Death By Taser: So Much For ‘Non-Lethal’ Police Weapons

The safe use of stun guns is drawing criticism as their misuse by police appears to be on the rise.
By @FrederickReese |
Be Sociable, Share!
    • Google+

    On July 14, St. Louis Park, Minn. police responded to a report of a Park Health and Rehab patient acting erratically. Zheng Diao, 76, was in possession of a knife and a pair of scissors. Unable to speak English, police attempted to contact with Diao through body gestures. As the police perceived Diao attempting the raise the knife to his throat, the police subdued the man with a Taser, causing Diao to fall on his face.

    Diao died of pneumonia as a result of the injuries incurred from the Taser shot.

    In Miami Beach, Fla., 18-year-old street artist Israel Hernandez-Llach, died after being hit by a police Taser shot earlier this month. Hernandez-Llach, unarmed and of slender build, was chased and ultimately fired on for spray-painting on an abandoned building. While the nature of Hernandez-Llach’s death is unknown at this time, witnesses report that he received no first aid from the police once it was revealed that he was in distress.

    A witness to the chase reported that the police officers “laughed and exchanged high-fives as he lay on the ground, immobilized.” The family is suing the City of Miami Beach for “unnecessary, excessive and unconstitutional force.”

    These cases reflect a growing trend of police-related Taser deaths. The blog Electronic Village has logged 544 documented stun gun-related deaths in the United States since 2001. Situations, such as when Ohio’s Franklin County sheriff “[engaged] in a pattern and practice of gratuitous, excessive and unconstitutional use of Tasers against arrestees, pretrial detainees and other prisoners, including pregnant women, incapacitated individuals and those with mental illness,” per a 2011 U.S. Justice Department’s appeal for intervention. In another example, a 2012 report from the Justice Department showed that the Portland police used stun guns against the mentally ill without justification. These illustrate the growing fear of an poorly trained police force indiscriminately using Tasers on the public.


    The safeness of ballistic electric shock

    Tasers and other stun guns are classified as conducted energy devices (CEDs). Used by more than 15,000 law enforcement and military agencies, the Taser — which, incidentally, stands for Thomas A. Swift Electric Rifle, named after the fictional adventurer-inventor Tom Swift — was developed in 1974, but was not adopted by law enforcement until 1998, when a non-lethal alternative to gunfire was sought.

    The Taser — the leading brand of CEDs — works by firing two barbed dart-like electrodes, which are connected by conductive lead wires to the main unit, via compressed nitrogen charge. The electrodes transmit a 5,000-volt microamperage electric pulse into the target, short-circuiting neural signals along the course of the peripheral nervous system. This causes the target’s muscles to spasm, causing a wave of pain and disorientation to take over and the victim to lose temporary control of his or her body.

    A U.S. National Institute of Justice report from 2011 suggests that Taser use is overwhelmingly safe. “Despite the dangers, most CED shocks produce no seri­ous injuries,” the report read. It continued:

    A study by Wake Forest University researchers found that 99.7 percent of people who were shocked by CEDs suffered no injuries or minor injuries only. A small number suffered significant and potentially lethal injuries. This NIJ-sponsored study included six police depart­ments and evaluated the results of 962 ‘real world’ CED uses. Skin punctures from CED probes were common, accounting for 83 percent of mild injuries. …

    Policymakers and law en­forcement officials want to know whether Tasers are safe and effective, and how (if at all) they should be used to match police use-of-force choices with levels of sus­pect resistance. This study indicates that CED use actu­ally decreases the likelihood of suspect injury.


    Tasers and “safe deterrents”

    This is challenged by the American Heart Association. The heart functions via electric pulses from the brain, which serve to maintain the muscle’s contraction rhythm. A weakened heart could be susceptible to external shock, causing ventricular fibrillation — the quivering of the ventricles due to an uncoordinated electrical signal. Left unchecked, this can cause asystole (“flatlining”) or cardiac arrest. While a shot to the extremities or the lower back will probably not cause ventricular fibrillation, a shot to the chest has a punch equivalent to the pulse of a Pacemaker.

    Since the release of the AHA’s findings, Tasers have since been classified as “less-lethal,” instead of non-lethal. As reported by the NIJ, while CEDs offer a lower suspect injury rate than traditional guns, CED use still contributes to more injuries than other techniques, such as pepper spraying. A 2012 Michigan State University study show that citizens were injured more often when a stun gun was used during apprehension than when no stun gun was available at the time of arrest. In an examination of 13,913 use-of-force cases, 41 percent of all arrestees tagged with a Taser reported injuries, compared to 29 percent of non-Taser arrests that were injured.

    A second study conducted in conjunction with the MSU study found that five percent of police officers reported injury when using a stun gun, compared to 10 percent that were injured without using a stun gun.

    Researchers argue that the use of a stun gun causes some officers to misevaluate a situation, thinking they are using a “safe” deterrent. “There has been this increased perception that these devices are effective and safe,” said lead researcher William Terrill. “But in terms of safeness, our data conclusively shows they are not safe to citizens. Now, are there concerns to the point that we’re recommending that law enforcement agencies not use them? Absolutely not. We think there needs to be more careful analysis done, and it has to be done in a way that’s fair and objective.”

    Ultimately, there is no such thing as a “non-lethal” weapon. Anything used to stop a person can kill a person. In 2012, Taser International acknowledged this fact when the company released this statement:

    TASER has changed the generic term describing our handheld products from Electronic Control Device (ECD) to Conducted Electrical Weapon (CEW). We feel Conducted Electrical Weapon is more descriptive of our products and is becoming a more commonly used term. This term also clearly describes these products as weapons that, like all weapons, carry certain risks and need to be handled and operated appropriately.

    A tool is only as effective as the way it is used. The majority of all Taser training done in the United States is done by the manufacturer. A serious, disciplined approach to training, registering and monitoring CED use will help to prevent future “mistakes” from occurring.

    While it can be argued that an officer shooting someone with a Taser in error is better than an officer shooting someone with a real gun mistakenly, both situations show the same police malpractice and deserve the same response.

    Be Sociable, Share!

    Stories published in our Hot Topics section are chosen based on the interest of our readers. They are republished from a number of sources, and are not produced by MintPress News. The views expressed in these articles are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Mint Press News editorial policy.


    Print This Story Print This Story
    You Might Also Like  
    This entry was posted in Daily Digest, National and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
    • TD2323

      Hahaha, did the PR flack for Taser actually post a soliloquy response in the comments section? Nice.

    • Pingback: Death By Taser: So Significantly For &#39Non-Lethal&#39 Law enforcement Weapons | | Tips | Deals | News()

    • stevetuttle

      I’m surprised you didn’t seek comment from us. I could have easily answered
      many of the concerns you put forth as well as corrected some incorrect
      statements. We’re easy to find at and any internet search for TASER comes up with us as number 1-3 in most engines Zjeng Diao’s death was reported to have died from pneumonia that developed as he was being treated for delirium and his injuries. I haven’t seen the autopsy yet but I’d like to know what the cause of death is listed as officially.

      Interestingly you cited the Electronic Village as a source for your story. I find it fascinating that this blog stated, “Mr. Diao is the 2nd nursing home senior citizen electrocuted to death by the police with taser guns over the past few weeks.” Electrocuted to death?

      That’s death by shock. Was that the cause of death? That’s right,
      it’s not out yet.

      Does the blog Electronic Village list the causes of deaths of the 544 incidents? Would it surprise you that 90% plus of these incidents did not list the TASER weapon as causal or contributory to death?

      In Miami Beach, we’re weeks away from the toxicology report and autopsy to be
      finished in the tragic death of Israel Hernandez-Llach.

      I see you relied on the The blog Electronic Village. Does this blog list the causes of deaths of the 544 incidents? Would it surprise you that 90% plus of these incidents did not list the TASER weapon as causal or contributory to death?

      As to the number of agencies with TASER devices, it’s actually 17,000 in 107
      countries – not 15,000.

      A human would bet 1,800 volts not 5,000 and it’s not microamperage current – it’s milliamp current.

      The American Heart Association did not conduct any studies nor did they take a
      stance on TASER safety. Nor was this a position paper by the American Heart Association. Their magazine, called Circulation issued a case series by a doctor (Zipes) whose theory was published.

      Of importance is that a “case series” should report interesting associations and novel curiosities of medicine based on uncontrolled and anecdotal observations — it does not prove a cause-effect association. Also, the Zipes’ article is not a position paper by the American Heart Association. Dr Zipes’ article that published provides observational data from a series of eight cases provided to him in his
      disclosed role as a plaintiff’s expert during litigation of these cases. He does not conclude that these cases reveal a fundamental flaw in the design of the devices.

      There have been 3 million uses of TASER device uses worldwide with this case series reporting 8 of concern. This article does not support a cause-effect
      association and fails to accurately evaluate the risks versus the benefits of
      the thousands of lives saved by police with TASER devices. In his cases, not one medical examiner agreed to Zipes’ opinions.

      You might actually want to know that The American Medical Association issued a White (Position) Paper on TASER safety in June 2009 that states:

      · “Most studies undertaken by law enforcement agencies (and others) indicate that deploying CEDs relative to other use-of-force options, such as pepper spray, physical force, police dogs, and batons, reduces injuries to officers and suspects and reduces the use of lethal force.”

      · “Furthermore, no evidence of dysrhythmia or myocardial ischemia is apparent, even when the barbs are positioned on the thorax and cardiac apex.”

      Where did this come from? Since the release of the AHA’s findings, Tasers have
      since been classified as “less-lethal,” instead of non-lethal. Completely incorrect.
      The lexicon of law enforcement calls its non-lethal weapons as less lethal weapons. Just as pepper spray, batons, impact munitions, etc. No government body classifies this semantic issue. The US DOD still uses the term non-lethal.

      Finally, this statement is untrue: The majority of all Taser training done in the United States is done by the manufacturer.

      We train-the-trainers on the safe operation of the equipment. We don’t train when
      they are used and we don’t issue policy on them. The train-the-trainers go back to their agency and work with command staff, risk managers and internal affairs to develop the training of their individual officers. The individual agencies train their officers at academies and in the less-lethal training. We don’t go into agencies and train users.

      I sincerely wish you had contacted TASER on these matters. In baseball, this is called a swing and a miss. It’s also an error of omission to not have contacted us.

      • AntiSocialSailor

        Shove our tasers up your ass. You talk about “lives saved”? What is the presumption that people who were tazed would have been shot if not for your wonderful device? That’s total bullshit.

        Cops are lazy-asses. All the Taser does is give them a shortcut to avoid having to engage in communication or conflict resolution. It relieves them of the responsibility to defuse a situation. Instead of taking 5 or 10 minutes to calm someone down, just Taser him. Quick, easy and you’ll be back to your doughnuts in no time.

        Tasers should be the next-to-last resort, not the first line of communication, which is the way they’re most often employed. You’ve handed cops a piece of equipment that absolves them of the responsibility to act like compassionate human beings and, instead, lets go about their business like some newly landed alien invaders.

        Well, the jokes on them. Tasers, and their profligate use are just one more thing contributing to the intense and growing hatred of police on the part of the same law-abiding citizens who respected them just a couple decades ago. So, don’t be surprised the next time you read about some cop who was beat to death, or shot, or rammed by a car and left to die on the street while hundreds of people stood around and did nothing to help. You did your part. I hope you’re happy.