Photo: Mark Laita
|
By Sandra Upson
The taser gun, an electroshock weapon used by police
departments worldwide, is no stranger to bad press.
Last September, campus police officers at the
University of Florida scuffled with Andrew Meyer, a
student who had just posed a long and angry series of
questions to Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) during a forum
at the school. As Meyer finished speaking, officers
surrounded him and directed him out of the auditorium.
Meyer yelled, resisted them, and demanded to know what
he had done wrong. “You're going to get Tased if you
don't put your arms behind your back,” an officer said.
Meyer continued to struggle and yelled, “Don't Tase me,
bro!” One of the officers fired his Taser Electronic
Control Device, and Meyer screamed, his voice breaking.
Within hours, the video record of the event in
Gainesville appeared on the Web and became an instant
YouTube sensation. The American Civil Liberties Union
and Amnesty International chimed in with support for
Meyer, whose memorable “Don't Tase me, bro!” cry leaped
into American popular culture on T-shirts and baby bibs.
Newspapers across the United States questioned whether
the campus police were right to use the Taser, whether
it was cruel, and whether Meyer had deliberately
provoked the officers into stunning him.
The explosion of attention surrounding the incident
reflects a deep public ambivalence toward the
electroshock weapon and its use. Meyer's experience is
but one of many high-profile cases in which the use of a
Taser to subdue a recalcitrant troublemaker may not have
been warranted. Last year, a student at the University
of California, Los Angeles, was shocked in Powell
Library, an event that generated a similar public
outcry. The student, Mostafa Tabatabainejad, was using
the computer lab after hours and didn't show officers
his student ID card when asked to do so. His continued
refusal to comply or leave the library led the campus
police officers to apply Taser shocks to him repeatedly.
Reports after the fact acknowledged police error—the
officers had overreacted and were too ready to deploy
their high-tech gadget in a situation that didn't call
for violence.
The screams of people being shocked by a stun gun
sound eerily similar to the blood-curdling cries of
torture victims, so incidents that involve unarmed
students raise hackles. But there's another factor
underlying the public distrust of Tasers: the
possibility that they can kill people.
In the period between 2001 and 2005, Amnesty
International reported, 150 people died in the aftermath
of receiving shocks from a Taser. In only a handful of
the cases did medical examiners cite the shocks received
as a cause of death. Even so, the considerable
uncertainty surrounding the physiological effects of a
Taser shock, as well as ambiguity regarding when it
should be used, have bred an atmosphere of distrust and fear.
Photo: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images;
|
The electroshock gun used by police—the Taser X26,
made by Taser International of Scottsdale, Ariz.—fires
barbed electrodes. A shot releases two probes, and those
probes must either both make contact with their target,
or one must strike the target and the other the ground,
to complete the electrical circuit. The electrodes are
attached by long, thin wires to a waveform generator
that sends muscle-locking electric pulses into the
target.
Situations where police have been able to successfully
disarm suspects without causing permanent injury are the
reason these weapons have gained widespread use. In an
October case in the Czech Republic, for example, a
kidnapped child was rescued by police who used Taser
guns to immobilize her captors. According to a 2006
report by the Police Executive Research Forum, a
law-enforcement policy organization in Washington, D.C.,
more than 8000 police and sheriffs' offices across the
United States have adopted the devices, which are widely
used in Canada and the United Kingdom as well [see
graph, ]. Police departments in Australia, New Zealand,
and France started using the devices after Taser
International introduced an attachable video camera. The
guns also now release bits of identifying confetti with
every shot, and the time and duration of each trigger
pull is recorded in the gun's memory. According to
Taser, its guns are now fired more than 620 times a day
and have been used a total of more than 680 000 times worldwide.
Any new technology that is designed for violent
encounters should be carefully assessed. Unlike medical
devices, Tasers don't have to undergo testing and
receive approval by agencies such as the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration, at least not in the United States.
Partly in response, several local and state legislatures
have considered introducing laws restricting the stun
guns' adoption, and most police departments, if not all,
have instituted guidelines on the proper use of Tasers.
Analyses conducted by British and Canadian police
research centers and by the U.S. Air Force concluded
that Tasers are generally effective and do not pose a
significant health risk to the recipients of a shock. In
Portland, Ore., meanwhile, police found that 25 to 30
percent of the situations in which a Taser was employed
met the criteria for the use of deadly force. Other
police departments have released statistics showing a
decline in the number of deaths of suspects and officers
in the months following the introduction of Tasers. But
research by the Police Executive Research Forum has
raised the concern that multiple activations of Tasers
may increase the risk of death.
Even if Tasers are proven to be entirely safe, there's
the bigger question of whether the stun guns encourage
police brutality. A Taser shock leaves almost no visible
scarring or bruising, as a clubbing or a beating
typically would. Could the absence of physical scars
lift a psychological restraint on officer behavior?
Should every Taser gun have a built-in video camera?
Equipping law-enforcement services with Tasers is
likely to reduce the number of bullets officers fire
from their handguns and therefore the number of serious
injuries and deaths. At the same time, it may lead
police to inflict an unwarranted amount of pain on
individuals who commit only minor crimes.
The broader questions regarding the social effects of
stun guns are, however, beyond the scope of this
discussion. The two articles that follow investigate the
physiological effects of electric shock. The first is by
Mark W. Kroll, an electrical engineer who has helped
invent numerous electrical medical devices and who sits
on the board of Taser International. The second is by
Patrick Tchou, a cardiac electrophysiologist at the
Cleveland Clinic, who has tested Tasers experimentally
on pigs.