Beacon Journal – 11/18/06, found via Overlawyered.com:
The makers of the controversial Taser guns have filed a lawsuit against the Summit County medical examiner, challenging her rulings that have linked the weapon to two area deaths.
The lawsuit filed Friday is just another twist in the debate over the safety of the stun-gunlike weapon, which sends 50,000-volt shocks into its target and is said to be linked to dozens of deaths across the United States.
As a result, police, who initially hailed the Taser as a life-saving alternative to firearms, are growing increasingly reluctant to carry the device.
Taser International Inc. lawyers claim in their suit that Medical Examiner Lisa Kohler lacks the expertise to connect its weapon to the 2005 deaths of Dennis Hyde, 30, and Richard Holcomb, 18, both of Akron.
In each case, Kohler listed a police officer’s use of the Taser as a contributing factor in the death.
Holcomb died in May 2005 after being stunned with a Taser by a Springfield Township police officer. Hyde died in January of that year after being shocked with a Taser by Akron police.
Kohler’s office listed the cases as homicides and said the electrical shocks by the Tasers contributed to the deaths.
Is it that hard to belive that electricity actually kills people? Holy crap no way? You mean if I get electrocuted I could die? Maybe they figure that they are safe because they just “almost” kill you. Peoples tolerances to everything differ from person to person. It is not hard to belive that a “light weight” could be killed by one of these devices.
And the doctor couldn’t possibly have her own agenda in this. The Tazer has been used on thousands of people without ill effects. Anti everything police tried the same thing with pepper spay years ago and it was proven that those deaths were caused by something else, usually drug related and not to the OC spray as many had claimed. Many see the Tazer as a further escalation of police powers. Just think how many people who have been tazed, would have had to have been shot with a real gun had the Tazer not been available.
I do agree though that some in the LE community are relying too heavily on the Tazer when other means would also work.
“The Tazer has been used on thousands of people without ill effects.”
So is the fact that most people survive automobile accidents proof that no one dies from automobile accidents?!
The Taser can contribute to an accidental death if the subject has other (often invisible or unknown) medical problems.
An Officer’s nightstick can do the same thing.
And we won’t even mention what an Officer’s sidearm can do.
Even OC (pepper spray) or earlier non-impact weapons (CS, CN) can kill people with respiratory issues.
These devices are now always called “Less Lethal”. Meaning that while they might kill you, they shouldn’t. This is going to get some people dead, I’m sure, but it beats the “guaranteed” effect of a bullet….
I suppose Tasering a drunk or somebody having “issues” (like a diabetic reaction) may be a very bad idea (and is going to be dangerous), but those whose activity volitionally invites such treatment need to think about the risks first. Getting killed while actively performing illegal acts shouldn’t be a lottery win for their relatives.
Regards,
#3 SN – Nothing in life is 100% safe. You could die choking on a chicken bone at dinner. The point is, its better then using a regular firearm which is usually 100% fatal. I agree the Tazer may be overused, but it is a valuable law enforcement tool that some are trying to eliminate, due to personal reasons and agendas.
#5 “You could die choking on a chicken bone at dinner.”
Maybe cops should hand out fried chicken to disruptive people. If a cop told me he’d give me a bucket of fried chicken if I left someplace, I’d be out of there faster than you could say, “Where’s the gravy?”
2 The Tazer has been used on thousands of people without ill effects.
From the article:
In the lawsuit, Taser attorneys say the weapon “has been shown to be among the least injurious force options for both the officer using force and the resistant subject” and that medical experts have found the weapon “to be one of the safest use-of-force options.”
If “among the least injurious” is the best they can say, how can they claim it was not a contributing factor?
Or, is the marketing department just upset they were labeled “homicides”? 😉
Reminds me of the Monty Python skit about the Wizzo Chocolate Company’s “Crunchy Frog”.
SN – I sense from your posts that you are one of those I spoke of that have an agenda against the Tazer.
#2, gq,
It is precisely this line of argument that puts the police in a bad light. When you claim that the mere questioning of a police activity is now “anti-everything police” not only denigrates the police, but their very authority. The police are there to protect society from societies dangers. They are not there to abuse people, harass those exercising their Constitutional rights, or to make up their own laws.
I don’t know of anyone that wants to deny police the opportunity or tools to do their job well, efficiently, and timely. It does appear that there are people that believe the police should have an unfettered right to do anything they wish in order to accomplish the job as they see fit. If you want the police to have so much power, then try living in a police state such as China, Egypt, Burma, Belarus, Kazakhstan, or Mongolia.
From a technical standpoint, even if the person has a medical condition or drugs in his system and dies when 50,000 volts of current is passed through him, the tazer can be a contributing cause of death.
It is akin to the fall from an airplane won’t kill you, it’s the sudden stop at the bottom.
Besides, I doubt this suit will go very far. As a government employee in the course of her official duties, she is immune to a personal law suit. They would have to demonstrate she exceeded her legal authority for it to even be considered.
The cops need to make better use of the ‘stun’ setting. Do they even have power settings? If not, maybe they should.
Yes, I was going to say – I wonder if I can patent my idea to turn down the power on a Taser?
RBG
“I wonder if I can patent my idea to turn down the power on a Taser?”
Yeah, the lowest setting would be for annoying little old ladies, next would be for annoying non-violent protesting students, up next would be for any black dudes wearing hats, and the very top setting would be for anyone standing in between the cop and his donut!
They should construct an electrical grid in the streets of America – creating one enormous Taser. Then, whenever word hits the donut shops about a crime being committed, or jaywalking or overdue library book, they can just “Initiate Taser!” and ask questions later. Those who are innocent have nothing to fear, except of course getting Taserfied.
One out of every 1000 Ferengis phasered, even with it set on stun, still experience medical complications. Does this mean the Federation should abandon the use of the weapon? No, it saves lives.
I understand the donuts are free in Annapolis Mall.
RBG
Just like guns,
TAZERS don’t kill people, people kill people.
But, unlike SN, most people resisting arrest or defying police will not stop if the police officers hand them some KFC. Between shooting with a gun and using a tazer I believe the tazer is the better choice. Every time I have ever heard of tazer deaths, the victim was in some type of drug induced rage (most often cocaine) and their ticker just stopped due to the large amount of drugs and adrenaline flowing through their bodies, combined to the high voltage, low amperage tazer shot. On a normal, healthy person, a tazer cannot kill them. Although it looks like the large voltage could really hurt someone, it is the amperage that matters. (The tazer almost has no amperage, the tik.tik.tik you hear when it is fired is the electricity. There are short pauses at rapid intervals to keep the amperage at a SAFE level.) If police officers didn’t have tazers, many of the people that were sucessfully arrested may have been shot an killed. PS- I do not believe that shooting students/black people wearing hats is a proper use of a tazer.
“But, unlike SN, most people resisting arrest or defying police will not stop if the police officers hand them some KFC.”
I hope you realize that was a joke, right?
“Between shooting with a gun and using a tazer I believe the tazer is the better choice.”
I agree, but those are never the sole choices available. Are you saying the sole choices to police in making someone remove his hat is either a taser or a bullet?! I think there are a wide range of ways that “problem” could have been solved.
And you’re missing the heart of this story. I don’t care if the taser kills anyone or everyone. The problem I have is that the company who builds the taser is suing some cop who connected the taser to some deaths. To me that’s complete BS.
First, it is a medical examiner that is being sued. And yes I realized that you were joking and I was joking as well. To clarify, I will repeat: “PS- I do not believe that shooting students/black people wearing hats is a proper use of a tazer.” And, until now your posts have not had a direct hit on the heart of the story either 🙂 About Tazer International suing: I am not advocating it or against it. They are just somewhat overzealous about defending their product, or maybe just right – considering the passion with which some people bash the tazer.
“They are just somewhat overzealous about defending their product, or maybe just right”
No, they are way beyond overzealous, they are frivlous. That’s what you call someone who files a lawsuit without any legal basis.
There were deaths and a medical examiner made reports. What legal right does Taser Inc have to make the medical examiner change her report? They have no legal interest in either estate of the decedents. They are third parties.
If they disagree with the result, then they can hire a doctor to say that. They can run ads saying that the medical examiner was wrong and that Tasers are as safe as mom’s apple pie. But I don’t see any basis under the law for them to force the medical examiner to change her opinion. What they are doing is a complete abuse of the legal process and I can only hope a judge throughly spanks them.
But the real purpose behind the lawsuit is actually even worse. Their real goal is to put future medical examiners in fear of being sued, “I better not mention that 50,000 volt jolt to his heart, I don’t want to be sued like that other examiner!”
So in essence, Taser Inc is trying to shut down any debate about the use of tasers by suing people who happen to disagree with them.
I agree that it is a bit extreme, but if they cannot prove their product is safe ( a medical examiner says it kills for example) they will lose their market share to policing institutions because cops already carry guns and don’t need another lethal sidearm on their belts. And until they roll out their C(citizen)-class tazer they will be losing big time. –once that comes out I bet you will have plenty more “TAZER INSANITY!” to report on–
Unlike the tobacco companies days gone by, Tazer International actually has a helpful product and are determined to defend it. Since in our North American society it is the norm to sue if you disagree with someone I think Tazer Int. isn’t being that overzealous. This is my opinion, and you are entitled to yours. 😉
And if you want to get into abuse of the legal system, lets start a thread in the cagematch forums about Bush’s bending of the rules and good ‘ol warcrimes.
“if they cannot prove their product is safe ( a medical examiner says it kills for example) they will lose their market share to policing institutions because cops already carry guns and don’t need another lethal sidearm on their belts.”
But they can address that, as I already said, with advertising. Let’s say that a police department is having second thoughts about buying Tasers because of that medical report. Taser Inc’s sales person could give the department a study it conducted with top physicians showing that the taser was not related to the deaths.
I guess my point is this, merely because Taser Inc wants to collect profits is no basis to file a frivolous lawsuit or to kill an open debate about a controversial topic.
Heck, to me if anything would kill their marketshare, it would be suing police who complained about their products. Why would anyone buy a Taser knowing that Taser Inc has no problem suing them?!
Heck, to me if anything would kill their marketshare, it would be suing police who complained about their products. Why would anyone buy a Taser knowing that Taser Inc has no problem suing them?!
Comment by SN — 11/23/2006 @ 6:00 am
Maybe taser thinks it would be cheaper then buying all that KFC?
🙂
I think Taser Inc knows that if medical examiners determine that the Taser caused a death or contributed to it, it would open them up to “wrongful death” lawsuits. Hence their lawsuit against the medical examiner in question.
i think tasers should be controlled.
what if gangs carried these around and taser people everywhere and just get the stuff from them?
no more conscience from killing and no need for bullets and knives.
Has the company done any studies on tasering people with heart problems, like heart murmers?
I just heard a 90yrs old woman was tasered…are you kidding me. You are telling me a cop cant restrain a 90yr old without using a weapon. My friend is a social worker she is 5′ 4″ and weighs about 130lbs, she is a social worker and must restrain patients at times and she has no problem. So I dont understand how a trained cop cant restrain someone without using a taser.
What is wrong with the night stick. I would much rather be hit across the head with that thing than electrocuted. Something must be done…….