People with heart disease more vulnerable when tasered, inquiry told

May 22, 2008
Neal Hall, Vancouver Sun

VANCOUVER - Taser shocks of a person with heart disease increases the probability of death, a Montreal biomedical engineer told a provincial Taser inquiry today.

"There is a strong statistical association between Taser related deaths and heart diseases," Pierre Savard told inquiry commissioner Thomas Braidwood.

He also said the current studies on healthy people or healthy animals are insufficient to conclude that the Taser weapon is completely safe.

Savard pointed out the placement of Taser darts within 1.6 centimetres of the heart could stimulate heart tissue and lead to ventricular fibrillation, which causes the heart to quiver, desynchonizing the pumping action of the heart chambers, causing a drop in blood pressure. Such an occurrence, he said, requires the use of a defibrillator to get the heart to return to its normal rhythm.

"The known effects of the Taser on the heart rate are similar to those of two standard diagnostic tests used by cardiologists: the stress test and programmed electrical stimulation," explained Savard.

"These two tests necessitate the use of defibrillators because of their inherent risk" said the professor at the Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal.

He made his presentation via video conferencing and showed a number of diagrams to illustrate how heart disease can be affected by Taser shocks.

The Taser delivers short pulses of electrical current through electrodes over the surface of the body, causing automatic muscle contraction and incapacitation.

Savard said the current is insufficient to cause heart tissue damage in a normal person, but could affect a person with heart disease and cardiac scar tissue.

He said a Taser shock sends a message to the brain, which goes into a state of alarm and causes the automatic nervous system to prepare the body for a "fight or flight response."

The heart rate jumps to 137 beats per minute (72 beats per minute is normal), he said, pointing out that in subjects with coronary artery disease, the blood flow is insufficient to satisfy increased cardiac metabolic needs, which is known as ischemia.

"Some ischemic tissue may show abnormal automaticity and generate ventricular tachycardia, that can be followed by ventricular fibrillation," Savard said.

He explained he began researching the issue after the death last Oct. 14 of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski, who was jolted twice with a Taser at Vancouver International Airport by RCMP. An amateur video of the incident, posted on the Internet, caused an international public outcry and led the B.C. government to order the inquiry.

The first stage of the inquiry is looking at Taser use in general. The second part, expected in the fall, will probe the circumstances surrounding the death of Dziekanski.

Dziekanski wandered around a secure area of the airport for seven hours, looking for his mother who had come from Kamloops to meet him. He appeared tired, disoriented and began behaving erratically. He was eventually confronted by police, shocked with a Taser and restrained by RCMP officers. He died minutes later.

Toronto cops back tasers

March 28, 2008
IAN ROBERTSON, SUN MEDIA

Tasers are a safe, less deadly way to deal with violent suspects, a Toronto police union official told commissioners after opponents yesterday sought a ban or reduced use of the electric stun guns. "Contrary to the media hype and disinformation, Tasers are a safe and effective direct use of force," George Tucker told the Toronto Police Services Board.

The Toronto Police Association director said there has been "not one single death in Canada from the direct use of a Taser."

After public lobbyists and several board members queried why zappings ranged from "pain compliance" to stun mode, Tucker told the Sun use of force is a last resort, depending on circumstances. Tasers are fired either in response to obvious danger or after efforts to calm a suspect fail and they become agitated, posing a physical threat to themselves or others including police, he said in an interview. Most people don't realize if the ETF is called, "the scene has already escalated to very serious."

Defenders have insisted deaths from a Taser would be instantaneous and those who died had other conditions.

Opponents told the board fears increased after the death of a man the RCMP zapped in October at Vancouver airport.

"There is a lot of confusion about what it is and the circumstances of their use," said Tan Goossen, of the Urban Alliance on Race Relations. "What is the criteria for officers to use them?"

Graeme Norton, of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, demanded an independent body review of all stun gun use plus restrictions for their use only to stop "serious, imminent threat and peril to life." In a letter, Andrew Buxton, head of the local Amnesty International branch, demanded "a moratorium on Taser use."

Since their introduction here and elsewhere, Buxton said police shootings have dropped, but Taser use has risen as officers get into the "habit" of using them.

Blair wants the province to change regulations to permit Tasers for all front-line officers. It has 454 of the 50,000 volt, hand-held devices, which are issued only to trained supervisors and Emergency Task Force (ETF) officers, he told the board. "They are always trained to use the use-of-force option that is ... less lethal."

Tasers were used in 368 cases last year -- the largest number 52 times in Parkdale and 43 in downtown Toronto. Scarborough ranked highest as a district for Taser use.

Toronto taser use doubles, report shows

March 26, 2008
Robyn Doolittle, Toronto Star

Police officers used Tasers 404 times during 368 incidents on Toronto streets last year, a new report shows. That number has more than doubled since 2006, but so has the number of officers armed with the electroshock weapons.

Two years ago, 88 officers were armed with Tasers and the controversial weapons were used 174 times in 156 incidents. In the same year, the Toronto Police Service launched its Taser pilot project. It was deemed a success, and the police services board approved Taser use for all front-line supervisors. By the end of 2007, 454 front-line supervisors and Emergency Task Force officers were armed with the device.

The report also breaks down the way in which Tasers were used. Last year, Tasers were fully deployed – meaning police fired darts – 46 per cent of the time, compared to 37 per cent of the time in 2006. A Taser is considered used if it is pulled from its holster.

"What's not in the report, but is becoming apparent in speaking to officers who are authorized to use Tasers, they are seeing many cases where they don't have to use them," said police spokesperson Mark Pugash. "The mere fact that someone knows the officer has it acts as a de-escalating factor."

But John Sewell of the Toronto Police Accountability Coalition, a community watchdog group, says something else is not in the report. "I'm very concerned. It obviously means they're using the Taser an awful lot more, more than twice as often," he said. "We're going down the road of other police services that have had Tasers – the RCMP and police in the States."

Records recently released to the CBC and The Canadian Press indicate that Taser use by Mounties has more than doubled since 2005. Throughout the country, RCMP officers drew the weapons more than 1,400 times in 2007. That's up from 597 in 2005.

"The issue is in this service we have very clear guidelines on when and where the Taser is to be used," Pugash said. "Certainly, the question people are entitled to ask is: Are your policies and procedures being followed. The answer is overwhelmingly – yes."

The report, prepared by Chief Bill Blair, will be presented to the police services board tomorrow.

BY THE NUMBERS
94% of situations effectively de-escalated in 2006
90% of situations effectively de-escalated in 2007
270 of 352 subjects perceived to be in crisis in 2007 report
77 subjects perceived to have a mental disorder in 2007 report
52 incidents – most incidents of Taser use (by 14 Division)

Tasering violated man's rights, Toronto judge rules

March 18, 2008
Betsy Powell, Toronto Star

A Toronto police emergency task force officer used "unnecessary force" when he fired his Taser at a man "lying face down on the floor, handcuffed ... fully restrained and compliant," an Ontario Superior Court Justice ruled yesterday.

Justice David Brown also found the officer fired his Taser at the man's back almost two minutes after another ETF officer had fired his stun gun at the man.

Police denied the allegations but Brown said he rejected their evidence and was staying the cocaine trafficking charge against Francis Walcott, 41. The large man seemed surprised and bowed his head yesterday as the judge read excerpts from his 44-page ruling.

"We review our policies to see whether they need to be changed and if any action needs to be taken in the wake of this decision we will do that," said police spokesperson Mark Pugash.

Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair is a proponent of Tasers and wants all his frontline officers to be equipped with them. In Ontario, only tactical units, hostage rescue teams and qualified frontline supervisors may use Tasers.

Walcott has been in custody at the Toronto (Don) Jail since his arrest almost a year ago. Brown said in his ruling the infringement of Walcott's Charter rights outweighed the "legitimate societal interest" in prosecuting the drug offence.

"Officer (Michael) Fonseca deployed his Taser well after Mr. Walcott had been subdued and handcuffed," the judge concluded. "In addition, since the discharge of a Taser after a person has been restrained and controlled would have no other purpose than to punish the person ... I find that Officer Fonseca's discharge of his Taser on Mr. Walcott constituted cruel and unusual treatment."

Defence lawyer Adam Weisberg applied for a stay of proceedings on the ground that the ETF used an excessive amount of force, thereby infringing Walcott's Charter rights. "The judge is sending a clear message that if you're going to use force on an individual it better be done appropriately," Weisberg said after the decision. "He's upholding and protecting the rights of other people that may be subject to the inappropriate use of Tasers or other police weapons."

Last March 29, ETF officers along with other Toronto police officers executed a search warrant at a Parliament St. boarding house. When the officers entered a room they found Walcott naked with a woman. While making the arrest, the ETF officers fired their Tasers.

There was no dispute that Walcott was Tasered separately by Fonseca and officer Eric Reimer. At issue in proceedings before the trial began was the timing of when the Tasers were deployed. According to police witnesses, including Fonseca and Reimer, the Tasers were fired "almost simultaneously," as Walcott came towards them.

While a senior officer also testified that "firing sequence information contained on the Tasers' data chips showed a difference of about 2 1/2 minutes," there was also evidence submitted that the Taser clocks are subject to "drift" that could explain differences in firing times recorded on the two Tasers.

The ETF officers all testified that if a suspect was under control, restrained and cuffed, it would be inappropriate to deploy a Taser against him, Brown said, summarizing testimony heard over 10 days in February and early this month.

The Crown has 30 days in which to appeal.

Walcott, originally from St. Lucia, smiled broadly before he was handcuffed and led out of court. He remains in custody on an "immigration hold."

Toronto taser news - a delay or a victory?

From the March 6, 2008 edition of the Toronto Police Accountability bulletin:

Toronto Police Accountability Coalition had a successful public meeting on tasers on February 6. The speakers Andy Buxton, chair, Amnesty International Toronto organization; Naomi Klein, author of `The Shock Doctrine, The Rise of Disaster Capitalism'' and David Reville, advocate and builder of the psychiatric survivor movement.

In spite of a major snow storm sweeping into the city three or four hours before the meeting, about 70 people attended, and the discussion was lively. We agreed that when the next opportunity next came at City Hall, many of us would attend to stress the need to not allow more general police use of tasers. A video of the forum can be found here.

The next occasion arose very quickly: the chief put the matter of buying tasers for all front line officers on the agenda of the Toronto Police Services Board meeting for February 21. His report listed the taser's advantages - fewer officer shootings; fewer and less severe injuries all round; fewer public complaints; less police liability; and improved officer morale. It also claimed the taser causes no permanent harm or serious side-effects, although after the October death of Robert Dzerkanski in the Vancouver airport - he was repeatedly tasered - there's serious doubt about that.

Eight individuals quickly notified the Board they wished to speak in opposition to the matter. Then the chief quietly removed the report from the agenda. Mark Pugash, director of communications for the police, says it was a simple matter of the chief being out of the city at the time of the meeting, but apparently there is no date for which the matter has been rescheduled.

Will the matter resurface? The Board may be badly split on the issue - Board chair Alok Mukherjee has openly expressed his concerns about tasers. The Minister of Community Safety may have privately said he is not eager to approve the regulation needed to expand taser use in Ontario. Perhaps finding the necessary $8.6 million is a problem. We know there is strong and vocal public opposition.

For now, it means the Board is not going ahead with supplying tasers to all front line officers. Perhaps there should be a moratorium on taser use in Ontario; perhaps tasers should be restricted to the specially trained officers on the Emergency Task - those seem to be two strong options.

The taser will be a permanent part of police arsenal

March 4, 2008
Henry Aubin, Montreal Gazette

The videotape of RCMP officers' gratuitous and fatal use of a Taser against a man in Vancouver last fall prompted a nationwide eruption of public horror over police forces' use of this weapon. In the wake of that incident, many law-enforcement officials have voiced concern and reviewed their use. So, problem over, right? Wrong.

Don't let officialdom's regretful tone fool you. Now that the Vancouver affair has blown over, Tasers are creeping back in much of the country.

Let's start with Quebec.

Although the incidents drew little attention because they were not videotaped, two men died in Quebec last year in the days after police shot them with the electric-shock device.

Quebec City police tasered a 32-year-old translator, Claudio Castagnetta, after they stopped him for loitering and, according to witnesses, he resisted being placed in a patrol car by making his body rigid.

In Montreal, police tasered 38-year-old Quilem Registre after they stopped him for erratic driving and, they say, he became aggressive.

Quebec's public security ministry, which oversees police forces across the province, issued a report on Tasers in mid-December. The ministry immediately accepted all the report's recommendations for restricting the police's use of Tasers, but those restrictions are slight.

For example, the province's earlier rules, apparently ignored by the officers who zapped Castagnetta with impunity, barred tasering people who were only "passively resisting" arrest. The new rules say officers can use the Taser on people whose "resistance represents a significant risk to the safety of the officer or anyone else." Despite the change in wording, the versions differ little in their practical application.

Indeed, the new rules also say officers should assess a person's "potential for violence." The word "potential" is a loophole giving officers enormous discretionary power. Officers might claim after the fact that even mild-mannered individuals had given them reason to believe they would become aggressive.

The report also cavalierly dismissed France's practice of clipping a camera (made by the Taser's manufacturer) onto the weapon and recording all the action in video and audio. The report says current training "conditions police to place their hands (on the Taser) in a way that would obstruct the camera's view."

The panel that wrote the report had 26 members and associates, of whom 25 are from the world of law enforcement -- that is, from the police departments, the police academy or the ministry. (The exception is a doctor employed by the province.) So much for taking into account the broad public interest.

Incidentally, Montreal could set tougher rules for its own force. So far, however, the current administration has given no sign of concern.

Elsewhere in Canada, it's much the same lethargy.

After the Vancouver incident, the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP made recommendations for changes. The RCMP, however, rejected a key one: The elevation of Tasers from the category of "intermediate weapon," a relatively humdrum status that includes pepper spray, to the serious category of "impact weapon."

If Tasers were in the latter group, they could be used only against people who are "combative" or otherwise dangerous.

In New Brunswick, police chiefs ordered a review of Taser use, and have concluded no substantive changes are needed.

As for Toronto, its police chief is certainly demanding change -- but it's not in the direction that reformers would like. He wants to buy 500 additional Tasers.

The devices are supposed to be substitutes for firearms. Too often they are substitutes for talk.

In Montreal, a coalition of critics that includes two councillors from the city's ruling party -- Warren Allmand and Marvin Rotrand -- is asking to suspend the use of Tasers until impartial research is in on how these 50,000-volt guns affect people with various health problems or who are high on drugs.

Twenty people in Canada have died after being tasered, says Amnesty. If governments require the pharmaceutical industry to test its wares for health effects before selling them, why not ask the same of Taser International?

The company is poised to launch later this year a new model that will make the current one look like a peashooter. The current handgun-style model zaps people as far away as eight metres. The new model is a 12-gauge shotgun with a range of 30 metres.

Unless politicians suddenly wake up, we ain't seen nothing yet.

Freeze urged on cop stun guns

February 29, 2008
By SARAH GREEN, Toronto Star

Michael Walker wants to zap police Tasers. The Toronto councillor wants to see a moratorium on the purchase of additional Tasers until there's more evidence about the safety of the hand-held stun guns. "I find it troubling," said Walker, who will ask his fellow councillors Monday to support his motion. "We've managed to carry out effective policing for a century and a half without Tasers. I think we can continue to do that."

Police Chief Bill Blair wants to outfit all 2,600 frontline officers with Tasers at the cost of about $8 million. The force has 432 Tasers for frontline supervisors. In a report, Blair said Tasers have the potential to reduce injuries among officers and prevent standoffs from escalating. In the first six months of 2007, Toronto Police used Tasers 215 times, including 73 incidents when the stun gun was just used as a show of force, the report said.

Toronto police seeking to amend regulations to allow tasers for all officers

At its next meeting on Thursday February 21, the Toronto Police Services Board will consider a report from the Chief of Police containing a recommendation that the Board write to the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services to amend the regulations to allow for the expansion of TASERS to front-line police officers. The report will be item 5C on the agenda to be posted on the Board's website, click on agenda. (The Feb 21 agenda was not posted by Wednesday afternoon.)

The meeting is at 1:30 PM in Committee Room 2, second floor, Toronto City Hall.

If you would like to deliver a deputation to the Board at this meeting, call the Board secretary, Deirdre Williams at 416-808-8094, or email her at Deirdre.Williams@tpsb.ca . If you cannot attend, please send a letter to the Board using Ms Williams' email.

When we held the taser forum at Innis College on stormy and snowy February 6 (about 75 people attended), there was general agreement that we would ask as many people as possible to speak at a city hall meeting about tasers if one could be arranged. This opportunity has come up (more quickly than expected), and we hope you'll speak. The more people who speak up, the more chance we have of stopping this recommendation. Just voice your opinion, loudly and clearly, and tell the Board whatever information you think it needs to know.

John Sewell for
Toronto Police Accountability Coalition

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.

`Why talk when you can shock,' says taser opponent

February 7, 2008
Robyn Doolittle, Toronto Star

Tasers are not a replacement for guns; they're a replacement for talking, said author Naomi Klein at a town-hall meeting last night. "If it happened in a cell, we would call it torture and if it happens on the street we should not be afraid to call it torture," said Klein, who is the author of The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.

The discussion on the police use of shock and stun guns was held at the University of Toronto in response to Toronto police Chief Bill Blair's request that 3,000 officers be armed with electroshock guns.

When RCMP officers used a Taser on Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski in Vancouver International Airport last October, they did so within 25 seconds of their arrival on the scene, Klein said. Dziekanski died shortly after.

"Why talk when you can shock?" she said. "Tasers are not a replacement for guns. They're a replacement for everything else ...they're a replacement for talking; for negotiating."

As many as 20 people in Canada and 290 in the United States have died after being shocked by a Taser, said the chair of Toronto's Amnesty International chapter, Andy Buxton, who also sat on the panel.

Taser International has said the weapon it manufactures is safe. But during clinical trials, people who are zapped are in a calm, healthy state. "That's not how it is in real life," Buxton said.

Of the 310 people in North American who died after being shocked with a Taser, people were often intoxicated or high on some kind of drug, such as cocaine. The majority had been in an altercation with police, had had force used on them and many were tied up in some way.

"Something in that whole witches' brew all together (is unsafe) and we don't know what," Buxton said. "And until all the facts are on the table, (Amnesty International) is asking police in Canada and the United States to put a moratorium on the use of Tasers until we know whether or not they're safe," he said.

Buxton also cited statistics that show officers can become addicted to using Tasers. He used the example of the Edmonton police force, where Taser use increased from an average of once a week to once a day.

EDITORIAL: Why rush on tasers?

February 3, 2008
Toronto Star

Robert Dziekanski was hit by a Taser at Vancouver Airport and died after struggling with RCMP officers. Near Hawkesbury, police zapped a disturbed man on a bus who was ripping the skin from his head. In Ottawa, police took down a teen who seemed suicidal.

Canadians have reason to worry about the growing use of Tasers by police in situations that once might have been dealt with by employing judicious physical restraint. This "usage creep" is troubling, and so is the lack of national Taser-use guidelines.

Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh said last week that Taser technology seems "riskier than I was led to believe." This from the man who okayed Canada's first Taser pilot project when he was B.C.'s attorney-general. Dosanjh aired his concern as Parliament's public safety committee looked into Dziekanski's death. Several Vancouver probes are also underway. The Ontario government, too, wants feedback before sanctioning more Tasers. Ideally, a consensus will emerge from all this.

Yet before the results are in, Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair proposes to spend $8 million to buy thousands more Tasers, after inquests urged their use. And the RCMP is shopping for 160. What's the rush?

The RCMP public complaints commission recently urged police to use Tasers only on suspects who pose a risk of "death or grievous bodily harm" to police, themselves or others. That forced the RCMP to remind officers that they may not use Tasers on people who resist passively or are belligerent.

That the Mounties needed reminding makes the case for national guidelines, and better training, before police go shopping for more.

Taser shares up on report of Toronto police order

January 25, 2008
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Toronto Star

But Toronto police say there are no plans to make such a purchase

NEW YORK – Shares of stun-gun maker Taser International Inc. climbed today after an analyst upgraded the stock and another said the Toronto Police Service could place a large order for Taser products next year.

Toronto police said this afternoon that there are no plans to make such a purchase.

Shares of the Scottsdale, Ariz.-based company picked up 82 cents (dollar figures U.S.), or 8.5 per cent, to $10.52 in heavy midday trading. The stock has ranged from $7.44 to $19.36 over the past year.

Feltl & Co. analyst Richard Ryan upgraded the stock to "Buy" from "Hold," noting a recent pullback in share price. At Yesterday's close, the stock was down about half from its 52-week high of $19.36 set in October, and has lost almost a third of its value in 2008. "This period of weakness could be related to a series of (strange) news releases primarily relating to old patent infringement issues from a couple of Taser competitors, combined with a rather direct response from Taser management," Ryan wrote in a client note. "During this same time, Taser enjoyed a successful PR campaign with its new consumer Taser at the Consumer Electronics Show".

Earlier this month, Stinger Systems Inc. said it asked the U.S. Patent Office to review a patent related to Taser's M26 stun gun.

The analyst said Taser's new products have increased its revenue dramatically, and items like its C2 personal protection device should lead to more growth.

Jefferies & Co. analyst Matthew McKay said in a client note that the Toronto Police Service is asking for funding to provide Taser stun guns for 3,000 officers. McKay kept a "Buy" rating on the stock, with a price target of $20 per share.

Late today, Mark Pugash, a spokesperson for Toronto Police, said reports of a Taser purchase being imminent are wrong. "While Chief (Bill) Blair has said he would like to equip his front-line officers with Tasers, the law in Ontario would have to be changed before this could happen. "Then, of course, there would be the issue of money being made available for such a purpose."

Taser Inc.’s shocking spin

January 24, 2008
Mike Smith, NOW Magazine (Toronto)

PR session hosted by cop board pumps “life-giving” nature of volt gun

It would be fascinating to see a concise history of our “needs,” to trace inventions’ transition from novelty to necessity. I can’t pinpoint when, for instance, failure to own a cellphone became effrontery, but since we relegated our evolution to our tools, life’s been an arms race.

“Police have had no need for electric shocks for centuries,” said one of the 100-odd people gathered at police headquarters on College on January 17 to hear Taser International founder Thomas Smith. “Why do they now?”

In other words, why should we presuppose a need? First rule of advertising: establish assumptions, control the field of discussion.

One might have assumed, for instance, that taser deployment was up for debate when the Police Services Board hosted the forum. Not so – though by the end, those with concerns were given a generous chance to vent. They just had to sit through a sales pitch first.

First slide: a clean-cut officer subdues a “criminal,” denoted by the tattoos, sunglasses, goatee and all-black ensemble of tank top, jeans and knit cap. So the taser can help me subdue K-Fed. But what about agitated autistic men?

The subsequent reams of charts and sentences ending in percentage signs failed to make a persuasive case for tasers. But Smith was forthcoming on technical realities for which you, gentle reader, will of course never find an application: The X26 Taser used by tactical officers employs a single-use cartridge that fires two electrical wires up to 4.5 metres. The top cable is aimed using a laser sight; the lower is angled downward by 8 degrees. In order to be effective through heavy clothing, the hooks at the ends of the cables must come within 5 centimetres of the target’s skin.

“We were taught electricity is bad,” said Smith. “Don’t put your finger in the socket. But really, electricity is life.” Just to open your hand you use electrical signals. So, really, officers won’t be immobilizing you so much as stimulating you with a pleasant jog. At 50,000 volts per.

Earlier variants were ineffective because they worked only through pain; if targets wanted to fight through it, they could. Current models deliver enough juice to bypass intention, going right to the body; subjects seize up and collapse, regardless of willpower – a sharp reminder that we are, essentially, meat. Charming. It’s like bureaucracy in a holster.

The pitch breezed over two points of great interest. One: a 2006 study (in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology) suggests that people on cocaine are less likely to be affected by tasers. Two: tasers are not, Smith said, in any way a replacement for lethal force.

There goes a favourite rationale for taser use. Oh, did we mention that there have been fatalities? Of the 315 deaths following tasering in North America, 20 were officially linked by coroners to the weapon’s use. Perhaps the “excited delirium’’ diagnosis now a favourite of taser supporters, will come up more often.

Again, if they aren’t a substitute for lethal force, there goes another prime argument made for the initial adoption of tasers: there would be fewer shootings. So was that a lie? Or have police been shooting people they didn’t have to? Or did police really not know much about these things except that they were cool and they wanted them? Actually, you know what? Don’t answer.

Smith didn’t touch on taser deaths but did refer to stats showing that injuries happen in only two out of every 1,000 uses, and those are indirect, like hitting your head on the way down. So, you’ll be fine. Or you’ll die. Either way.

When one deputant said the UN has expressed concern that taser use is tantamount to torture, Smith objected. “We don’t want to see torturous devices used,” he said. “But if the UN is going to define torture as causing pain, then a baton is torture, stepping on a nail is torture.”

But as we’re learning from the U.S. military, torture is more than excruciating pain. Use of packing tape and water over the face may not cause actual pain, but the sensation of drowning causes intolerable mental anguish. If torture renders subjects unable to exercise their own will, then Smith’s earlier description of the new taser fits the bill.

At the meeting, Stuart O’Connell, representing Osgoode Hall’s Law and Autism Group, raised the circumstances of Robert Dziekanski’s death at the hands of the Vancouver RCMP. Pointing to the acute anxiety Dziekanski showed on tape, O’Connell, said that the state of agitation that makes officers wary is also the one that makes victims susceptible to a negative response to tasers.

“It’s called sensory integration dysfunction. The subjects don’t process sensory information in the same way as a neurotypical person. When police arrive in a situation, what they witness is that high anxiety.”

I’m not inclined to trust the phrase “sensory integration dysfunction” any more than “excited delirium.’’ But O’Connell makes an important point: for a weapon so powerful, there’s almost no consideration of how it interacts with an individual’s mental space.

Chief Bill Blair assured reporters that officers are well trained. Maybe, maybe not. I just happen to have spoken recently to an officer I won’t name who felt otherwise. The training isn’t enough, he said, since it doesn’t encourage rookies to be conflict mediators and doesn’t equip them to understand when not to use a taser. If I had to paraphrase, I’d say this: their training pumps them up, but it doesn’t humble them.

For now, rookies don’t carry the weapon, but the force wants them to. To give all front-line officers a taser would require a change in provincial law and the board’s agreement. Sure, board members were kind enough to give opponents free rein this time around.

What’s not clear is if they’re listening.

TPAC sponsoring a forum on tasers - February 6

From the Toronto Police Accountability Coalition
Bulletin No. 39, January 21, 2008

Forum on Tasers, February 6

Toronto Police Accountability Coalition is sponsoring a public meeting:

"The Shock of the Taser," A discussion of the police use of shock and stun guns Wednesday February 6, 2008 7.00 pm Town Hall, Innis College St. George and Sussex Streets, one block south of Bloor

Speakers:

* David Reville, advocate and builder of the psychiatric survivor movement.
* Naomi Klein, author of `The Shock Doctrine, The Rise of Disaster Capitalism'
* Andy Buxton, chair, Amnesty International Toronto organization

Moderator: Anna Willats, Toronto Police Accountability Coalition.

Please tell your colleagues and friends about this public meeting.

Taser International Comes to Toronto

The stakes for Taser International are huge. If the company can get the Toronto police force to agree to spend $8.6 million to equip every member of the force with a taser, it will be able to go around to every other police force in Canada and say: the largest force in the country thinks every officer should have a taser - why not your force too? Chief Bill Blair is on side, and has recommended the purchase, but the Toronto Police Services Board seems to have some reluctance to proceed.

So it was a real coup for Thomas Smith, chair of Taser International, to be invited by the Board to make a presentation at police headquarters on January 17 about how great his product is. What more could someone ask for when they are looking at a $8.6 million sale?

TPAC objected, writing Board members that, "Giving a possible supplier such a privileged vantage point . is improper. It is the continuation of the cosy relationship that Taser International seems to have with others who have spoken in favour of the use of its product, such as deputy coroner James Cairns (who has appeared at the Board supporting the purchase of Tasers.) As reported by the Globe and Mail on November 30, 2007, Taser International paid for Dr. Cairns' expenses to speak in favour of Tasers at one conference." TPAC suggested that Taser should rent its own space to make its pitch. No Board member responded to our objection.

Smith made his pitch with a slide show for about 45 minutes, at which point there were questions (or rather hostile speeches) from the audience. Two points stand out from his presentation. First, he continually talked about how the taser could stop someone from attacking an officer. But an incident where an officer is under attack from someone is very rare. Toronto data shows that about 98 per cent of all tasers are discharged in regard to someone who is in a state of mental crisis, only rarely being a threat to a police officer (see TPAC Bulletin No. 35, May 2007.) So the device is best used, according to Smith, for something that very rarely occurs.

Second, Smith made the point that the two day training done by Taser deals only with how to work the gun, not with situations in which it should be deployed. Thus training does not include such matters as assessing the nature of the problem, the different kinds of approaches that might be taken (such as talking to the person), or so forth: Smith said that was a matter for the local force to decide on. But Toronto's chief has not been willing to release the policy or protocol about taser use, so we don't know when it might be used. As one speaker noted, if police are trained properly, then they won't use the taser.

Questioners at the meeting raised several interesting points. While most police officials suggest that tasers are used instead of guns, it seems they are most often used instead of a lesser kind of intervention (such as talking) as was tragically demonstrated in the Vancouver airport incident last October. So it seems entirely likely that equipping all officers with tasers will result in an increase in the incidents of use of force by police. As well, more than 80 per cent of the people who are tasered are unarmed.

Alok Mukherjee, chair of the Police Services Board made it clear that the reporting recommending the purchase of tasers for all Toronto officers will be coming before a Board meeting in the near future.

Taser executive didn't face ENOUGH tough questions

I was astonished and more than a little disappointed at the relatively small number of people who showed up on Thursday evening in opposition to arming every Toronto police officer with a taser. Because, based on everything I've seen and read following the Dziekanski incident, I believe that the majority of Canadians feel the way I do. I don't even live in Toronto, but travelled several hours to be there anyway.

To their immense credit, those who did show up on Thursday had done their homework and were very well prepared to face off against Taser CEO Tom Smith.

Tragically, if Canadians are unwilling to put themselves out there and make themselves heard where it counts, then it won't be long before every police officer in Toronto - and indeed in the rest of Canada - is equipped with a taser. The only people who can prevent a massive rollout of tasers across the country is us. Make no mistake about it: Canada is hurtling in the direction of U.S. style cowboy policing ... taser first, ask questions later - that is, if the person lives to answer those questions.

I, for one, don't want to live in that version of Canada. But it will soon be too late to turn back the clock.

EDITORIAL: Rein in those tasers

January 19, 2008
The Globe and Mail

At a public forum organized by the Toronto Police Services Board on Thursday, Thomas Smith, co-founder of Arizona-based Taser International Inc., found himself placed on the defensive by members of the public opposed to the weapon. Patti Gillman, the sister of a man who died after being tasered by Vancouver police in 2004, told Mr. Smith that her brother, Robert Bagnell, was unarmed and was no threat to police or to the public when he was fatally shot with the stun gun. There was little Mr. Smith could really be expected to say in response to such information. His company merely manufactures the 50,000-volt weapon. Taser International doesn't decide how and when to use it. That's left to the discretion of individual police officers. And that's part of the problem.

Tasers are held up by police as a relatively safe alternative to handguns. Yet they are often used in cases where police would never have pulled handguns. It is inconceivable, for example, that police would have used handguns in the case of the 17-year-old Ottawa high-school student tasered last month because he was acting strangely near a busy road. The boy said he was distraught over a breakup with his girlfriend, but was out of the traffic and had his hands up when he was tasered by police.

The same surely can be said of 16-year-old Randy Fryingpan, who was tasered six times in just over a minute by Edmonton police in 2002. The boy was drunk, and sleeping in the back seat of a friend's car. He was tasered when he failed to respond to an officer's orders to get up. A judge later described the incident as cruel and unusual punishment. The same applies to the 2004 Edmonton police tasering of Hector Jara, who was given jolts even though he had surrendered to police and was lying face down on the ground after a car chase. The courts said that Mr. Jara was "completely at [the police's] mercy" when he was twice tasered and that police actions in that case were "irresponsible."

Deaths as a result of police taserings, such as those of Mr. Bagnell or Robert Dziekanski, the Polish newcomer tasered to death by the RCMP at Vancouver International Airport last Oct. 14, are still relatively unusual. But police taserings are not, and would become even more a matter of routine if police in Toronto and many other jurisdictions in Canada had their way.

That fact must weigh heavily in the assessment by the Toronto Police Services Board and the Ontario government of the request from Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair to spend $8.6-million to equip and train every front-line officer in Toronto with a taser. Mr. Blair believes that wide dissemination of the taser among officers is a way to "save lives." In some instances it might. But the tasers also cost lives, and risk imposing other costs, including jeopardizing public confidence in the police. Civilian authorities should be highly dubious about making Mr. Smith's frightening device ubiquitous.

Taser executive faces tough questions

January 18, 2008
UNNATI GANDHI, Globe and Mail

As Toronto police consider spending millions on stun guns, forum audience comes armed with critical research

The packed auditorium listened in silence as the co-founder of Arizona-based Taser International Inc. explained at a public forum in Toronto last night the science behind the stun guns, but it was during the 75-minute question period that Thomas Smith found he had to defend himself from stinging accusations.

Mr. Smith, who was in town as the Toronto Police Services Board weighs a request by Police Chief Bill Blair to spend $8.6-million to equip and train every front-line officer with a taser, was confronted by the sister of a man who died after being tasered by Vancouver police.

He was also presented with an offer to stun an elderly man right then and there, and was caught off guard by audience members armed with research.

"Are tasers risk free? No. ... The reality is that there [are] still studies to be done, we encourage them, we work with them, we want them to be done because it's going to continue to answer those questions," he told the standing-room-only crowd.

If Chief Blair's request is approved by the civilian oversight board, the move would see the number of tasers deployed by city police rise significantly from the current 500 or so, and make the Toronto force the first in the country to have the stun guns so widely available.

Speaking to reporters after the heated question period, Chief Blair defended his position on the use of tasers as an alternative for guns.

"In the hands of a properly trained officer, properly directed, supervised and accountable for its use, those things can save lives and I want them accessible to my front-line officers for those circumstances where they can reduce injury to my people and also reduce injury to the public."

During the forum, Patti Gillman, whose brother, Robert Bagnell, died after being tasered by Vancouver police in 2004, said she was speaking on behalf of the more than 300 North Americans who have died after being shot by the guns since 2003.

"[My brother] was unarmed, he was of no credible threat to police or to the public and there were 13 police officers there the night that he died," she said. "I know that most thinking Canadians would concur that the use of tasers was not only unjustified the night my brother died, but was also likely unjustified in the majority of cases."

Ms. Gillman - who lodged a formal complaint after learning that a veteran Victoria police officer who played a pivotal role in a 1998 pilot program that led to his force adopting the weapons permanently had received several payments from Taser International since 1999 - asked Mr. Smith how many other Canadian police officers had been paid by the company.

Mr. Smith responded: "We also compensate officers when they train, for their time to train. I don't know if any Canadians were among those."

Ken Wood volunteered to be stunned in front of the crowd.

"Everything that I see that you do in your studies is basically physically fit, gung-ho military types saying, 'Go ahead, taser me.' You don't know my health history, you don't know who I am, I'm Joe Average on the street."

Andy Buxton, chair of Amnesty International Toronto, asked Mr. Smith about research on tasers conducted by Amnesty and other independent organizations. Mr. Smith repeatedly responded that he had not seen the data and so he could not comment.

Then, Mr. Buxton asked: "Are you familiar with research that suggests that 20 per cent of all use of tasers are in what you refer to yourself as pain compliance mode [set to inflict pain to get a subject to co-operate]?"

"I'm not familiar with that specific study," Mr. Smith responded.

"Those were your own statistics, Mr. Smith, from your own website," Mr. Buxton said.

Taser chief faces criticism amidst push to equip police with devices

January 18, 2008
Natalie Alcoba, National Post

TORONTO - The chairman of Taser International faced a barrage of criticism last night at a public meeting in Toronto amidst a push by the police chief to equip all front line officers with the device.

“The problem that you got with your product, sir, is not the science,” said one man. “It’s the fact that it goes to human beings with human frailties who will make the mistake of over-using it and they’ll kill someone.”

Chairman of the board and co-founder Thomas Smith conceded that Tasers are not risk-free and have been listed as a “contributing factor” in about 20 to 30 in-custody deaths.

A 2005 review by the Canadian Police Research Centre on the safety of Tasers concluded that “definitive evidence does not exist” that there is a causal relationship between the use of a Taser and death, although Amnesty International has linked at least 17 deaths in Canada to its use.

“Any confrontation between people has inherrent risk,” Mr. Smith told the crowd. “This is in our minds the safest way to end that confrontation, but it’s not the magic bullet. There is nothing out there that is 100% ... this is just one more tool in the tool box.”

The meeting was organized by the Toronto Police Services Board to answer questions about Taser, formally known as a conductive energy device that fires two darts that shock and immobilize someone, as the police board contemplates expanding its use in Toronto. Chair Alok Mukhurjee pointed to the “intense public interest” around the safety of the device that followed after a Polish immigrant died last year after being Tasered in Vancouver International Airport.

Following recommendations from two coroner’s juries, Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair plans to equip all front line officers with Tasers as a way to “save lives.” The Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police last year passed a resolution asking for the same thing.

The provincial Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services “has adopted a very cautious approach to expanding the use of Tasers” and will wait on pending studies before making its decision, a spokesman said yesterday. Currently, only supervisors, perimeter and tactical officers can carry the device in Ontario.

After the presentation, Chief Blair maintained that Tasers “can save lives” when in the hands of a properly trained officers. “I want those accessible to my front line officers for those circumstances where that can reduce injury to my people, and also reduce injury to the public.”

He said Toronto officers are guided by a “strict policy” that tell officers “precisely when it’s appropriate to use [a Taser].”

Currently, the force equips about 500 supervisors and tactical officers with the device. Chief Blair said those officers are not always available in the “critical situations” where a Taser could, he said, change the outcome of a confrontation. He noted that there are many more steps before the devices land in officers’ hands, since laws must change and the city and province must commit to paying the $8.6-million it will cost to equip and train all officers with the Taser.

During his presentation, Mr. Smith likened the jolt of electricity to hitting your funny bone, times 20. “It’s certainly not a pleasent experience, but your’e very aware of what’s going on,” he told the crowd that appeared captivated at times, skeptical at others.

Patti Gillman, whose brother Robert Bagnell who died in Vancouver in 2004 after being Tasered twice, said she spoke for the 350 people in North America who have died after being shocked with the device. (I said 315 people, not 350!)

Andy Buxton, chair of the local branch of Amnesty International, voiced concern over the potential for abuse. He said that if officers had to be equipped with Tasers, it should be instead of, not in addition to, guns.

Taser exec takes shots from audience

January 18, 2008
Dale Brazao, Toronto Star

While he claims devices reduce serious injury, others fear their `excessive use'

Proponents of Taser guns praise them as non-lethal alternatives to deadly force and an invaluable tool for law enforcement.

Opponents cite the 20 people who have died across Canada since 2001 after being Tasered by police as proof their use should be quashed pending further study.

Last night some of those opponents took turns firing questions at Tom Smith after the chair of Taser International Inc. spent an hour praising his devices as life-savers now being used by more than 12,000 law enforcement agencies.

While the use of Tasers has dramatically reduced the use of lethal force in some jurisdictions, they are not a substitute for lethal force, Smith told a public forum held at Toronto police headquarters.

"You don't take a Taser to a gunfight."

Studies conducted on more than 1,200 people show the units are very effective in reducing serious injury among both police and subjects and are far less harmful than other methods, including batons and pepper spray, Smith claims.

The slide show accompanying his presentation claimed more than 10,000 lives were spared death or serious injury.

When fired, the battery-powered device launches two barbed darts with 50,000 volts of electricity. The projectiles, which are able to penetrate thick clothing, attack the nervous system and immobilize the target.

Andy Buxton, of Amnesty International Canada, said studies show the use of lethal force declines when police officers are equipped with Tasers but "excessive use" takes its place, and that's why the agency wants a moratorium on their use pending further study.Ken Wood, an activist who claimed he has had more than one run-in with police, offered to be Tasered to prove they do hurt people, but no one took him up on the offer.

Social activist Don Weitz, 77, told the 80 people assembled that he's concerned the weapons will become the "toy of choice" for Toronto police.

The force's own studies show that people with mental health issues were the target in 30 per cent of Taser deployment incidents, he said.

Toronto police chief Bill Blair has asked the Toronto Police Services to consider equipping all front-line police officers with the devices. Blair's move comes after two jury inquests recommended increased use of Tasers.

Blair said he has passed on the information to the Ontario government and is waiting for an answer.

The debate on the use of Tasers, which has been raging for years, bolted to the forefront after the death of Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver airport last October.

The 40-year-old, who had never been out of Poland, was immigrating to Canada to join his 61-year-old mother in British Columbia when he was Tasered by RCMP officers after becoming confused and agitated during a 10-hour wait in the arrivals area of the airport.

CBC Documentary - Taser Deaths

In a Radio-Canada/CBC in-depth documentary on Tasers, produced by Frederic Zalac and aired nationally on Canadian television at the end of last year, the conclusions of recent independent medical reviews of Tasers were revealed which raised some very serious questions about the lethality of Tasers.

The documentary, in which I very enthusiastically participated, is about 20 minutes in length and is available online at CBC News. Scroll down and click on (or search for) “Taser Deaths”.

Highlights include:

Dr. Stanley Nattel, Cardiologist at the Montreal Heart Institute, Director of the Paul-David Chair in Cardiovascular Electrophysiology and leading cardiology researcher at the University of Montreal, and an associate professor at McGill University, analyzed a study performed at the University of Toronto (see below) and concluded that “A rapid rhythm induced by a Taser, called a Ventricular Tachycardia, may not cause very severe symptoms and particularly if the person is very excited, frightened, etc., they might not even notice it. But that kind of rhythm can eventually what we call “degenerate” to Ventricular Fibrillation, which is an even faster and irregular rhythm that is rapidly lethal.”

Dr. Nattel said further that “the way in which the Taser causes death is by provoking a very rapid, irregular heart rhythm, and that doesn’t leave any traces in the body. So basically if you don’t see anything there, you don’t know what the cause is and it could be a lethal dose of drugs or it could be an extreme mental stress or it could be the Taser. I don’t think it’s possible to differentiate those possibilities in most cases.”

An independent study in Canada on the effects of Tasers on pigs was performed at the University of Toronto by Kumaraswamy Nanthakumar, MD; Ian Billingsley, MD, Stephane Masse, MASc, Paul Dorian, MD, Douglas Cameron, MD, Vijay S. Chauhan, MD, Eugene Downar, MD and Elias Sevaptsidis, DEC. This study injected into pigs a substance that mimics the adrenaline rush that would be experienced during a stressful arrest by police or a cocaine high. The pigs were then shocked with Tasers. The study found that, in circumstances of increased adrenalgenic stress, arrythmias (irregular heart rhythms) were caused and, in some cases, were lethal. (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)

In the U.S., Dr. John Webster, Biomedical Engineer, University of Wisconsin tried to duplicate the situation that would occur with humans … and “we got very different results. I don’t think that they’re non-lethal weapons but I think that there’s a probability, albeit small, that the Taser could electrocute a person.”

When asked by Radio-Canada reporter, Frederic Zalac, what he would do if a study showed there was a risk, Taser International spokesperson Steve Tuttle answered by saying, “We would have an obligation to disclose that to our customers and to the public. That’s pure and simple.”

To the best of my knowledge, Taser International has never disclosed these results to its customers or to the public.