I will say that I don’t, and never have, agreed with the use of Tasers. I understand the idea behind them – and as a technology it would have been great to be able to incapacitate someone rather than shooting them.
Technology that can offer that scenario with minimal effect on the person I would think would be welcomed. Not just for the humanity of the technology but also the protection of a police officer going about his/her duty.
But it is stories like the one on CBC that really does make you think about how Tasers are discharged.
[…] results of independent tests of a sample of Alberta police Tasers that showed more than 10 per cent didn’t meet manufacturer specifications.
Ten percent is a lot – but, as with most companies where the technology doesn’t quite live up to what it is supposed to do:
Taser International has called the testing “flawed.” In written releases to news agencies, the Arizona-based company said the CBC investigation made scientific errors by failing to spark-test the weapons before firing them, which the company recommends police officers do.
I am not a police officer but when in a situation where the officer maybe justified in the use of a Taser (remember I don’t agree with them for a myriad of reasons) that situation would be one of impending fatal attack on the officer or a fatal attack on a victim. And if that is the case – as cool and calm as an officer wants to be – how is it expected that the “spark-test” before launching the thing at someone?
That just doesn’t make any sense at all.
These things have been ordered by the Home Office in the UK – and I would, before deploying them to police officers in the UK – look at the results of the tests coming out of Canada long before anyone is killed by a dodgy piece of equipment.
Calgary, Edmonton police support testing
In Calgary, 31 of the force’s 190 stun guns that were tested were found to be outside the manufacturer’s specifications.
I would think twice muzz Smith – I would really think twice.