Probe finds one-third of people shot by Tasers need medical attention
By Donald Melanson 
posted Jun 19th 2008 2:38PM
posted Jun 19th 2008 2:38PM
While the last Taser study we came across found that the devices were safe and caused only a few trips to the hospital, a joint investigation by CBC News and the Canadian Press has now turned up some decidedly different findings, with about one-third of people shot by Tasers reportedly requiring some form of medical attention. Those numbers were drawn from the Taser-use forms that RCMP officers are required to fill out whenever they draw the device, which revealed that 910 of the 3,226 people shot between 2002 and 2007 had to go to a medical facility, and that "many more" people had minor injuries but never saw a doctor. Needless to say, we somehow suspect this won't be the last such investigation or study on the matter, especially with the lawsuits flying fast and furiously these days.[Via Digg]
I haven't done the research, but I'm willing to bet close to 100% (3/3rds) of people shot by firearms require medical attention.
I wouldn't require medical attention if I was dead. There goes the 100% theory.
Exactly. If there was a perfect solution, we'd use it. This is a better solution than guns (or nightsticks even), and should be used until something better comes along.
Damnit. I didn't read the close to part. -1 for me.
but even if you die someone with medical skillz has to come and pronounce you dead.
Your powers of deduction astound even Captain Obvious.
I say there should be a serious probe into the brown noise. An officer threatening to make you crap yourself is sure to make you less belligerent.
Tasers find two-thirds of people probed need medical attention.
the problem is that a number of the RCMP are taser-happy... lazy... indifferent (perhaps because of their low pay)... RCMP in training have to be healthy, and to be able to use a taser, they have to be tasered themselves to know exactly it's effect - but since they're healthy and fit, they don't realize that tasering some overweight, stressed out, recently ex-smoker, newly landed immigrant at the vancouver airport would kill him.
Criminals should be shot in the head, not tasered.
Guys, it is departmental policy in many areas to require Taser 'victims' to go to the hospital or at least get checked out. And since most of them are meth’d out, drunk, or causing a disturbance in the vicinity of a secret service agent it can be assumed they warrant some sort of monitoring or treatment. If you are acting foolish enough to get Tased, you probably need some help.
Don't Tase me bro!
The problem is that tasers are used to render someone who may easily be tackled and poses very little threat incapacitated. Toted as being completely safe to use, officers are more readily willing to pull them out and zap people. Thus, they are more likely to use them in any situation were the offender is acting against the orders of the police officer, and not ones were the offender may be a serious danger to their safety ("don't tase me bro" boy epitomizes that).
And that is the danger here. Guns kill, flat out; 100% lethal. Tasers are marketed as 100% non-lethal. That's the problem. Officers are willing to use them without thinking of the consequences. And that is no fault of theirs as they have been marketed as not having any...
Yeah, if only these were used as alternatives to guns instead of alternatives to non-lethal force.
When they are used for crowd control purposes as is often the case, they are abused - always. Let's see the cops pull out their GUNS for crowd control. Yeah, I thought so.
i wanna know why the hell this country spends so much time worrying about criminals rights than those of the regular person. Hell they are pardoning death row inmates nowadays , wtf ? I agree that if your so mentally messed up that you become enough of a problem to tase that they should just beat the crap outta ya rodney king style.
@ws
Guns are NOT 100% lethal. Their mortality rate is certainly higher than a taser, but it is certainly not 100%.
You are full or crapola, sir.
Awww, poor criminals. Did the bad old policeman put some voltage though you? They were probably only beating an old lady to death on the sidewalk - where's the harm in that? Quick, get your human rights lawyer!
@DumpsterJ
"i wanna know why the hell this country spends so much time worrying about criminals rights than those of the regular person."
Ah, I see your logic now. Criminals get tazed. If you are tazed, you are a criminal. QED.
we only need some Precogs and we'll be fine.
@i wanna know why the hell this country spends so much time worrying about criminals rights than those of the regular person.
Um.... innocent until proven guilty for one thing? hey.. are you that guy who always posts BUILD MOAR GULAGS!!!1 on usenet?
Arg, beat me to it, Spyvie.
Forget tasers and firearms, just get one of those net-shooting guns. That'd be cool AND humane. Or heck, why not tranquilizers? Blow guns in movies seem to drop people instantly, with no ill effects... so that must be the same in reality.
It may be possible that the sudden drop to a hard surface could be what causes the need for medical attention. If it was so dangerous there wouldn't be a requirement that every officer carrying a taser be shot with one before they are allowed to use it.
You mean like a bandaid for the probe punctures?
yeah...first i get tased, then i get probed? sheesh...i'd need psychiatric help more than medical attention.
Yeah most of the visits were probably from puncture wounds or bumps on the head from falling down. This probe proves nothing other than falling down can hurt.
I bet that is still significantly lower than the number of people who need medical treatment, or a cornier, after a gun shot wound. There for I think the taser is doing it's job unless cops are just shooting people with them for fun.
Yea I was about to say better than the 100% of people who need medical attention after being shot.
yes but the problem we are facing these days is overuse of tasers.
tasers are designed to be usually-non-lethal replacements for gun use when a person is physically threatening a cop or another individual.
in cases where the person is no physical threat at all -- for example, passively resisting arrest, simply sitting there and not obeying orders, shouting but not fighting, or simply not responsive -- tasers should not be used. unfortunately, far too many cops feel the need to use them in such non-violent scenarios where it is much more humane to simply just pick them up and transport them.
bottom line is that tasers are NOT a compliance tool, they are a defence tool.
How di you passively resist arrest?
95% of the people who are shot require medical attention
I also bet that a lot more than a third get medical attention when subdued with a baton and the effects of that last much longer than those of a taser. I don't understand why people expect a perfect solution to a problem, any solution that gives better results is, well, better. Even if it's not perfect.
What does "had to go to a medical facility" really mean? Why wife is a nut and wants to go to a doctor at the slightest sniffle. I know if I got zapped full of electricity I'd want to get checked up whether I was injured or not. Bro.
Subtle yet fantastic, Bro.
umm... do I have to say again... these devices are less than lethal... that means they are gonna effin HURT!!!!
dumbasses
i bet 80 percent of cops shot in the line of duty that just so happened to be wearing a vest, still broke a damn rib and needed medical attention, I could give two sharts if a criminal gets tasered... my father being a cop Im glad he can do some damage with a taser, that means he might live to tell about it... its bad enough a cracked out maniac wrestled him down, only to dislocate his shoulder beating the living shit out of the criminal, so he wouldn't die. Now he has a hinge and crap in his shoulder... if you do a crime, or resist the police, expect to get hurt.. because if you don't get hurt, the cop will, then who will protect the rest of the world... FU
It would be badass if your first name was Fox.
What about when unarmed civillians are non-violently protesting? Tasering them is akin to sicking police dogs on them and shooting them with fire hoses.
History repeats itself...
police exist for the service and usage of the rich and ruling class. always have, always will. don't look at all funny or do anything strange. walk in a straight line, keep your hair closely cropped, and wear a tucked in plaid shirt at ALL times, or the terrorists win.
its not about the criminals.Its about the those who are not criminals.
There are far too many people getting taserd for liitle or no reason.
Before the taser the a cop would NOT have shot someone with his gun for getting on his nerves.The Taser and its extreme force is often being used in non violent situations against people who do not deserve it. For this reason alone it should be banned.
Probe.
I guess the cops will have to resort to harsh lamguage.
Reminds me of 1) "Monty Python and the Holy Grail", 2) "Demolition Man" (police procedures in the future when apprehending Wesley Snipes), and 3) bad/permissive parents.
I agree with Spyvie. I don't understand the problem. The alternative is to use bullets in which 100% of the people require SERIOUS medical attention.
This study seems to justify Tasers and tell me that they are doing their job.
Hey, here's a suggestion... don't do something that would require someone to Taser you.
Yeah, like protest...or be a color other than white. Serious crimes people, watch out.
the problem is they use it on unarmed people all the time when they don't need to. these cops should have training that lets them take control of the situation without having to electrocute people.
Race War! Race War!
No, seriously, that is the stupidest excuse.
Que in Al Sharpton and Jess Jackass and there we go.
The reality is exactly:
DON'T PUT YOURSELF IN A SITUATION WHERE THE THOUGH OF USING A GUN OR TASER BY COP IS NECESSARY!
01, you are a shithead.
:)
@bolezhinkov
I'd rather be tazed than whupped with a Baton or shot, so what do you suggest the cop do, use harsh language?
@01, everyone I know who is non white gets tasered at least once a day just for the heck of it. Cops are constantly just tasering my friends when we're walking down the street.
Luckily for me I'm white so the cops don't care when I take all my friends money or rob little old ladies. In fact if my victims are non white the cops will even help me with their tasers.
@01
This isn't the 1960's...when you protest in a nonviolent way cops are not going to hit you with a firehose or taze you for no reason (besides that dumbass from the Univ. of Florida that kept yelling - campus police at any major public institution are not friendly towards troublemakers).
Stop making a big deal out of tasers, it's better than getting shot with a rubber bullet or beanbag from a shotgun!
i would rather a taser than that thing from the jackass movie
@ Dave
You're right, I'm sure that this not being the 1960's the FBI wouldn't be inflitrating non-violent anti-war protestor groups, or have major telecoms monitor and record phone conversations of US citizens, or torture prisoners, or suspend civil liberties or...well, you see where I'm going with this. (shrugs) you can call me a liberal, hippie loving cop hater, but when the FBI tracks you and your friends at your college in Indiana for simply attending a WTO protests in DC, and having cops tell you they wish they could shoot you in the face for smoking a joint...well, then we'll talk.
z0phi3l:
cops can do more than use a baton, taser or gun. they are trained to take down people without weapons. if they werent they would just be fools with a gun (which they are as well).
I would and have taken the baton and its better than being tasered - I've had that too.
you think falling to the ground and twitching without control while in excruciating pain throughout your whole body is better than being put in a chokehold or getting a baton on the leg? that is/you are retarted.
01,
I am not a police officer. I didn't even handle any sort of law enforcement when I was in the military. However, I am a firefighter, and I am friends with a lot of police officers.
Every time they have had to use a taser it was when they normally would have used a gun.
I don't care if you are a hippy liberal pot smoker. If you want to live your life like that, it's your own choice. But, you have already admitted to being a criminal. Marijuana is illegal.
You most likely also have a major contempt for government and authority and are very vocal, sometimes angry in demeanor. Then you are a WTO meeting in DC. Well, your behavior and attitude plus the drug abuse at a international event, made you a target for the FBI. That's your fault. Not the governments. 93% of all our terrorist incidents are caused by homegrown terrorist. Little pot-headed trust-fund sucking shits who soak up some liberal causes from a fuckhead teacher and you spend mommy and daddies money to go and protest. Guess what! You match the description of all the members of the ELF. I'm glad they followed you. It means they are doing their jobs.
As for the cops wanting to shoot you in the face, well my wife's neice was hit by one of you pot-smoking shit-for-brains that got behind the wheel of a car and now lives her life in a wheelchair. So, I'm actually kind of pissed that they DIDN'T shoot you in the face.
Go smoke your drugs, maybe we will al be lucky and you will OD and DIE.
@MadMax/Mike
dude... are you really a walking after school special? "Marijuana is illegal." um yeah.. personal pot use has been decriminalized in most of CA. federal drug laws are unconstitutional (but there's too much money to be made by the black market and corrupt pols and cops on the take for any kind of amnesty). and "liberal pot head"? go ahead, throw around more labels at people.
don't know about where you live, but in San Francisco and Oakland the police are notorious for doing largely jack squat on their ILLEGALLY loud motorcycles and getting double overtime while violent crime statistics continue to get worse. if you were at all logical, you wouldn't be railing on a harmless drug while advocating wanton repression by police.
looks like you fancy yourself a libertarian. might wanna look at how many billions in tax dollars we piss away each year incarcerating nonviolent drug users.
p.s. do you have any family member who drives while taking prescription medication? so, i'm sure you're ok with them taking a shotgun blast to the face, too.
@ MadMike -->
Paid my own way through college
Don't really respect laws that are based in racism and monetary oppression of other people/races/cultures
"Terrorist" is a fun word to use to describe people that aren't really doing anything different that the founding fathers did...although I didn't toss any tea overboard at my protests.
I wasn't aware that exercising my constitutional right to free speech and assembly warranted interest from the FBI. I stand corrected.
I don't even really want to think about how much pot I'd have to smoke to OD. Want to watch?
As if there's only one alternative, it's either tazer or a gun right? There's no middle ground, like non-lethal rubber bullets, tear gas, tear gas bullets, or anything else that's 10 times less harmful.
You know, it's not only murderers, robbers and what not being tazerd, in fact it's mostly people like you and me, who don't look up to cops as gods and sometimes question some of their methods, the next second we're on the ground shaking.
If i only type in "tazer" on youtube i get 1000 videos of cops tazering people for broken tail lights.
correlation causation
people shot with tasers may have required medical attention prior to being tased.
I wouldn't require medical attention if I was dead. There goes your 100% theory.
Probe finds 0% of people not attacked by The Man require medical attention. 1 in 3 may be better than 3 of 3, but 0 of 3 is still preferable.
The Police Are Always Right(TM)
Question:
If the two wires connecting the probe cross, do they short out or are they insulated?
I think it is very similar to when the streams cross in ghostbusters ;]
3 words.
Total Protonic Reversal.
I was reading about some of this stuff on the CBC website - pigs here are firing tasers all the time. and they don't just do it once, I think something like 60% of the time there were multiple shocks fired.
and then they said that more than 2/3 of the people fired on with a taser were unarmed. ok I cant understand if a cop uses a taser to take down a guy with a knife even, or especially a gun.
but aren't they trained in unarmed combat and stuff? if the perp or whatever doesnt have a weapon in hand they should not be allowed to use a taser 99% of the time.
I can't stand coppers . . . most of them have some kind of power/control complex from having ED or not being allowed to smoke pot with the cool kids in high school.
Seems to me YOU are the one with a problem, a problem with authority.
Tazing is the best option, if they shoot you you can end up dead, if they use a baton, you can end up seriously injured, if they tackle you you can break something, tazing is the only real solution in this age of people like you suing Police stations for doing their jobs
Like someone said, if you don't want to be tazed, etc. don't do anything that will force the Police to use it on you.
yo - read about the guy who was on his deathbed and got tasered - the guy was like 70-something. and read up on all the people who have died from the taser - its not a short list for a device that is supposed to be non-lethal. and you think the police use this only when warranted? get your head out of the government-propaganda-sand.
you think I would sue a cop? not a chance, I dont support the legal system either. I figure after I got the shit beat out of me by the same cop three times in one summer I should cut my losses. so you would think I did something that would result in a charge or something after all that - nothing, no charges laid, only beat down on kids from cops.
the icing on the cake - one of the cops involved was our vice-principal who we had to plead with in order to stop the beat down.
in fact, I suggest you read just a little of anything . . . you need it, man.
I think where you live people are dirty and the cops dont want to touch you.
bolezhinkov is a bit crazy, but he is right. Not all cops are bad, but I know a few personally, and they do think they're above the law. And most aren't always bad, but sometimes people piss them off and they just fuck with them for the heck of it... Lie about it in court, and the judge believes them. It's a frustrating, tough job, and they have the power to take out their frustrations on people... which happens too often.
Hmm, doing some calculations...910 is 28% of 3226. This is 3% away from 25% and 5% away from 33%. So if we're going to round, let's at least round to the closer mark.
1/4 of people shot by Tasers need medical attention.
This is an excellent point. Not only is that one fourth riddled with people who did not have any material need to go to a doctor, but Engadget's campaign against this device lies about the actual numbers in their headline, knowing thousands of people will only read the headline and move on.
A correction is mandatory.
This campaign is silly. But Engadget can feel like a long commercial sometimes, so what's the loss? If they don't want to be fair, they are going to lose some credibility.
Personally, I respect them more for it.
Tasers have a false reputation as being totally safe. They also have a reputation as only being used as a last resort when in reality, they are used on unarmed, nonviolent protesters as a compliance tool.
Also, it's a blog, not a news site. Everything on this site is effectively an editorial and is most likely written entirely on macs by non-taser-toting individuals.
Ask nicely and they may make a no-taser RSS feed for you. ;)
Come on we all know that if you shouted get down on the floor, you've got three seconds. We'd all shoot them before the 2 second mark and feel secretly proud with a taser. You'd get excited just because you can shoot them without fully harming.
Everyones a taser whore.
I don't think that cops are using these exclusively instead of guns. For example, I don't think the police would have shot the "don't taze me bro" guy with a gun if they didn't have a tazer, they would have used some other form of restrait. Similarly, if a person has a gun, I would imagine that the police would use a firearm before a tazer, because even if you taze someone there is still a likely chance they could get a shot off. So the point im trying to make is, you cant compare this to medical treatment after gunshots, more like medical treatment after being beaten with the stick club things the cops have.
So when did Cal Ripken Jr. become a taser spokesman?
well i know the police don't use the tasers lightly, since each time they pull out the taser they have to file a report. But what I'm wondering is can't they turn down the voltage or something to make it less dangerous?
I really don't get the point of police tasers at all.
If the suspect is armed you use the more effective weapon.. your sidearm.
If the suspect is unarmed then you use any one of the numerous holds taught in police hand to hand combat courses.
When is a taser even necessary? They only seem to exist to encourage the lazy, incompetent, and sadistic.
yeah.
that's it.
Police should use PHYSICAL FORCE to remove a subject.
meaning they should get right next to the possible antogonist and place themselves within easy to reach distance for any type of knife strike, lethal hand strike, or any of a million other possible situations.
Because we all know that a person who wants to stab a police officer is going to tell them "I have a knife".
Think before you speak.
You'd be amazed how many times you can pick apart your own arguments with LOGIC.
hey mike,
Try out a little of your logic. Are you saying everyone arrested should be tasered first, because they may have a knife?
hey there mike McExcessiveforce,
how about, oh i dont know, hands on your head, face first on the ground? i'm sorry, but if you still need to tase someone after they're in that position you have no business carrying a weapon or wearing a uniform.
what percentage of those people tasered where criminals?
i have zero sympathy for people who get themselves into a situation where a police officer feels the need to zap them with their Zeus gun.
And 100% of thieves shot in the head by police need morgues.
selection bias and correlation alert: how does this compare to normal rates of medical attention required by drug addicts (which, i'd bet, are a large percentage of those tased).
Better to need medical attention than undertaker attention.
Have you ever seen a video of someone getting hit with one of those? They drop like a sack of bricks. I suspect that a large percentage of the medical attention people need comes from them hitting the ground.
or is simply the reaction of a police force who wants to ensure that a tazered subject receives follow up medical attention to prevent them from having a later problem and thus suing the police force.
In other words, it very well may be that since Canada has socialized medicine that "doesn't cost anything" the police are merely aggressively using the available system to prevent any possibility of medical problem.
"RCMP superintendent has apologized to a B.C. senior who was Tasered last month after double parking his vehicle in downtown Kelowna"
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=d1b946f8-f3d3-4a51-83fb-997994681f89
The problem is that cops are using Tasers instead of the skills they learn to pacify an unarmed person. They use them to make people stop talking. They use them to disable frantic victims. They use them when they don't need to use them at all, when communication and patience would work just as well. They fall back on the taser whenever any resistance (or just inconvenience) is met, and they aren't meant for this purpose.
It comes down to training and discipline. Police need to be trained not to use Tasers to apprehend everyone without lifting a finger. They need to be taught to only use a Taser when a weapon is present, or when the suspect presents a clear and present danger to the officers or surrounding civilians. They need to be held to a higher standard than private citizens when it comes to the use of non-lethal weaponry, and prosecuted for assault when they taser a person who is just frantic, speaks another language, or is easily detained through other methods.
They need to stop treating the Taser like it's a tool for ay situation. It's not. It is meant to be used as a defensive tool, not to replace the need for physical labor in subduing a noncompliant-but-unarmed suspect.
"They need to stop treating the Taser like it's a tool for ay situation. It's not. It is meant to be used as a defensive tool, not to replace the need for physical labor in subduing a noncompliant-but-unarmed suspect."
Well said. Your thoughts completely mirror my own...
nah.. i like that cops have total power. i mean, i'd never do anything to piss them off, like being in the wrong place at the wrong time. i just stay home and play WoW. too dangerous out there.
First of all "ay" was meant to be "any", but you all knew that.
Have any of you seen the video of the (Polish?) guy that was Tasered to death because he was a bit frantic and couldn't speak any English? The Candian police zapped him when he was getting excited, and all he was saying was that he was here to visit his mother, and that he didn't know what was going on. He wasn't under arrest. He wasn't violent. He was scared, feeling persecuted because he spoke no English (or French) and the police couldn't understand him, nor could he understand them.
In that situation, they need not have used the Taser at all. He wasn't a criminal. He wasn't a threat. He was a frightened foreigner being surrounded by officials, trying like hell to communicate to someone- ANYONE- his concerns and fears. He was frustrated- Not violent.
They could have zip-corded his wrists and waited to bring in an interpreter. They could have stood back and given him some room, showing him there was no threat, and he probably would have calmed down. They could have ushered him into a room, given him a cup of coffee or a Coke, and a telephone, and gestured for him to call someone who could explain.
Instead, they surrounded him, shouted at him (and guessed his country of origin wrong), and pointed a weapon at him. He freaked out. They fired the Taser. He went down, and they kept it on him. He went unconscious, and died in hospital.
How many of these sorts of misunderstandings do we need to see happen before we start punishing police for being lazy and hair-trigger with their Tasers? What was needed in that situation was brains, not force, and the police utterly failed to protect & serve.
When someone has a weapon they think of as "non lethal", they feel empowered to use it whenever they have an opportunity. They OVER-use it. They use it when it's not needed, because "it can't really harm them, can it?"
If they applied the same ideals to their guns, we'd have a lot of dead innocents. I think cops need to do the opposite. They need to treat Tasers with the same regard as their handguns.
Maybe we should insist that cops *only* use the tampon-taser (http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/deadly-cooters/pink-stinger-tampon-taser-256483.php) as the resulting shame would force them to use traditional methods of compliance.
I can't believe no one has said it yet. I guess I'll be the one this time:
"Don't taze me bro!"
Is that a picture of Col. Decker from the A-Team?
Seriously.
So...
Canadians are pansies, how is this news?
;)
so, here's the engadget reader logic:
"dude, tazing's like nonlethal and stuff and being shot is worse. therefore, cops should be able to do whatever they like with Tasers without standards, reprisals, investigation, or any other sort of citizen protections"
Uhm, maybe stop committing felonies?
I would think many of those trips are to remove the darts if they penetrate too deeply into the skin. Cops are not supposed to pull them out and here in AZ always call EMT.
Agree with the first commenter: The alternative might be worse - I'd rather get stunned by a taser than to get hit by a bullet which would almost guarantee that I need medical attention.
There are probably problems on both sides. Taser holders might be overdoing it thinking that no permanent harm will be done. Or that it is not a bullet so "I better crank it up."
On the other side, the problem might be that people do not want to surrender when something is aimed at them especially a toy gun. If I am on the ground (even as a mistaken identity), I will be pretty upset if I am stunned in my back.
That's interesting. Independent studies based on actual medical data found less than 1% of Taser uses had medical complications. I bet some numbers drummed up by two media organizations are way more accurate though. Many if not most department policies dictate that ALL persons Tased see a doctor which would greatly inflate this number.
Out of a group comprised of me and 60 classmates, approximately 0.00% required any medical attention. That may have had something to do with the fact that none of us were on PCP at the time.
I agree with Spyvie ... I am sure if you get shot by a gun with a bullet, eventually you will need medical attention. So 100% > 33.33% ... I'd take my chances with a Taser.
+1