Taser Parties

Posted by: ChristinaRodriguez

Taser Parties - 01/06/08 06:28 PM

Women's Taser Parties Story on CNN

I'm not entirely sure what to make of this. I guess it is "Girl Power" to want to arm yourself with a Taser, but if these women are still afraid to using lethal force even if it were to save their own necks (many of them don't want guns) I'm not sure they're learning anything.

I know that Tasers hurt, but I guess I don't really have much faith in them for serious stopping power. The "Don't Tase Me, Bro!" idiot didn't even pass out. Maybe I'm expecting too much? If an attacker is drunk or on drugs, do Tasers still pack as much of a wallop?
Posted by: Stretch

Re: Taser Parties - 01/06/08 06:45 PM

Yes...even if drunk or on drugs, although with certain drugs there may be some limitations. Tasers hurt, but that realization comes later....after the "tasee" has a chance to think about it. The taser, like the electrical charge that it is, renders your muscles almost useless....it's not designed to make someone pass out.

I agree that women afraid of guns or other deadly force weapons to protect themselves won't, generally speaking, be effective with tasers or anything else they may not have objection to. The ability to imagine the horrific nature of sudden, life-threatening violence from another human is sometimes impossible for those who have never experienced it. Good luck to 'em, I suppose.
Posted by: Stretch

Re: Taser Parties - 01/06/08 10:38 PM

Hehehe....me too. There isn't any fun in the "funny" way a good tasing makes you feel! laugh

Taze me bro! Do it again!
Posted by: Arney

Re: Taser Parties - 01/06/08 11:03 PM

Originally Posted By: Christina
I know that Tasers hurt, but I guess I don't really have much faith in them for serious stopping power.

From your comments, I'm assuming that you believe: 1) Tasers aren't particularly effective, and 2) You're supposed to be knocked unconcious. Neither is true of Tasers.

I have yet to see any credible refutation of the manufacturer's claim of 94% stopping ability in the field, so that's as effective as any handgun. Unlike "stun guns," Tasers don't work by generating pain; they cause your muscles to contract involuntarily so you can't control them yourself. That hurts, but the pain is a byproduct of how the Taser works.

You're rendered helpless while being shocked, but typically don't black out unless you fall and hit your head. You typically recover very quickly after the shock is stopped. The Taser model discussed in the article, the C2, automatically discharges for 30 seconds after firing. This gives the user the time to drop the Taser and then get the heck out of there while their attacker is incapacitated on the ground. That's how it's meant to be used in self-defense situations. Unlike a gun, where if you're put down, you're generally going to stay down until the police/paramedics show up, someone who is Taser'd can get back in the fight when the shock is ended so you need to get away while you can.
Posted by: Art_in_FL

Re: Taser Parties - 01/07/08 12:37 AM

Both 'stun guns' and tasers use essentially the same electrical method of gaining their effect.

There are claims that the waveform is different but both are mainly high frequency, high-voltage, low-amperage discharges. Stun guns do not rely on "pain". Both disrupt normal neural activity and disrupt and potentially exhaust the electro-chemical mechanism of muscular contraction. Doing it by over-driving it.

The only substantial difference is that the stun gun depends on exposed studs to make the connection while a taser uses darts that much more reliably make a good connection.

The advantage of a taser is it is less likely to be thwarted by heavy clothing and, being a projectile weapon, gives you some distance. The effect of a taser is often m
Posted by: OldBaldGuy

Re: Taser Parties - 01/07/08 01:22 AM

"...A friend of mine worked security for a local private airport and used it on me randomly for sheets and giggles..."

Is he/she still a friend? Still alive???
Posted by: ironraven

Re: Taser Parties - 01/07/08 02:33 AM

too much information.... whistle
Posted by: ironraven

Re: Taser Parties - 01/07/08 02:46 AM

Originally Posted By: Art_in_FL
Both 'stun guns' and tasers use essentially the same electrical method of gaining their effect.


Art, that is a REALLY interesting statement, and I would like a source that supports it. Preferably one prepared by members of the medical community who are neutral on the use of Tasers, rather than by a bunch of yahoos of unknown scientific pedigree and a political/economic stake in the matter.

The reason why I'm asking is because the targeted neuromuscular interference created by a current generation Taser is due to the fact that probes are under your skin. It's 26V (which is why everything has a "26" in the model number) at itsy-bitsy but variable amperages.

Unless you get under the skin, you are only going to cause pain until you get the point where you are overloading ALL of the nervous system. Your epidermis has a pretty decent resistance, it takes quite a few amps to get through it. Otherwise, all you are going to do is cause pain. Your average static shock you pick up from shuffling on carpet and touching a door knob is hundreds, if not thousands, of volts at almost no amps- it is the same reason why people's hearts don't explode and smoke roll out of their various orifices when they get poked with a quarter-million volt jabby-zappy stun gun.

Amps change what your nervous system is doing, volts just hurt. A contact stunner overloads a small number of sensory nerves, causing pain and maybe a minor burn. A Taser basically EMPs your voluntary nervous system for a few seconds, which while it hurts, the pain isn't why you are going down.
Posted by: ame

Re: Taser Parties - 01/07/08 03:00 AM

Originally Posted By: Christina
Women's Taser Parties Story on CNN

I'm not entirely sure what to make of this. I guess it is "Girl Power" to want to arm yourself with a Taser, but if these women are still afraid to using lethal force even if it were to save their own necks (many of them don't want guns) I'm not sure they're learning anything.

I know that Tasers hurt, but I guess I don't really have much faith in them for serious stopping power. The "Don't Tase Me, Bro!" idiot didn't even pass out. Maybe I'm expecting too much? If an attacker is drunk or on drugs, do Tasers still pack as much of a wallop?


Non lethal? How much "serious stopping power" do you want?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/15/taser_death_video/

Causing death is a bit of a wallop. That's the most recent one. There are more.

A
Posted by: Stretch

Re: Taser Parties - 01/07/08 03:53 AM

Ame,
You could say men are stronger than women, only to have someone point out that there are many strong women...stronger than men. It doesn;t make the first statement untrue. There are always exceptions.

Tasers are non-lethal just as bee stings are non-lethal. People who are allergic to the bee sting may die, just as a person may die from being "tased".

Tasers are non-lethal.
Posted by: ame

Re: Taser Parties - 01/07/08 04:25 AM

Originally Posted By: Stretch

Tasers are non-lethal.


Tasers have killed people, ergo, tasers are lethal.

A
Posted by: Stretch

Re: Taser Parties - 01/07/08 04:33 AM

Water killed a girl near San Francisco last year or year before. She drank too much at an outdoor event (water drinking contest).
Ergo, I stand corrected. - EVERYTHING is lethal.
Posted by: aardwolfe

Re: Taser Parties - 01/07/08 12:19 PM

Originally Posted By: ame
Tasers have killed people, ergo, tasers are lethal.


People have died after being hit with a Taser. That's not the same thing as being killed by a Taser.

The guy at Vancouver airport, for example, died after being zapped with two Tasers. However, the autopsy was unable to determine what killed him.

Are you aware of any Taser-related death in which it has been proven that the Taser caused or even contributed to the person's death? My understanding is that, in every case so far, it has either been determined that the Taser did not cause the person's death, or the autopsy was unable to pinpoint the cause of death.

I don't own stock in the Taser company or have any other vested interest in it, btw.

Posted by: Susan

Re: Taser Parties - 01/07/08 09:55 PM

People want the 'perfect' weapon.

They want something that will stop (100%) a seven-foot, 350lb guy on Angel Dust, but not harm or scare a child.

They want a gun that almost kills.

They want a weapon that will put a bad guy in suspended animation, but if he gets it away from them, he can't do the same to them.

IOW, people have been watching WAAAAAAY too much fiction.

Sue
Posted by: picard120

Re: Taser Parties - 01/08/08 02:24 AM

Originally Posted By: ironraven
too much information.... whistle


No, No. we need more info. this is better news than PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. election. grin grin
Posted by: ironraven

Re: Taser Parties - 01/08/08 02:32 AM

Ame, let's say you have left me no choice but to shoot you. I know, unlikely, but just for the sake of argument.

*holds up a Taser in my left hand*
*holds up a .45 in my right hand*

Choose, but choose wisely.

Seriously, I would love to find a completely non-lethal defensive device, I really would. But even in Star Trek, a repeated hits from a phaser set to stun can kill. Expecting a perfectly non lethal but perfectly and instantly effective wonder weapon is not realistic and never will be. "Non-lethal" is a myth, always will be. "Less lethal" is the goal people have in mind.

People have died due to allergic and sever asthmatic reactions from pepper spray and mace.

Various low-lethality projectiles can be used to kill, just aim for the head at very close range, even a blank can kill.

Batons can kill and maim very easily, anyone who's ever studied serious stick fighting knows that, or is just unlucky, particularly if someone is not able to feel pain or simply over powers you when you get close enough to try for locks.

Jabby-zappy stunners can't kill without some very odd circumstances, but do the the higher voltage if the planets are aligned wrong they are very easily able to do so- if they don't, someone can fight through them, and at knife fighting range...

And hand-to-hand requires a lot of training and isn't as effective against crazies and drunks as you might think unless you are willing to break bones and if need be kill them with your bare hands, because you have no stand off.

Realistically, the Taser is one of the best tools out there in terms of less-lethal, but it is only one of the ones available. There are ways in which it can kill. But I can kill and maim with my bare hands easier than I can with a properly applied Taser. If you are going to defend yourself, there is the possibility that only lethal force will work, or that the other guy is just unlucky and dies. That they might die is better than you dieing.
Posted by: benjammin

Re: Taser Parties - 01/08/08 02:00 PM

"It's a helluva thing, killing a man. You take away all he has, and all he's ever gonna have." Eastwood

The threat of lethal force deters crime. Anything less would be uncivilized. I don't use a taser, a stun gun, pepper spray, mace, or a stick for the same reason I don't bring a knife to a gunfight. An awful lot of violent crime is committed with a firearm, so I at least want to match the threat. Wouldn't you agree? At least that seems to be the most effective approach I've heard of.
Posted by: frenchy

Re: Taser Parties - 01/08/08 07:55 PM

now that you mentioned it .... if I could find one of these "Weapon Shops of Isher" .... grin
Posted by: aardwolfe

Re: Taser Parties - 01/08/08 08:33 PM

Look up "hyponatremia" on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyponatremia#Notable_cases

Notable cases

Matthew Carrington, a student at California State University in Chico, California, died of hyponatremia in February 2005 during a fraternity hazing ritual [1].

James McBride, a police officer with the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia, died of hyponatremia on August 10, 2005. Officer McBride had been participating in a strenuous bicycle patrol training course. During a 12-mile (19 km) training ride on the second day of the course, Officer McBride drank as much as three gallons (11 liters) of water[2].

Leah Betts[4] died on the 16th of November 1995 after taking an ecstasy tablet at her 18th birthday party and subsequently drinking too much water; the case received mass media coverage throughout the United Kingdom, which focused on the dangers of ecstasy.

In January 2007 Jennifer Strange, a woman in Sacramento, California, died following a water-drinking contest sponsored by a local radio station, Sacramento-based KDND-FM.[3]. The fact that the contest was called, "Hold your wee for a Wii" has led some to believe that not urinating is related to hyponatremia. This is untrue; this type of water intoxication is caused by excessive and rapid consumption of (sodium-free) water.

After completing the 2007 London Marathon, 22-year-old David Rogers collapsed and later died as a result of hyponatremia.[4]
--------------------------
As you say, *everything" is lethal in sufficient quantities.
Posted by: aardwolfe

Re: Taser Parties - 01/08/08 09:05 PM

Originally Posted By: IzzyJG99

The Canadian Government apparently had an independent medical examiner from the U.S. do another autopsy on the body. I believe it was Cyril Wecth who did it. He ruled that the death was most likely caused by prolonged use of not one, but two tasers on the man leading his heart to beat irregularly and stop functioning.


Is this the same Cyril Wecht who is facing 84 criminal charges in Pittsburgh?

PITTSBURGH - Attorneys for celebrity pathologist Cyril Wecht are trying to stop federal prosecutors from dropping more than half the 84 criminal counts he faces. (Posted on Thu, Jan. 3, 2008)

He appears to be someone who has built a very lucrative business as a consultant offering second opinions; I know that some of these "professional expert witnesses" have the reputation of saying whatever their employers want them to say, as long as it doesn't constitute outright perjury; although I don't know whether Wecht is one of them, I'd have to know a lot more about the man to give full credence to any of his testimony at this point.

I can't find anything on the web about an independent medical examination of Robert Dziekanski. Do you have a citation for it?


Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Taser Parties - 01/08/08 11:20 PM

Originally Posted By: IzzyJG99


The Canadian Government apparently had an independent medical examiner from the U.S. do another autopsy on the body. I believe it was Cyril Wecth who did it. He ruled that the death was most likely caused by prolonged use of not one, but two tasers on the man leading his heart to beat irregularly and stop functioning. Ironically enough he also said if they'd zapped him once more it might've kept him alive.


A second autopsy was not done, especially by the infamous Cyril Wecht....

There were some further toxicology tests ordered which findings have still not been announced..AFAIK.
Posted by: Arney

Re: Taser Parties - 01/09/08 06:18 PM

I like Tasers, so I am a bit loath to mention this because they seem so hokey, but anyone checked out the new leopard print version of the C2 that just came out for the Consumer Electronics Show? Or the new holster that also has a built-in MP3 player? It's on the Taser website.

There's also a new C2 infomercial on the Taser website, hosted by the familiar John Burnell. Not really informative at all. Actually, since it repeats the same limited info over and over, I have a feeling that the video was primarily meant to play at their CES booth, and not be viewed online or on TV.
Posted by: Art_in_FL

Re: Taser Parties - 01/10/08 10:37 PM

ironraven - "The reason why I'm asking is because the targeted neuromuscular interference created by a current generation Taser is due to the fact that probes are under your skin. It's 26V (which is why everything has a "26" in the model number) at itsy-bitsy but variable amperages."

Funny how you want documentation for my claims but then go on to claim a "fact" which is a canard. As the saying goes: 'You can have your own opinion but you don't get your own facts'.

Point being that I have a background in power electronics, understand how they work, and have been hit with both a taser and stun gun. Both feel quite similar. The taser was a little stronger but likely for the reason I mentioned previously.

I'm not used to doing research for people unpaid but you can find a few reasonably accurate answers here, I don't vouch for the site, it was one of the first to show up on a Google search. But the information lines up pretty well with what I already knew but no guarantees. You could track down the manufacturers site and check but I suspect these pages are copies of the manufacturers sheets.

http://www.tbotech.com/advancedtaser.htm

A few notes:

The M-18 taser is a very commonly used model by police. Lots of police around here use this model. I understand it is much like other designs.

The "26" you note is so commonly used in the model number is the wattage applied by the taser. Not the voltage. Actual input voltage for the M-18 is eight 1.5v batteries, 12v. Output voltage is claimed to be 50,000v. Sounds about right as it felt like a stun gun that also claimed a 50,000v output.


Further:
http://www.tbotech.com/taser-information.htm

A few quick notes:

The M-18 has a set of probes out front that allow it to be used as a stun-gun. See #8. Stun gun and taser share a common electrical mechanism.

The darts don't need to penetrate the skin. See #7. They claim the probes just have to get within 2" or the person to have some effect.

If you want more detailed answers, and have the finer points of biological and neurological effects filled in, your welcome to do your own research and report back. I have backed my claims and proved my point. Enough said.
Posted by: ironraven

Re: Taser Parties - 01/11/08 06:55 AM

Hi Art, I'm not trying to bust on you. Your first post made it sound like there was no difference between a Taser and contact stunner other than the probes, and that's just not so. If I misunderstood what you were saying, I apologize.

I did some digging- yeah, wattage. Lesson here, don't believe the gun rag articles. I had to dig through my back issues, and several of them did clearly say voltage. *blush* My bad for passing on bad data.

My background includes control systems- I've been shocked more than a few times. As I said, it hurts, but it rarely makes your muscle control overload. A few times my hand didn't want to obey me, but I could move my legs and my other hand. The only time I've really lost control was being cheap and stupid and trying to fix a CRT monitor, but that is a LOT more charge than anything we are talking about here. All the contact stunners are is DC, no pulsing, it is like hitting one of those newer, orange wire cattle fences. I've never seen a "stungun" that does what a Taser does, and I've owned and played with several stunners. Even built a couple.

The Tasers use a regulated pulse, it (mostly) jams specific nerves rather than hammering at every frequency. AC of any cycle is different from DC in how it makes your body react, and if you can tune the signal you are going to effectively turn nerves off by remote- or did I completely miss the point of several lectures in college? You are talking about the M18- is this the older one the M26 replaced? If so, the older generation delivered a different pattern of pulses and much less power. Same technology, but not as effective- that is why you have various rather infamous bits of footage with people continuing to effectively resist while being shocked.

You talk about how it "feels"- yes, it hurts. But how something "feels" is a subjective experience, not something that has quantifiable value. Personally, I think 25VDC at an amp hurts a lot more than household AC, but that doesn't mean that either one is less stupid to stick your finger into than the other. That 25V hurts about as much my old 40KV stun gun did as far as I could tell. I've seen pictures of a Taser's signal on an o-scope (nice spikes), and I've put stunners (DC transformer, no surprises when it is flat) on scopes myself- looks different to me. The results based on the body of collected evidence are also different. Ergo, the two classes of devices aren't the same.
Posted by: James_Van_Artsdalen

Re: Taser Parties - 01/11/08 09:33 AM

A taser can certainly kill someone - depends on all sorts of things. It takes very little amperage to interfere with the hearthbeat, but it has to be in the right place. People with implanted pacemakers and the like are definitely going to be vulnerable depending on where you hit them. There have also been quite a few deaths in the US where, like the Canadian guy, there is no other explanation.

(some people survive lightning strikes that conduct through them so you can't say tasers always kill. Then again, lightning strike victims often die too)

Anyone using a taser needs to keep in mind it might well be fatal, and you don't know ahead of time if the target has a defibrillator implant, etc. When it's needed fine - it's less risk of death than a .45! - but keep in mind there is a risk. "Backtalk" is not a good reason.

And use the time to escape! If someone uses such a weapon on me you can bet that if I don't see a police uniform after I recover I will use all means available to defend myself against another attack...
Posted by: ChristinaRodriguez

Re: Taser Parties - 01/11/08 03:46 PM

Originally Posted By: Arney
I like Tasers, so I am a bit loath to mention this because they seem so hokey, but anyone checked out the new leopard print version of the C2 that just came out for the Consumer Electronics Show? Or the new holster that also has a built-in MP3 player? It's on the Taser website.


Hokey indeed. The built-in MP3 player is, in my opinion, a major design flaw. Everybody knows that a chick listening to music and tuning out the rest of the world makes a prime target. They're just encouraging lax behavior instead of reinforcing situational awareness.

I can't tell how big it is, but purse space is often at a premium and designers need to keep size and weight in mind. It is easy to get a chick to carry pepper spray precisely because the units can be tiny.

Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Taser Parties - 01/11/08 04:09 PM

There was another Taser related death in Canada at a Nova Scotia prison. Sounds like the Canadian taser laws might end up getting even more strict in the near future.
Posted by: Arney

Re: Taser Parties - 01/11/08 05:34 PM

Originally Posted By: Art_in_FL
The only substantial difference is that the stun gun depends on exposed studs to make the connection while a taser uses darts that much more reliably make a good connection.

I suppose there's some personal judgement involved, but I would disagree that the main difference is just at the point of contact. If I hooked up two long wires to the probes of a stun gun and clipped them to someone, I would still say that the Taser is delivering a different type of discharge.

Stun guns are very high voltage (I see 1 million volt models advertised), low amperage, DC devices. Usually only a handful of mA of current, which your typical 9V battery can support.

From this article:
Introduction of the Taser into British policing. Implications for UK emergency departments: an overview of electronic weaponry. Emerg Med J 2004;21:136–140

The authors state, "The Advanced Taser delivers a sequence of half sine wave current pulses, each having a peak amplitude of about 18 amps and a duration of about 11 microseconds. The peak voltage output of the device is as high as 50 000 volts." Still DC, but now rapidly pulsing, unlike the constant DC discharge of a stun gun. Tasers don't use as high a voltage as many/most stun guns but are higher powered, requiring a brick of AA batteries or a lithium ion battery pack, as in the new C2 model. The authors don't mention whether the pulsing characterstics are constant or change, so it's possible that the Taser unit adjusts the discharge as well, but that's just conjecture on my part. For example, perhaps the peak amplitude is highest at the start of the discharge, but gradually tapers because the subject's muscles will be quite fatigued by then, particularly at the end of a 30-second long C2 discharge. I only mention this possibility because of some foggy recollection of something I read a long time ago regarding the Taser, but maybe it was just marketing BS.

The authors further explain that it is thought that the high frequency pulsing helps protect the subject of a Taser strike from cardiac disturbances from the discharge because high frequency discharges will tend to remain on the surface of the conductor, in this case, the skin. Like a Faraday cage effect. This helps protect the heart and other internal organs from the brunt of the discharge, particularly the longer shock times (30 seconds) of the C2 model, and would theoretically seem to help distribute the charge to even more muscles and nerves near the skin than a simple DC current would propogate. (my opinions, not the authors')

Is this really different or just a tweak of the same thing? Well, that's in the eye of the beholder, I suppose. But to me, a stun gun does not work the same as a Taser, although Tasers are an evolution of the original stun guns, so of course, there is a great deal they have in common.
Posted by: ironraven

Re: Taser Parties - 01/12/08 02:08 AM

Canada seems to be having an abnormal number of fatalities compared to the US and EU. I doubt the devices are different, and I strongly doubt Canadians are all that different internally (even if we can't teach you to say "out" right :P ). That leaves how the tool is being used.

I've heard a couple of places that some of your Taser fatalities had multiple units shocking them at the same time. That just sounds like a bad idea, from a signals perspective.