Police don't need more Tasers Police don't need more Tasers (December 30, 2005)

City officials who will decide whether to approve the purchase 100 more Taser guns for the police department would do well to look closely at the nine incidents in which Mountain View police officers have used the weapons.

A Voice review of police reports from those encounters, dating back to October 2004, shows that the X-26 Taser was more of a 50,000-volt convenience than a necessity for the officers, who primarily used it to subdue drunks and other incapacitated suspects. None of the suspects was armed, and most were shot with the Taser for failing to obey a command. A simple hammerlock or tap with a baton would have sufficed in almost every case.

But despite the implications of the incident reports, Police Chief Scott Vermeer said he intends to ask the council in January to purchase 100 of the guns, one for every member of the force. At about $700 a pop, the expenditure is not a huge amount for public safety, but that is not the point.

The issue is whether the Taser really is a non-lethal weapon as advertised by its manufacturer. That claim seems more dubious all the time, especially in light of recent testimonials, including some in the Bay Area.

The worst report card for Tasers comes from a recent study by the ACLU, which alleged that 15 people died after being shot by the stun guns in Northern California over the last year. Palo Alto has put plans to purchase Tasers on hold due to concerns about their safety, and the police chief in Newark, just across the Bay, has publicly argued against them.

And as reported in last week's Voice, the Police Executive Research Forum, a group that has studied the devices and published guidelines on their use, says police should avoid using Tasers on non-violent subjects or certain vulnerable populations.

Mountain View police already have 10 Tasers, and should continue their experimental phase with the weapon for another year. Before the department buys any more, it needs to set stricter guidelines on the weapon's use. For example, is it appropriate to use Tasers when someone simply fails to obey a command to sit down? Or when they're too drunk to stand? Is the Taser meant to be used in lieu of a handgun, during life-threatening situations? There seems to be very little thought on these points within the police department.

By waiting, city officials can assess whether the Taser is really an essential tool for law enforcement, or a fad that will fade away in a year or two. If the financial performance of the gun's manufacturer, Taser International, is a bellwether, it is best to wait and see. Taser stock has fallen to the $6 range from a high of $33.45 a year ago, as more and more police departments are having second thoughts about the company's products.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.