davis, retired Detective Lieutenant from the Metropolitan Police Dept. and former criminal investigations instructor with the FBI's Behavioral Science Unit. Shannon B. Bohrer, retired Maryland State Police Sergeant and firearms instructor for the FBI. Benjamin J. Infanti, graduate of Marymount University specializing in forensic psychology. They used surveys and data to support their idea that the idea of widespread (over) use of force is overstated despite the documented incidents where excessive force has been used. The authors gave 250+ active, sworn officers from all over the United States

Weapons such as, Tasers, batons, pepper sprays and so forth are classified as less lethal or non-lethal weapons. The purpose of these weapons is to prevent serious injuries or death. However, according to Macdonald et al. (2009), less lethal weapons cause unnecessary injury while using police force. Recently, police force has been the number one topic in media. Many argues that law enforcement officers are abusing their powers and unjustly shooting the suspects. Less lethal weapons may stop suspects without fatally injure them. However, many argues that less lethal weapons aren’t exactly the best way to deal with certain situations as suspects may get seriously injured if not killed. The use of Tasers may seem non-lethal, but, excessive use

Tasers are a necessity for law enforcement to keep the peace and continue doing their job with a minimal amount deaths. However, there are some people that want tasers to be removed from the equipment of law enforcement, but they do not realize the alternatives. If law enforcement officers were to not have tasers, they would be forced to apprehend a criminal using close quarter combat or even worse, a gun. There are no alternatives to tasers. They offer a means of subduing someone who has broken a law and continues resisting arrest without greatly harming them or causing terrible injuries. For example, a police officer pulls over a man for driving way over the speed limit. The cop then gazes into the man’s gar and spots drugs. After a short

In the quest to develop safer use of force options for law enforcement the concept of neuromuscular incapacitation technology was produced leading to the development of a ‘Taser’ or conducted electrical weapon. Since the introduction of a taser law enforcement agencies have embraced this idea of a less lethal option to use in force situations. As a potential investor in the Axon company which continues to develop tasers and web based applications for law enforcement it is important to look at the company reports, specifically focusing on the annual financial report from 2016.