'Lethal' nonetheless - study shows stun safety, but more research needed

July 28, 2008
CHRIS KITCHING, The Winnipeg Sun

A landmark study of police Taser use in the U.S. suggests the device is safe after finding almost 100% of 1,000 suspects zapped suffered either mild injuries or none at all.

Despite the findings, the principal investigator of the two-year study, released last October, doesn't think a stun gun or any other weapon can be considered non-lethal and is calling for more research into its effects.

"Any weapon, all the way from your fist to a metal baton, can cause injuries and even death," said Dr. William Bozeman. "There's no such thing, in my mind, as a non-lethal weapon. I refer to (Tasers) as 'less lethal.' "

Using data from six U.S. police departments, Bozeman's study looked at 1,000 incidents where police stunned a suspect with a Taser. He found a 0.3% likelihood of serious injury.

Three people suffered a significant injury and two died, but not as a result of a Taser, Bozeman said.

"We don't have any particular cases where it's clearly evident the Taser was the cause of death," he said.

Stun guns have been deemed a contributing factor in some deaths.

The study does not argue for or against stun guns, but Bozeman said he supports police use of Tasers.

The Taser debate has reignited after the death of Winnipeg teen Michael Langan.

Langan, 17, died July 22 after he was shocked by a city police officer in a William Avenue alley when, police said, he refused to drop a knife.

The cause of death is unknown. It's the first such death in Manitoba.

Bozeman said the study is the first to explore the likelihood of serious injury and is based on human and animal studies.

Concerns about electrical safety have not been fully addressed, the report found.

Bozeman said there is a need for more research into cardiac safety and whether certain people are at greater risk of injury or death due to their age, medical or psychiatric conditions, or the presence of intoxicants.

So far, no human studies have found any evidence a Taser -- which sends a small amount of energy to the body -- can stop a person's heart but that doesn't mean it's not possible, Bozeman said.

The Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties is among those calling for more research into the effects of Tasers.

"When we see another death we have trouble understanding why this is described as a non-lethal response," said executive director Valerie Price. "We're not drawing any conclusions yet on whether things were done appropriately in this particular case that happened (last week)."

Winnipeg police reviewed its Taser policies and training last winter at the request of a city hall committee and found nothing unusual.

Several governments or agencies are reviewing Taser policies and safety after recent deaths in Canada.

Manitoba's NDP government has not said if it will do its own review.

Bozeman said his study was funded by the National Institute of Justice but was independent from government and stun gun manufacturers, including TASER International.

Police and tasers: hooked on shock

February 11, 2008
by Naomi Klein

The past couple of weeks have been rocky on the stock market, but one company that hasn't been suffering too much is Taser International. At the end of January, its stock jumped by an impressive 8 per cent, and it's even higher today.

Matthew McKay, a stock analyst at Jeffries & Co. in San Francisco, cites a simple cause: news that the Toronto Police Services Board plans to buy 3,000 new Taser electroshock weapons, at a cost of $8.6 million for gear and training. If the deal goes ahead, tasers would become standard issue weaponry for all of Toronto's frontline officers, right next to their handcuffs and batons.

On Wednesday night, I participated in a public forum about the prospect of a fully taser-armed police force, organized by the Toronto Police Accountability Coalition. One speaker, who had a history of psychiatric illness, told the room: "We're worried because we're the people who are going to get shocked."

It's a concern grounded in experience. According to Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair's own analysis, in 2006, city cops deployed the devices in 156 incidents. In all but nine, the subject appeared "to have a mental disorder" or was in some sort of "crisis."

Several speakers at the forum pointed out that $8.6 million would be better spent keeping people out of crisis — by opening more beds and providing better mental health and addiction services. Instead, four homeless shelters were closed last year, at a loss of 258 beds.

But the most troubling remark of the evening was this: "Why is this happening now?" The timing is indeed baffling. It was only three months ago that video of the death of Robert Dziekanski at the Vancouver International Airport caused an international furor. The tragedy exposed the most prevalent misconception about tasers: that they are used primarily as an alternative to guns. As former Toronto mayor John Sewell told me, "the taser is not the thing that replaces the gun, it's what replaces all the other things that police might do other than use a gun, like talk to you."

That certainly appears to have been the case with Mr. Dziekanski. When the RCMP approached him, they made no attempt to calm the unarmed Polish man, or to discover the source of his extreme agitation. Within 25 seconds, he was getting zapped.

Mr. Dziekanski's death also put a spotlight on the other post-taser deaths, the ones not caught on film. According to Amnesty International, 310 people in North America have died after being shocked with a taser since 2001.

Were these deaths caused by the device or by something else? Taser's aggressive lawyers make it tough to know. The company has been hit with roughly a hundred wrongful death and injury lawsuits and claims it hasn't lost one yet. But in August, Bloomberg News reported on "several mysterious dismissals" — instances where the plaintiffs asked for the cases to be thrown out. Though Taser denies paying off all its accusers, it admits to paying in some, "where the settlement economics … were significantly less than the cost of litigation."

Taser has consistently claimed that something else is causing the deaths. The company points to a report saying that that death by electrocution happens within seconds. Yet in many cases, subjects have died minutes, even days, after being shocked.

A recent study may explain the discrepancy. Trauma researchers at Chicago's Cook County Hospital conducted an experiment on 11 pigs, zapping each for 40 seconds; then zapping them again 10 or 15 seconds later. (This mimics how tasers are actually used, since Amnesty reports that those who have died after being Tasered were frequently "subjected to multiple or prolonged shocks.") The study found that all the pigs exhibited heart problems after the shocks and two of them died of cardiac arrest, one three minutes later.

Taser CEO Rick Smith has brushed off the study, saying human research is more relevant. However, according to Bob Walker, one of the lead researchers, it shows "that the effect of the taser shot can last beyond the time when it's being delivered."

So back to that question: Why now? In addition to the troubling new scientific evidence and the disconcerting lawsuits, there are several public investigations in Canada that are still ongoing. In addition to those sparked by the Dziekanski death, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia are all conducting taser reviews.

Surely it would be wise for Toronto's police chief to wait for those findings before ordering a seven-fold taser increase. But something more powerful than reason appears to be at play here, and I believe it has to do with the seductive promise of no-touch policing.

No other method of controlling unruly suspects offers police the same kind of all-encompassing, instant effect. Talking, calming, negotiating are all messier and take time. Other physical techniques put officers' own bodies at risk.

Then there is the taser. The company boasts that its technology, which allows electrified darts to be fired from more than 10 meters away, "temporarily overrides the command and control systems of the body." At the push of a button, even the strongest, angriest subject drops to the floor. In a way, firing a taser is the maximum power one person can exert over another. As an Ottawa Police officer reportedly said after tasering protesters at the ministry of immigration back in 2003: "Less mess, more fun."

Few would argue with an officer's right to use an electroshock weapon when lives are in danger and the only alternative is a gun. Many Toronto police officers, particularly those on the Emergency Task Force, clearly use them with restraint.

Yet there is also plenty of evidence that some officers get hooked on shock. In Edmonton, in 2001, reports of taserings averaged less than once a week. Three years later, they were coming in daily. In another part of the country, a mother in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia called police when she and her 17-year-old daughter were having an argument. Three officers showed up and tasered the teen in her own bed. In a recent court ruling, the judge called these actions "very disturbing and disconcerting."

It may well be possible to prevent shock-happy policing with tighter controls. Yet, despite repeated calls for stricter regulations for police, Taser International is racing to get its devices in the hands of civilians, marketing the product as not just safe but fun. In the United States the company has been aggressively pushing its line of C2 "personal protectors" — available in pink, leopard print, and in holsters with built-in MP3 players. (The weapon is nicknamed the "iTaser.") Tupperware-style taser parties are springing up in the suburbs of Arizona.

Taser International is a company whose executives present themselves as serious experts in public safety. Yet it has launched this foray into fashion at the very moment when the safety of its devices is being questioned on multiple fronts. Valentine's Day is coming and Taser's website is busily hawking the C2 in flaming red. "Love her? Protect her," goes the slogan.

This is what corporations do: whatever they can get away with to sell more product. From Taser International, we should expect nothing less. From our police we have a right to expect much more.

Naomi Klein is the author of The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.

Tasered-teen case raises new questions for MPs

January 30, 2008
BRODIE FENLON, Globe and Mail

Troubling new questions are being raised about the police use of tasers just as a House of Commons committee hears Wednesday from one of the inventors of the controversial stun guns.

Top of mind for many MPs will be the acquittal Tuesday of a 17-year-old Halifax girl who was charged last year with assaulting police and resisting arrest after she was tasered in her bedroom during a confrontation with three officers.

Politicians will also be interested in a Chicago study unearthed by CBC News which reportedly found the weapon may not be as safe as the manufacturer claims.

Tom Smith, co-founder of Arizona-based Taser International Inc. and chairman of the company, appeared before the Commons public safety committee Wednesday afternoon.

His testimony follows a provincial court decision Tuesday in which a Halifax judge had harsh words for the city's police service for stunning a teenager when she resisted arrest inside her home. “The spectacle of a 17-year-old girl being tasered in her bedroom is a very disturbing and disconcerting one,” Judge Anne Derrick said.

The arrest happened last February in Dartmouth after the girl's mother asked police to remove the teen from their home. Two male officers and a female officer confronted the girl in her bedroom. When they tried to arrest her for breaching the peace, she fought back. Two officers struggled with the teen while a third hit her once with the taser. Judge Derrick said the police had no legal grounds to arrest her, because there had been no breach of the peace, said Megan Longley, a legal aid lawyer who represented the teen.

“I still am astounded that ... three-full grown police officers cannot find some way to deal with a 17-year-old girl apart from using a taser,” Ms. Longley said, noting her client was unarmed at the time and has no criminal record. “It certainly highlights for me the need for specific policies on taser use,” she said.

The girl, who is now 18 and can't be named under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, told reporters outside court she intends to file a complaint against the Halifax Police service and is considering a lawsuit. “I just don't understand why I was tasered because I'm not a criminal,” she said.

Halifax Regional Police Const. Jeff Carr, spokesperson for the service, said he couldn't comment on the arrest or the tasering. However, he said police are taking a close look at the evidence presented at trial and are in discussions with the Crown about an appeal of the judge's decision. Const. Carr also noted that the media did not cover the trial, only the decision, and would not have heard all the evidence.

Mike Taylor, president of the Nova Scotia Criminal Lawyers' Association, agreed that the case raises serious questions about when and why police officers use tasers. “To me, the taser is the last line before the gun is drawn. It's supposed to take the place of that,” said Mr. Taylor, a former Calgary police officer. “It's just completely ludicrous that they would taser a 17-year-old because she was being non-compliant when there was no weapon,” he told globeandmail.com. Mr. Taylor said his view on the necessity of the taser as a police tool has been shaken recently by some high-profile arrests and deaths. He said he welcomes the committee hearing in Ottawa. “There has to be something done in a formal fashion, because some internal report from a police force is not going to satisfy the public at large that the police are being monitored appropriately in the use of the taser.”

CBC News reported Wednesday on a study by a team of doctors and scientists at the trauma centre in Chicago's Cook County hospital that found 11 pigs stunned twice with tasers were left with heart rhythm problems. Two of the animals died from cardiac arrest, one three minutes after being shocked, CBC reported.

Chicago study calls Taser's safety claims into question

January 30, 2008
CBC News

Taser stun guns may not be as safe as their manufacturer claims, according to a study carried out by Chicago researchers, CBC News has learned.

The team of doctors and scientists at the trauma centre in Chicago's Cook County hospital stunned 11 pigs with Taser guns in 2006, hitting their chests with 40-second jolts of electricity, pausing for 10 to 15 seconds, then hitting them for 40 more seconds.

When the jolts ended, every animal was left with heart rhythm problems, the researchers said. Two of the animals died from cardiac arrest, one three minutes after receiving a shock.

The findings call into question safety claims made by Taser International, the Arizona company that makes the stun guns, which are used by dozens of police departments across Canada.

According to Taser International's website, "independent medical and scientific experts have determined Taser devices to be among the safest use-of-force options available."

Taser director Mark Kroll has also published a paper called Safety of Taser Electronic Devices, in which he says when electricity kills, it is an immediate death that occurs within four seconds because electricity can't linger in a living being's body "like a poison."

But Bob Walker, one of the lead researchers on the Chicago study, said the fact that one of the pigs died three minutes after being stunned is significant.

"It says that the effect of the Taser shot can last beyond the time when it's being delivered," he said. "So, after the Taser shock ends, there can still be effects that can be evoked and you can still see cardiac effects."

Officers need to ask questions: researcher

Dr. Andrew Dennis, a trauma surgeon and ex-police officer who worked on the study, said if Tasers can affect pigs, more research needs to be done to study how safe the stun guns are. In the meantime, police should question when, and on whom, they use the devices, he said.

"The officers need to question themselves and ask themselves, 'Is this the appropriate situation for this device?'" Dennis said. "They need to have the understanding that this is not a truly benign device.

"What I would not want to see is an individual police officer thinking that this device can used with impunity, because I think there are certain risks to this device."

Stun gun safety was called into question after Robert Dziekanski, a 40-year-old Polish man, died at Vancouver International Airport after being shocked with a Taser by police on Oct. 14, 2007. Dziekanski's death renewed calls for a moratorium on Taser use.

'The human studies are clearly much more relevant'

Other Taser studies have been done on pigs and humans in the past — some finding medical problems with the stun guns, and others not — but the Chicago researchers said they wanted to do a study where subjects were exposed to longer bouts of the guns' electrical currents.

Because the researchers opted for 40-second jolts, their ethics board wouldn't allow them to use human subjects.

Rick Smith, the CEO of Taser International, doesn't think much can be concluded from the Chicago study because it focused on pigs that weigh less than 100 pounds and have a very different physiology from humans. Smith said studies done on humans have shown Tasers don't pose a serious health threat. "The human studies are clearly much more relevant to policy-makers, and to people that are interested in the science of how Tasers affect people," he said.

Dr. Jeffrey Ho, a researcher who has studied stun guns in the past, but was not involved in the Chicago study, stressed that the guns may not have the same effect on people as they did on the pigs in Chicago. "I think animals are good surrogates for research models in some situations," said Ho, an associate professor of emergency medicine at the University of Minnesota. "In my modelling, I prefer to use humans."

However, pig studies have been used as evidence in arguments for and against stun guns in the past. Even the Taser International website points to studies on pigs in which the outcomes suggest the stun guns aren't a serious safety risk.

Tasers can be safe, but oversight is crucial

February 19, 2006
By Robert Davis, USA TODAY

Tasers, the controversial stun guns used by police to subdue suspects, are safe when used with restraint, a coalition of emergency-medicine doctors says.

But even so, the doctors, who are tackling this issue for the first time, said in a consensus statement Saturday that oversight programs are needed to ensure that Tasers are used properly.

Tasers, and similar devices known as conductive energy devices, incapacitate by delivering a five-second jolt of electricity. They have been under fire because people have died after being subdued.

Amnesty International USA, which monitors Taser deaths, said last year that 103 people in the United States and Canada died between June 2001 and March 2005 after contact with a Taser. The organization charged that there is widespread abuse, that in some cases, Taser use is torture.

But the Metropolitan Municipalities EMS Medical Directors Consortium, doctors who oversee emergency medical services in 30 major cities, said the devices, if used appropriately, are low risk compared with other options, such as guns and batons or police dogs.

Proper use, the doctors say, is delivering as few shocks as possible, and only when the officer or anyone else present is at risk of injury. The consortium based its findings on a review of medical literature, autopsy reports and police practices. "We don't want people to get hurt or have cardiac arrest," says Paul Pepe, Dallas' EMS medical director, who heads the consortium.

The group says it hopes every community using Tasers will follow the recommendations.

More than 8,500 U.S. law enforcement agencies use Tasers, says spokesman Steve Tuttle of manufacturer Taser International Inc.

The doctors are concerned because Tasers are used differently in every city. Some police departments stun a few people a month; others 20 to 30 people a day. "Some cities are more liberal with their use, and the devices are considered more of a behavior-modification tool," says Gary Vilke, San Diego County EMS medical director.

The group says every city should create a registry to track and scrutinize Taser use. "If you are not recording Taser discharges, you are not requiring responsibility," says Corey Slovis, Nashville's EMS medical director. This step will encourage officers to think more before they zap, he says.

Usually, delivering a single, five-second shock is enough to get somebody's full attention and compliance, Vilke says.

But some of the people most likely to be shocked more than once — those so unruly that they're dangerous to themselves and others — may also be suffering from a condition called excited delirium. Many of the people who have died following repeated Taser shocks have suffered the syndrome, which the doctors say makes people wild and uncontrollable.

The syndrome, which is associated with anything from a drug overdose to a severe psychiatric illness, can cause metabolic changes that put the person at higher risk of sudden cardiac arrest.

"The real cause of death in some of these cases is excited delirium," says Kathleen Schrank, EMS medical director in Miami. "These are not people to be put in the back of a police car and taken to jail."

"You could basically say, 'Boo!' next to these people and they would be at risk of dying," says James Dunford, medical director of San Diego emergency medical services. "We don't know everything, but we do know that these people are dying unrelated to the Taser."

"These are the people for which there is almost no other options than shooting them," Dunford says.

The doctors say Tasers are safe when used with restraint, reducing the number of serious injuries from police batons and guns. But they say guidelines are needed so that police and medics can work together to prevent Taser-related injuries and deaths.

Nashville is launching a new type of response. In coming weeks, when a 911 dispatcher or a police officer on the scene suspects that an unruly person is suffering from excited delirium, he or she will call out paramedics, more police officers and a police sergeant.

In the perfect response, Slovis says, paramedics would stand ready with an injection to calm the person. As the Taser shock is administered, the police officers would restrain the person — they can touch the person without getting shocked themselves — and the medic would move in to inject the tranquilizer.

But even after a person is subdued, risks remain. Another medical problem that the coalition found was positional asphyxia, in which people stop breathing when they are restrained and placed on their stomachs, making it impossible to take full, deep breaths.

"You can't sit on people and you can't put pressure on their chest wall," says Slovis. "As soon as you are suppressing their ventilation, you put them at risk."

The coalition also says cities must reconsider where they put Taser use on the police department's acceptable-use-of-force scale. Some cities have used Tasers on anyone who does not comply with police commands.

Dallas police reduced the number of people being shocked by telling officers that some physical threat has to be present. "The officers have to feel that they are threatened or that the public is at risk," says Lt. Robert Owens of the city police department.

He trains his officers to recognize the danger of repeated shocks. "The people who died got an average of 25 seconds. That's five cycles on average," he says. But the Taser prevents serious injuries when used properly, he says.

The other option on a police officer's belt is a baton. "People who will not be controlled, your only option is to beat them up if you don't have any other tools," he says. If an officer has to fight, he says, "you're going to get hurt and they are going to get hurt."