I saw this article about the use of Taser guns and whether they are lethal or not. Is it just me or doesn’t the word “taser gun” just sound so strange. It’s like, let’s invent something where it sort of shocks you and makes it so you can’t move. The research is based on a case where a man, Robert Heston, died after repeatedly being shocked with a Taser gun. I am not sure why anyone finds this surprising. I think if you are shocked enough with anything that it is likely to kill you. In this case, the Taser guns were developed to give someone a 50,000 volt shock for five seconds. Mr. Heston was shocked 25 times. Can you imagine? It it just so sad. I mean, the guy was mentally ill and attacked the police officers but this is not like the movie Transformers – remember the scene in the dessert where the soliders just kept shooting at the robots? This is a human being that might have been out of control but the treatment in this case seems a bit severe.
The jury found that the company that developed the Taser guns in this case were 15% liable for Robert Heston’s death as the company should have known that prolonged exposure would have lead to cardiac arrest and failed to warn the police officers of that danger. It is a tough call though as I do believe that police officers should have some type of recourse when dealing with an unruly situation that shouldn’t result in their use of lethal force. However, in this case, the non-lethal force became lethal so we are back at square one.
I am happy there has been some light shed on this as apparently the company that developed the Taser guns were at one time immune to all lawsuits. They received some 70 or more dismissals prior to this case. I think anything we can do to make the manner in which police officers deal with the public more safe and sound, the better.
Let's make the law entertaining, shall we? 
October 10th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
For some people who may have heart or other medical conditions that would put their life at risk if Tase’d, then the taser gun should not be used unless in the same circumstances the officer would also be justified by using a firearm to subdue the assailant.
That is the problem isn’t it? There is no way for an officer, or anyone else for that matter, to know who is vulnerable to electric shock, and may die if tase’d. So… “no one”, not just police officers, should ever use a taser gun to “subdue” an “uncooperative” or “unruly” human. They should only be used when the life of the officer, or anyone else, is being threatened by assault. i.e to defend ones life.
As long as the police think that it is a safe means of subduing the unruly then they will continue to use them rather than more conventional means, such as the old fashioned way of physically overpowering someone. Using a taser gun should be considered the same as using a firearm, that it will most likely inflict serious injury or death when used. But then using a firearm is a bit messy isn’t it?
Personally I think that the whole taser gun thing should be scraped. Lets return to the days when officers use the more old fashioned means of dealing with the unruly and only use a firearm as a last resort to defend their life.
Let’s throw our taser guns away. They carry with them an illusion that somehow they are a more humane and safe, and as a result, the temptation to use them when not necessary is much to irresistible for some.