Sask. won't authorize use of Tasers by municipal police

[CHIMO]

The Saskatchewan Police Commission says it wants more information about Taser stun guns before it can make a decision about approving their use.

Commission chairman Michael Tochor says until they get that information, Taser use will be limited to specially trained police tactical teams.

Tasers incapacitate people with electrical shocks. They have become the focus of a number of investigations in Canada following the deaths of several people after they were shot by Tasers by police, including the case of new immigrant Walter Dziekanski at the Vancouver International Airport.

The use of Tasers in other provinces, such as Manitoba and British Columbia, have raised questions about the safety of the weapons for general use by police in Saskatchewan, outside of the RCMP, Tochor said.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2008/07/25/tasers-sask.html

[iverglas]

1. the immediate background

is probably the Winnipeg death this week.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/466428

Jul 24, 2008 04:30 AM
Petti Fong
WESTERN CANADA BUREAU CHIEF

The suspected thief who died after being Tasered by Winnipeg police was a cornered 17-year-old who refused orders to drop a knife, police said yesterday.

The incident began shortly before 4 p.m. Tuesday when two people spotted the teen allegedly stealing something from a vehicle behind a home in the city's west end. Police were flagged down and confronted the suspect."They encountered this male who was armed in the rear lane of a residence," said Const. Jacqueline Chaput of the Winnipeg Police Service. "They repeatedly requested that he disarm himself and drop the knife.

"The male refused to comply with that request and at that point the electronic control device was deployed."

The teen was taken to hospital in critical condition, Chaput said, and was pronounced dead there. An autopsy should shed light on the Taser's role in his death.

Chaput couldn't say where the Tasers probes hit his body, how many times he was shocked or if the youth injured himself when he fell.

[MicaelS]

2. Taser are being used as a method of forcing compliance

That's basically the whole thing in a nutshell. The fact that people die is simply viewed as collateral damage. If your do not comply with the cops demands, they're going to taser you. Just another case in point: http://www.ky3.com/home/video/25829234.html

“He refused to comply with the officers and so the officers had to deploy their Tasers in order to subdue him. He is making incoherent statements; he's also making statements such as, ‘Shoot cops, kill cops,’ things like that. So there was cause for concern to the officers,” said Ozark Police Capt. Thomas Rousset.

Notice I am NOT defending the police, I'm just explaining what I perceive as their mindset.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

3. Any suggestions on how they should disarm a suspect who refuses to comply?

[MicaelS]

4. The real crux of the issue

"Is the suspect armed?" If yes, and they refuse to disarm, then yes use the taser. But this horsehit of cops willy-nilly tasering people for "lack of compliance" is something I'm completely opposed to and I think is morally and ethically wrong. Mark my words, this misuse and abuse, and it is ABUSE, of tasers by street cops, especially where people die, is going to lead to them being withdrawn from service. And cops will have no one to blame but themselves.

[spin]

5. The judo choke hold was withdrawn after misuse by cops...

Choking techniques are some of the most universally taught techniques in the martial arts and are found in jujutsu, aikido, Brazilian jujutsu, karate and in many Chinese, Philippine and other arts. Of all the arts, Judo is perhaps best known for the variety and sophistication of its many chokes.

When you are against a very strong or determined opponent and everything else seems to fail, the choke has proven over time to be one of the most dependable techniques. If done properly, it acts quickly and causes no physical damage and minimal pain. But if incorrectly applied, chokes can be dangerous, even potentially fatal. In fact deaths attributable to incorrect applications have led to choking techniques being banned in some law enforcement jurisdictions. (1) If chokes are taught safely, as in Judo, as a temporary incapacitating technique of short duration done with proper execution, they should be quite harmless.
http://www.fightingarts.com/content01/judo_choke.shtml

The choke hold was very effective against people under the influence of drugs such as PCP. Unfortunately, some police who used this technique were poorly trained and applied too much pressure on the neck and death resulted. Deaths of suspects caused by police officers using choke holds in various cities caused the practice to be discontinued. Pepper spray and tasers became popular, but they also can be misused.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

6. So you agree with the use in this case

and you agree with cops carrying tasers for cases such as this?

From Iverglas' post:"They encountered this male who was armed in the rear lane of a residence," said Const. Jacqueline Chaput of the Winnipeg Police Service. "They repeatedly requested that he disarm himself and drop the knife. The male refused to comply with that request and at that point the electronic control device was deployed."

I think use of a taser should draw the same investigation as the use of a firearm. If they use a taser they ride a desk for 2 weeks while the use is investigated by IAB and a CRB. That in itself would almost stop the overuse and missuse.

David

[MicaelS]

7. Only in the case

Of an armed suspect, or one who is in a drug rage, that is it. And I agree with you about the investigation. I don't see that happening, except as a last ditch effort by PDs to forestall a complete ban on tasers.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

10. That's one of the problems though.

Suspects in a drug rage are likely the ones to die after being tasered. The autopsies have shown that many of the deaths after the use of a taser have been on suspects with huge doses of cocaine or methamphetamine in their systems. So tasers are most often to be used on the people that are likely to die afterwards.

David

[MicaelS]

11. Really? I did not know that...

Well, then, I guess they will have to be limited to those brandishing a weapon. Unless you have a better answer, because I do not.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

14. No good answer here either.

The problem with many of these cases is that both cocaine and methamphetamine can by themselves cause lethal cardiac disrhythmias. Tasers have never been shown to, but many suspect that they are a contributing factor. My guess is it's a combination of factors, general poor health by many drug users, high doses of stimulants, an intense physical exertion while fighting or running from the police which likely results in hypoxia, and then to top it off a large dose of lactic acid which is released from the muscles when they contract anaerobically from the electric shock of the taser and from the overall physical exertion, all of these factors combined likely lead to a lethal cardiac disrhythmia in a very small percentage of suspects. I really don't see a good alternative, tasers are far safer for the suspects and the officers than firearms, rubber bullets and nightsticks. I believe heavily increased oversight, as we previously discussed, would likely result in fewer uses, but I fear you would not see a corresponding drop in fatalities at the same percentages. I wasn't trying to be argumentative, I have been called every name under the sun here for espousing the above viewpoint.

David

[MicaelS]

19. Since you're a professional

I take your word about the medical end of things.

But, if the current state of affairs keeps occurring, then I seriously believe tasers will be removed from service. I think the only thing that will stop that from occurring will be multiple very high-profile prosecutions of cops for the misuse of tasers, or successful judgments against Taser itself, such that tasers will become used as a last resort before firearms.

What about widespread deployment of beanbag guns?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

22. Probably more dangerous than tasers.

Blunt force trauma from those less lethal weapons would probably result in just as many deaths if they were used in the same situations that tasers are. A shot to the throat would likely kill a suspect and a shot to the chest could easily cause cardiac arrest. There are not really any good alternatives.

David

[iverglas]

21. just to note

I agree with that overall assessment -- "tasers are most often to be used on the people that are likely to die afterwards" -- and that's a huge problem, and also something that it seems police are not being made aware of.

[VeraAgnes]

13. That is the real question.........

The answer is..............they have no answer....just lack of knowledge.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

16. I'm not sure what knowledge they lack.

Disarming an armed suspect without hurting them or without getting hurt is no easy feat. Tasers do kill a very small percentage of people that they are used on, shooting them twice in the chest would kill about 60-80%.

David

[VeraAgnes]

17. I was referring to the general public.....sorry.

For the Officer, it's the perception of danger that rules...bottom line. I do support the need to educate the public regarding what is expected of them when confronted by police.....See, the police know that standard, use of force guidelines...but the public does not seem to have a clue these days. Too much TV I guess.

[krispos42]

18. Pepper spray would be my first choice

If need by, use a nightstick to whack the hand holding the knife while the guy is trying to keep his eyes from burning up.

Other possibilities include a K-9 unit, beanbag shotgun rounds, or calling the fire department and blasting the guy senseless with a fire hose.


I wonder if animal-control-style tranquilizer guns should be issued during a standoff like this. Tasers and firearms would still have a use if the suspect charged at somebody or was already in a fight, but in the case of the cornered suspect that won't surrender but isn't getting violent, just hit him with a tranq dart and wait a couple of minutes.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

23. Tranquilizer darts would be risky.

Dosages would vary so wildly. Anything strong enough to really subdue them would likely have severe side effects like respiratory arrest. I have been given huge doses of valium during medical procedures, it had no effect largely because of the adrenaline and endorphins being released in response to severe pain. There really doesn't seem to be a very good option although I have seen some promising technology on Future Weapons.

David

[krispos42]

24. I don't really know what they use in them

Not an animal-control officer or anything remotely related, but I figure there got to be something out there that can make them mellow, at least. How about a healthy shot of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana?

Or a muscle relaxant? Would that make them go kind of all jello-like?

:shrug:

I'm more of a mechanically-minded person.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

25. Succynilcholine is a paralytic.

It would work. Unfortunately it also paralyzes the diaphragm and you have to ventilate the patients. If you don't have a paramedic handy that could be a problem. One of the most promising things that I have seen was a net gun that shot out a net that was nearly impossible to get out of. There are some gases that cause severe vomiting, gases though have a bad way of affecting more people than the suspect, as does pepper spray.

David

[tburnsten]

28. Well ventilation is easy!

If you just have to ventilate them after the paralytic agent, you would be right back to square one, deadly force as the only adequate response. If the idea is to increase the number and type of situations where it is possible to safely bring the person into custody, then an agent that requires you to ventilate their lungs, easiest with a gun or a knife, wouldn't make much sense at all.

[jeepnstein]

26. You would be a statistic.

If you are facing an armed suspect, the Taser is a poor choice. A knife is an incredibly dangerous weapon and anyone wielding one within 21 feet of an officer can be considered "paid for". You don't have time at that kind of distance to transition from a Taser to your duty weapon, you go for the duty weapon. Now if you have multiple officers confronting the suspect it is perfectly fine for one of them to deploy the Taser while the others cover him in case things don't go well.

Spray is a good tool but don't think it can stop a determined attacker. I know from experience that it is possible to fight through the effects of OC. Get sprayed some time and then tell me you'd bet your life on it to stop a deadly attack.

Pounding someone with a baton has far more lasting effects than the Taser. It's quite easy to kill someone with an impact weapon. Oh, and there's the fact that you have to be very close to the armed suspect to use it. A Taser will generally leave a memorable impression but no broken bones or internal injuries.

Having faced a charging suspect armed with a knife, I can assure you there is not time to call the fire department, get a K9, or get in touch with the aggressors feelings. If you have time to negotiate then by all means that's the thing to do but more often than not things don't work that way. I have been truly fortunate to not have to kill anyone, but others I know have not had my good run of luck. The unfortunate truth of the matter is that most people who get into armed conflicts with the police are having a very bad day already and their options are dwindling fast. Ride the bull, get the horn.

Now I know that some officers are abusing the Taser. They wield it like some kind of Sword of Excalibur that renders all opposition to their will futile. It's a serious weapon, not a negotiating tool. In my department you face an internal review every time you fire a Taser but aren't held to the same standard as a review of deadly force. They even log how many times the thing is cycled in a shift in case someone is using it to "drive stun" instead of firing the cartridge. You must cycle it at the beginning of a shift and any time after that you'd better have a Use of Force report to explain why it was being cycled three times at 2:00AM.

[MicaelS]

29. Very good post, thank you.

Now I know that some officers are abusing the Taser. They wield it like some kind of Sword of Excalibur that renders all opposition to their will futile. It's a serious weapon, not a negotiating tool. In my department you face an internal review every time you fire a Taser but aren't held to the same standard as a review of deadly force. They even log how many times the thing is cycled in a shift in case someone is using it to "drive stun" instead of firing the cartridge. You must cycle it at the beginning of a shift and any time after that you'd better have a Use of Force report to explain why it was being cycled three times at 2:00AM.

I think what is going to gave to happen nationwide is that use of a Taser is going to have to be considered the use of deadly force. That is the only way I can see to curb the abuse of the Taser by street cops.

[jeepnstein]

30. It's not deadly force.

It's an interesting experience, but it's not deadly force. If you are going to place the officer under the same requirements on the force continuum for the Taser he might as well just shoot the suspect. It's not a substitute for a duty weapon but is just another tool that can limit physical harm to the officer and suspect. The answer to abuse of the thing is to fire anyone who uses it in a manner other than what is clearly defined in the training. It's not the Taser that's the problem.

The thing is not meant to be used five or fifteen times on an individual. If you don't get results with three cycles you are going to need to try a different approach.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

31. It's considered a less lethal weapon.

[MicaelS]

8. Seriously, iverglas...

Do you forsee a nationwide ban on tasers in Canada?

[iverglas]

20. studies and studies

I've reported here a couple of times on studies being done -- by a commissioner of inquiry in BC, but a parliamentary committee ...

I basically agree with your assessment that the things are being used to enforce compliance, that this is never what they were intended for, and that it is an entirely inappropriate use.

They were supposedly intended to be a less-lethal alternative to the use of a firearm.

What cop would have used a firearm on a disoriented newcomer at the Vancouver airport? On a 17-yr-old with a knife, when there was apparently no immediate threat / no other way to avoid risk of harm?

There are situations where they could and should be used. In my neighbourhood several years ago, a man apparently in a psychotic state was brandishing a large knife at two cops in an enclosed space. Yes, Taser. They didn't have one, so they shot and killed him.

So I dunno. I haven't got much time just now, but this should give you some reading if you're interested:

http://www.google.ca/search?num=30&hl=en&safe=off&q=taser+committee+commons&btnG=Search&meta=cr%3DcountryCA

[SteveM]

9. I remember warnings on early VW auto electronic ignitions:

"Potentially lethal shock." All automotive ignition coils step up D.C. voltage to tens of thousands of volts; so-called "electronic" or capacitive-discharge types even higher. I've been "popped" by some of these and it's enough to make you sit down and take stock of your arm and its functionality.

I'm of mixed feelings about tasers. It's certainly better than being shot by a firearm, but tasers (if there is any comparison with something as pedestrian as an auto's secondary ignition) are not "non-lethal." Let's hope protocols were being followed, and such measures as pepper spray were at least considered.

[MicaelS]

12. I think cops everywhere

Have swallowed Taser's kool-aid that these things really are non-lethal. Of course all the companies demos are on males who are extremely fit, just the type of person a taser shouldn't "harm". So now the cop mindset is "No one will get hurt, these things are non-lethal, I can use this thing as method of compliance, and I don't have to risk my or my partner's safety."

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

15. They can't test them on anyone else.

The company can't test them on pregnant women and men with heart conditions. I personally haven't seen any misuse of tasers in our city. I'm sure there have been some but taser use by our officers is quite rare, and in the cases I have seen has been more than justified. There are some ridiculous videos online, though.

David

[jeepnstein]

27. It's been tested on me.

Yeah, you get to "ride the lightning" when you get certified on the Taser. I saw a guy with four-way bypass take a hit. Wow, is it ever an interesting sensation. Images of Jack Bauer at Guantanamo Bay instantly came to mind. It is far too easy, without proper oversight, for someone to really abuse the thing. Give me a couple of hours, a Taser with a test lead, immunity from prosecution, and I can get you to tell me anything I want to hear whether it's true or not.

The fact of the matter is that in most cases the recipient of a ride on the Taser is just a step away from getting shot. I don't know that there are statistics on it but I'd be willing to bet more lives have been saved by the Taser than taken.