The Taser: An Alternative to Deadly Force

Given the choice, which do you think Rodney King would have chosen, the old fashioned ass whooping he received, or a five second Taser ride? The safe money would have to go to the Taser. If the choice were mine, knowing what I do about the Taser and the technology behind it, I would definitely go with the Taser ride. I also base my choice on the fact that I have been on the receiving end of both the Taser and the ass whooping.

Following the latter, it took some time to heal and the repeated impact of a fist against my skull had the potential to cause permanent damage. I should also mention that it hurt like hell.

There is nothing pleasant about being tased. I can think of a great many things that are more painful, but being shocked with 50,000 volts is an experience one remembers for a long time. Using what is termed "Electro-Muscular Disruption Technology", when fired into a subject, the Taser causes every muscle between the probes to involuntarily contract. This renders the person incapable of moving, or more specifically resisting arrest.

This seems to a good place to mention that I have been trained as a law enforcement officer and that I carry a Taser. It is without question a tool I would not want to be without. Many law enforcement agencies give officers who have been properly trained, a choice of "less-lethal" equipment. Pepper spray, police baton, or the Taser.

I have been trained to use all three and have come to the conclusion that the Taser is the most effective and least likely to result in me being injured in the course of performing my official duty.

Pepper spray (Oleoresin Capsicum), was developed for use by law enforcement to reduce the reliance on more lethal weapons. It was widely used during the late 1980's into the mid 1990's, before the introduction of Electro-Muscular Disruption Technology. As a part of my academy training, I was sprayed in the face at point blank range with the strongest type of OC currently available. While experiencing the effect of the spray I had to attempt to perform tasks that included physically engaging a hostile opponent with hand to hand techniques, again with a baton, observing a suspect and giving an accurate description over the radio, and finally taking the suspect into custody. I was successful. I fought through the effect of the spray, as did many others in my class.

Using a police baton requires an officer to get very close to a suspect. During my Defensive training I managed to resist and even disarm the officer attempting to subdue me with a baton. Did I mention that I am only 5'5" and weigh only 150 pounds?

Finally, the Taser. Once hit with the probes, I dropped like a stone, unable to move. End of story. I also watched fifty other trainees get tased that day, and all fifty, without exception, went down immediately and were unable to move for the full five seconds of the discharge. We all agreed that it was the longest five seconds of our lives, but we all survived the training that day, and we are all alive now. From a practical use standpoint, it can be deployed from a distance of up to 35 feet. This equates to increased safety for the officer or officers involved.

There are individuals and groups who believe that the Taser should be banned from law enforcement. They argue that too many deaths can be related to its use and that some law enforcement officers abuse it. Using it excessively or when it isn't required.

I am not defending those who use the device inappropriately, and I am not denying that even in law enforcement there are some bad apples. I am however defending the Taser. Of all the less-lethal options available to police today, it is the most effective. One statistical study after another proves that officer injuries have been significantly reduced in agencies world wide since the introduction of Electro-Muscular Disruption Technology into the law enforcement community.

The purpose of this article is not to quote statistics. It is not intended to be a lesson about the technology behind the Taser. It is simply my testimonial that it is an extremely effective alternative to other methods of gaining compliance from otherwise uncooperative subjects.

I would ask that the individuals and groups opposed to the use of Tasers in law enforcement to consider the following. The alternative to less-lethal force is deadly force.

If the word deadly is not graphic enough to capture your attention, maybe this will help.

Your choice in a confrontation with the police is either being shocked into compliance with a tool that has very little chance of causing permanent injury or death, or being shot with a firearm. Large bullet or bullets entering the body in a bloody impact, shredding tissue. The latter is guaranteed to cause painful, permanent injury, and very possibly death. Shock or death, the choice shouldn't be too difficult.

In law enforcement, it is generally understood that your primary weapon is the firearm. It is not intended to be a defensive tool. Most officers hope and pray that they will never have to shoot anyone in the line of duty. Most have been trained to utilize every other option available before deadly force is considered. But given no other alternative, sometimes it becomes necessary. In most places, police are trained to kill with their firearms, not to injure. Police are trained to shoot center mass at target silhouettes shaped like human beings. In plain language, the area of the body that contains the vital organs.

As a law enforcement officer, faced with a hostile subject, I would much prefer deploying my Taser in order to gain compliance, than to engage with my pistol. This is true of most officers. We are after all, the good guys.

Thanks to modern technology, we now have a tool available to us that is intended to allow an arrest without a fight, without serious injury to the subject or the officer, and significantly reduces the need to escalate to the use of deadly force. You can't ask for better.

Opponents of Taser cite examples of misuse. It is sometimes branded as police brutality. Not nearly as brutal in my opinion, as being repeatedly struck with a baton, or worse, being shot. And of course, there have been isolated incidents in which death has occurred after a Taser has been used. In most of these incidents, other factors were proven by medical examiners to have been the primary cause for death.

While preparing to write this article I tried to take into consideration why some people are so opposed to the Taser. I believe that some are genuinely concerned that it poses a great risk to victims, but these I also believe are the exceptions. The greatest opposition comes from subjects, who themselves have been involved in a confrontation with the law that resulted in getting tased. Those opposed to its use may consider denouncing crime and the people committing crime, instead of complaining about the law and the manner in which it is enforced.

The bottom line, and my reason for writing this article are to try and promote a better understanding of the Taser and its use by law enforcement.

The Taser is a tool intended to reduce injuries to officers as well as criminals.

It is a means of gaining compliance from violent subjects with very little risk of death or serious injury and it is the best alternative to the use of deadly force.