Are "Tasers" a legitimate law enforcement tool or are they too dangerous to the health of suspects and should be taken out of the hands of officers?
Ever since the 1990s, when Tasers were introduced into the law enforcement scene, there has been great controversy, as to whether they comprise a valuable law enforcement tool in the hands of police officers, as well as corrections officers, or if there has been police misconduct and abuse. With a sudden burst in the sales of Tasers, with numbers of law enforcement agencies using Tasers having risen from 1,700 to 8,700, from year 2001 to 2005 (O’Brien, MacKenna, and Simpson), a more in-depth discussion of the use of Tasers is more than a requisite. Based on facts from the Amnesty International, more than 350 people have died, in the US alone, as of now. From what it seems, what are billed as non-lethal firearms alternatives, are, in fact, very serious weapons that could even lead to death. And, if they should be used to impose the law, they should better be placed in knowledgeable hands that can control both the Tasers’ power and themselves as law enforcement officers.
A Taser is usually a battery-operated unit that bears significant resemblances to a hand gun, and “fires two barbed electrodes on copper wires of up to 35 feet, at 180ft/s [which] embed themselves in the victim’s skin or clothes and deliver up to 50 000 volts of electricity with 1.76 J of energy in rapid pulses over a period of 5 s, causing uncontrollable muscle contraction and overwhelming pain” (O’Brien, MacKenna, and Simpson). A law enforcement officer can administer repeated electricity charges if considered necessary. Tasers are already used in Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and, of course, the US (O’Brien, MacKenna, and Simpson). They are theoretically used as lethal force alternatives, so to save lives. So, instead of using a service revolver, police officers can use a Taser, to restrain the suspect, and bring him to justice, preventing him from getting shot and killed. Of course, this happens assuming police officers use the power given to them by Tasers in a reasonable and legitimate manner. Unfortunately, inadequately trained or not trained police officers are often accused of excessive force, brutality, and misconduct. Right now, approximately 14,000 law enforcement and police agencies globally use 50,000-volt Tasers, which temporarily paralyze the central nervous system of the suspect, with the blessings of the law, only after a three-day training (Greenwood).
Leaving aside the fact that police officers could even be malicious and intentionally want to harm people they do not fancy much, with the use of a Taser; having inadequately trained –if trained at all- law enforcement officers trying to impose the law by applying 50,000 volts to people they consider suspects, could be somewhat frightening. Like previously mentioned, many people have already died after they have been Tasered the world over. Indicatively, in the Las Vegas Review Journal and Daily Mail, one can read about the case of Dr. Ryan Rich, who had died after being Tasered (2010), and Andrew Pimlott’s case, who died after he had been soaked in fuel and then Tasered (Greenwood). Sadly, such cases are not far and apart.
The use of a Taser can cause many health-related problems, even death. According to a peer-reviewed study published by the American Heart Association, the use of electronic stun guns, another word for Tasers, can result in cardiac arrest and eventually death (Baker and Morse). This study has been predicted to prompt local and national police agencies to drop the Taser use, so to avoid liability issues in deaths that could possibly be attributed to the Tasers (Baker and Morse). That being said; although there is limited published scientific research, in regards the health-related effects, both mental and physical, of the use of Tasers, existing research suggests that healthy individuals are in no risk when Tasered, unlike those belonging in the vulnerable at-risk groups, where the use of a Taser requires high-level vigilance (O’Brien, MacKenna, and Simpson). People more at risk are those with cardiac arrhythmia, pregnant women, and people with mental illness or intoxicated on drugs or alcohol, as well as those often referred to as with an excited delirium (O’Brien, MacKenna, and Simpson). According to the National Institute of Justice’s briefing paper, almost 20 percent of Taser-related deaths were among people with mental illness (O’Brien, MacKenna, and Simpson). At this point, advocates of Taser use support that a death after being Tasered could be the outcome of multiple factors. Truth is there is little literature body available to know the exact effects of Taser use on mental health. However, taking a closer look at the Taser operational protocols, one can see that there are specific warnings in cases a potential suspect is unable to respond, or even unwilling to respond, to a law enforcement officer, due to the use of stimulants that affect the central nervous system, such as methamphetamine, cocaine, and phencyclidine (O’Brien, MacKenna, and Simpson). Evidence shows that most victims have been repeatedly Tasered and subjected to various restrain means, such as means that impair breathing (Amnesty International).
Other types of injuries caused by Taser shocks are found in the materials provided by Taser International, according to which, an individual could experience burns, infections, hernia, scars, vision loss, seizures, and tissue damage (Taser International). Moreover, more injuries could occur due to broken bones, and teeth caused when the suspect is stunned and falls down, while there have been cases where people have drowned as they were tasered near water bodies (Amnesty International).
Undoubtedly, police officers carry out an extremely important work in society, and perform a valuable function in it, helping to maintain the law and keep everybody safe. However, in this process, the law enforcement officer should be extra careful not to violate constitutional rights of possible suspects, such as the Fourth amendment Constitutional Right referring to everyone’s right to be free from unreasonable seizure (The Lectric Law Library). In the state of California, there is a high federal court that hears civil rights and constitutional rights cases. In a relatively recent case of Bryan v. McPherson, it wrote “We hold only that [Taser] X26 and similar devices constitute an intermediate, significant level of force that must be justified by a strong government interest [that] compels the employment of force” (F.3d ---, 2010 WL 2431482). The key-words in the court’s appeal are “intermediate” use of force and “strong” interest. It all depends on the following three factors that determine whether the government intrusion is justified, through the use of a Taser: (1) the subject’s resistance, (2) the crime’s severity, and (3) the threat to public safety (Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396). So, it has come down that the most important is the manner in which Tasers are used in practice, rather than their theoretical use. There are cases when subjects should be Tasered, and others that do not, or should not. But it is such a fine line that it is almost impossible a police officer will not judge incorrectly at least once in his career.
Even though nobody can argue that Tasers were originally invented to help bring down fatal police incidents, it seems that their effectiveness lies in the hands of those who use them. But, how can one be sure that those using the Tasers are not misusing them? Who regulates Tasers? There are local police departments with strict rules as per the use of stun guns by their officers, and there are those with lax, or no regulations at all, or even worse, have regulations, but leave their officers untrained about them. Of course, even the most carefully crafted policies are practically useless, if not properly and closely adhered by all police officers. So, again, the ones that hold the power in their hands are assigned to a great task: be able to manage that power. Unfortunately, History has shown us that whenever there is power, there is a great misuse of that power and only one man’s law-defiance is enough to cause a chaos, even in the best-ruled societies. For all the above reasons, Tasers should be better taken out of the hands of law enforcement officers, in respect to the human life, health, and dignity. If laws are to be imposed, they should be done so with other means that do not pose a threat to people’s health, either mental of physical, and do not violate any of their constitutional rights.
Works Cited:
Amnesty International (2006). “Amnesty International’s Continuing Concerns About Taser Use”. Web. June 1, 2014 <http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=ENGAMR510302006>
Baker, Jennifer, and Morse, Janice (n.d). “American Heart Association: Tasers can cause death”. USA Today News. Web. Jule 1, 2014 <http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-05-02/taser-study-deaths/54688110/1>
Bryan V. MacPherson (2009). No. 08-55622 D.C No.3:06-CV-01487-LAB-CAB. Web. June 1, 2014 < http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/12/28/08-55622.pdf>
Graham V. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989). “490 U.S. 386. Graham V. Connor Et Al. Certiorari to the United States Court Of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit”. No. 87-6571. Web. June 1, 2014 < http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=490&invol=386>
Greenwood, Chris (2013). “14,000 officers allowed to carry 50,000-volt Tasers after just three days training”. Daily Mail Online. Web. June 1, 2014 <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2316339/14-000-officers-allowed-carry-50-000-volt-Tasers-just-days-training.html>
Las Vegas Review Journal (2010). “Lawsuit targets Taser maker”. Las Vegas Review Journal. Web. June 1, 2014 <http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/lawsuit-targets-taser-maker>
O’Brien, Anthony, McKenna, Brian, Simpson, Alexander (2007). “Health professionals and the monitoring of Taser use”. Psychiatric Bulletin (2007) 31: 391-393 doi: 10.1192/pb.bp.106.014175.
Taser International (2006). “Products Warning – Law Enforcement”. Web. June 1, 2014 <http://www.taser.com/safety/index.htm>
The Lectic Law Library (n.d). “FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution]”. Web. June 1, 2014 < http://www.lectlaw.com/def/f081.htm>
