TASER
Electronic Control
Devices (ECD / ECW)
“Protecting Life”
Town Meeting Article 34 (Id 67)
May 2011
Justification for Taser





No evidence that other law enforcement force
option is safer than a normal use of a Taser.
Tasers are more effective in facilitating capture,
control and restraint than other force options
Tasers are generally safer per se and are usually
safer than other force options
Courts have held that ECW’s are not excessive
force per se
Tasers are saving lives, reducing injuries to
officers and suspects, and reducing excessive
force claims
2011 – Society’s View of Force
Police Officers should:
Use the least amount of
force
 Use the least injurious
force option
 Be patient and
understanding
 Be tolerant of people
acting out


Know the difference
between a person who:
– Presents an intentional
immediate threat of harm.
– Is fleeing from serious
physical harm
– Needs medical or mental
health crisis assistance
2011 – Society’s View of Force
Officers are often judged on outcomes of force
used (death, serious injury)
 Officers should not hurt a person whose
intentions are not immediately threatening
 Non-violent people should not be injured- people
who need to be controlled may be:
A. Acting as they are due to a medical crisis
B. Acting due to serious psychological
distress
C. Drug and alcohol abusers

Common Quotes

The news has several ready made quotes
for Officers’ use of deadly force
– “Why couldn’t they shoot him / her in the leg”
– “Why couldn’t they have sent a dog”
– “Why didn’t they let me speak with him / her”
– “They didn’t even try to talk with him / her”
– “Why couldn’t they have tased him /
her”
What is our objective for using
force?

Defensive Force – Subject reasonably
perceived by the officer as an immediate threat
of harm
 Capture Force – Subject fleeing from serious
(physical harm) crime & officer is justified in
subduing subject
 Restraint Force – Force to facilitate restraint
 Compliance Force – Force to gain compliance
to commands
ECW how it works
It captures skeletal
muscles
 The electrical current
“tends to favor” the
grain of the muscle by
10:1 going against
the grain, so current
tends to stay on the
outside
 4000 ECW uses per
week in the US.

ECW Deployment

Probe deployment
– Taser ,generally, is
more than a nonserious or trivial use of
force but less than
deadly force
– Taser is higher force
than OC and baton

Drive Stun
Deployment (not
recommended)
– Less than the probe
deployment
– Amount of force more
on par with pain
compliance techniques
ECW Force – Probe Deployment







Pain: excruciating, intense pain felt throughout
entire body
Probes penetrate up to ½” into body
Causes Neuro Muscular Interference (NMI)
Taser “Commandeers” muscles and nerves
Causes temporary paralysis (seconds)
Causes uncontrolled fall
Immediate relief occurs after application ends
Drive Stun Deployment
Drive Stun Deployment (Not
Recommended)
 Pain: only transitory, localized
 No NMI
 Non-incapacitating effect
 Without incapacitating muscle contractions

ECW Safety Points
ECW Safety Points
50,000 volts NEVER goes through the body- actually
600 volts
 The pulse has less peak current than a strong static
shock
 The skeletal muscles tend to shield the heart from
current
 99.75% of the time suspects have no significant
injury as a result of using the device (DOJ)

Source: Bozeman, W., et al. Safety and Injury Profile
of Conducted Energy Weapons Used by Law
Enforcement Officers Against Criminal Suspects,
Annals of Emerg. Med. 2009
ECW Safety Points
 The
pulse is 50-200 times too short
to efficiently stimulate the heart
 It has less than HALF of the current
allowed by the electric fence
standards
 It has less current than some pain
blocking stimulators
Dept
Orlando, FL
Austin, TX
Phoenix, AZ
Columbus, OH
Officer
Injuries

60%

53%
*

23%
Suspect
Injuries
Lethal Force
Force
Complaints
 50%
*
*
 80%
*
 32%
 67%  54%
 24%
14
“saves”
CharlotteMecklenburg, NC
59%  79% 19 “saves”
Orange County FL
80%
*
 78%
*
 25%
*
*
ECW’s usually more effective
than other force options:



Every other force option (Baton, OC,
Handgun) uses pain/discomfort compliance or
traumatic injury to facilitate capture, control
or restraint.
ECW’s are usually safer force options and less
injurious to suspects and officers.
ECW’s can reduce the use of deadly force
ECW Smart Use Guidelines
Policy must be approved by EOPSS
 Clearly delineated force standards insure
proper use and accountability
 Accomplishes the lawful objective of the
minimum (least amount of) force goal

ECW’s have more accountability
features than other force options
Records every safety activation, trigger
pull, arc, etc.
 Taser cam records video and audio
 Records pulse by pulse determination of
electrical discharges
 Data download and AFID evidence
 MASH Test to determine causes of in
custody deaths where taser was deployed

– Reliable forensic tool to determine excited
delirium as a cause of death
Taser Cam
Cost Savings
Fewer officer-hours lost to injury
 Fewer investigations of injuries to subjects
 Fewer excessive force claims
 Use has reduced excessive force litigation
by 54% -Michigan Municipal Risk Management Authority

Study 2004 – 432 Taser deployments, 40 + agencies, 1 injury
requiring hospitalization ZERO claims of excessive force
Taser in Action
Supporters of ECW's
U.S. Department of Justice – Office of
Community Oriented Policing Services Director
Bernard K. Melekian
 Police Executive Research Forum, Executive
Director Chuck Wexler
 Dr. Alex Eastman, M.D. Trauma Surgeon and
reserve officer with Dallas PD
 ACLU Atty. Scott Greenwood, National Expert on
Police Use of Force cases and authority on Taser
related legal issues.

Interview of Atty. Scott Greenwood
on May 5, 2011
Atty. Greenwood has the most legal
experience in the use of these weapons in
the ACLU
 The only Constitutional Lawyer present at
creation of 2011 ECW guidelines (PERF,
DOJ)
 Studied policies and implementation in
almost all jurisdictions in the country

ACLU Atty. Greenwoods
Opinions
ECW’s are less injurious
than less lethal and O.C.
 Every Department that
has them has seen a
decrease in injuries to
officers and subjects
 They decrease and
eliminate confrontations
that can escalate to
deadly force.

ACLU – Atty. Greenwood
“I am convinced they present the IDEAL
compromise when having to resort force.”
 ECW’s offer the lowest risk vs. highest
reward.
 “In the future, suits may come from
departments not using Tasers when they
would have been appropriate.”

ACLU – Atty. Scott Greenwood

Addressed the concerns of injuries and death as
a result of ECW’s;
– In his research 30-40 deaths that are attributed to
ECW’s, The medical Examiners did not rule out other
contributing factors in causes of death.
– Atty. Greenwood stated, “Statistically, this number is
insignificant, The facts are overwhelmingly in favor to
get them. Every department that has them has seen,
without exception, a decrease in injuries to officers
and subjects.
Final Words
–“There is Zero justification to be
against these weapons.”
(May,5 2011)
Attorney Scott Greenwood
General Counsel to American Civil Liberties Union
Work: (513) 943-4200
Email: Law@ScottGreenwood.com
I’m a Believer!
May 7, 2011