This guy gets tasered…and tasered…and tasered by a renegade taser gun that doesn’t turn off. I read somewhere (I thought) that extended shocks like that can be deadly. Am I wrong, or is he just really, really lucky? Skip to 1:30 for the tasering.
So the guy survived? plainly your titular question is answered.
It isn’t a renegade gun - it’s programmed to shock for 30 seconds. The idea is that you would use it on someone, then put it down giving you a head start to escape.
There is an electrophysiologist who believes tasers applied to the chest can be lethal, but I’d be surprised if he asserted a back shot could be lethal.
There are several timescales involved in determining whether a shock is deadly; first, if it is strong enough (and through the right part of the body) to stimulate the heart, a very brief shock (fraction of a second) will probably not cause fibrillation unless it occurs during the so-called “vulnerable period”, where the ventricles are recovering from the contraction. As you can see here, that is a relatively small part of the cardiac cycle, so such a shock has a relatively low chance of being fatal. On the other hand, very high currents cause cardiac arrest without fibrillation, such that the heart often resumes beating on its own without help if it is removed; obviously in this case the time factor is several minutes (of course, even higher currents will literally cook your body, but tasers can only do the first two).
As Wikipedia puts it, here are the factors that determine whether a shock is fatal or not:
Note that the current capability of the power source is also important (or if a capacitor, energy storage, with 5 joules or more being considered dangerous); this is why touching the HV supply of a CRT, up to 30 kV at less than 1 mA, a few mA short-circuit, isn’t fatal or even incapacitating (the CRT itself may store up to several hundred millijoules, well below the danger level), as I can personally attest to (they say in a following paragraph “shocks above 2,700 volts are often fatal… voltages over 40,000 volts are almost invariably fatal”).
Who?
There is nothing in the Taser training that says anything of the sort. In the last decade I’ve hit about 20 people in the chest, including several drive stuns, and all recovered quickly to continue being the fucking assholes they’ve always been.
There is a massive amount of ignorance regarding the Taser. It’s DC current, and while it has high voltage the amps are incredibly low. The horror stories you’ve heard about people bursting int flames are extraordinarily rare and happened after they had been sprayed with oil based OC.
The Taser in the OP worked exactly as it was designed to and was not a life threatening event.
Douglas Zipes is who. He regularly gets paid a great deal of money to testify against tasers. You shouldn’t expect taser to put him in the training material, as they don’t believe he’s correct.
It’s funny you mentioned fire - I hope they checked beforehand whether the spray was flammable.
Yes, it worked as intended, which made me worried about letting the guy fall toward a pool of water. Things could have gone wrong if he went face first into the water.
The human body is an incredibly flexible thing - what may kill one person, another may shake off; small changes in physiology - how hydrated, tired, heart problems, etc. - may make a difference.
The classic case in Canada was Robert Dziekański (Google Vancouver Airport taser). The guy was tasered 5 times (which probably worked out to less than the video). The mounties then stood around and watched him die, waiting for the ambulance from town (because the airport manager was having a snit with the airport first aid and refused to call them). If not for a bystander’s video (which the mounties conffiscated and surprisingly, did not delete) we would not know the details, and the fact that they lied under oath at the inquest.
Many people have died from being tasered. Most don’t. Taser has a history of suing to suppress or “correct” any inquest that blames a taser for a death. Doesn’t hide the fact, though - a shock like that may occasionally be fatal.
I would think the best analogy would be using a nightstick over the head (or a ball peen hammer). Most of the time the person recovers, occasionally not. We have just been brainwashed to think the taser is long-term harmless.
Maybe I am just out of practice but the little ex EMT in me will take 100 taser hits over 1 solid whack on the head with a ball peen hammer.
[quote=“md2000, post:7, topic:648088”]
The classic case in Canada was Robert Dziekański (Google Vancouver Airport taser). The guy was tasered 5 times (which probably worked out to less than the video). The mounties then stood around and watched him die, waiting for the ambulance from town (because the airport manager was having a snit with the airport first aid and refused to call them). If not for a bystander’s video (which the mounties conffiscated and surprisingly, did not delete) we would not know the details, and the fact that they lied under oath at the inquest.[\quote]
In what manner is it a “classic case?” Braidwood concluded, “I am satisfied that the response, which was significantly exacerbated by Mr. Dziekanski’s interaction with the RCMP officers, is the most likely cause of Mr. Dzienanski’s death.” (Braidwood Commission on the Death of Robert Dzienanski, page 335). The forensic pathologist who performed the autopsy concluded that Mr. Dzienanski’s cause of death was “sudden death due during restraint due to or as a consequence of chronic alcoholism.” Braidwood didn’t reach the same conclusion - he accepted that Mr. Dzienanski was in a hyperadrenergic state before the RCMP arrived and that the RCMP’s response, including use of a taser, made that state worse to the point it caused a lethal arrhythmia. What about this do you see as classic?
In what manner is it a “classic case?” Braidwood concluded, “I am satisfied that the hyperadrenergic response, which was significantly exacerbated by Mr. Dziekanski’s interaction with the RCMP officers, is the most likely cause of Mr. Dzienanski’s death.” (Braidwood Commission on the Death of Robert Dzienanski, page 335). The forensic pathologist who performed the autopsy concluded that Mr. Dzienanski’s cause of death was “sudden death due during restraint due to or as a consequence of chronic alcoholism.” Braidwood didn’t reach the same conclusion - he accepted that Mr. Dzienanski was in a hyperadrenergic state before the RCMP arrived and that the RCMP’s response, including use of a taser, made that state worse to the point it caused a lethal arrhythmia. What about this do you see as classic?
Can you prove your first assertion? I know that there are Internet lists that record reports of death proximal to use, but they don’t make allegations of causation. (And they don’t seem to remove reports even if it becomes clear that the death couldn’t have been caused by a taser).
One of Taser’s nasty little policies.
Wendy isn’t correct. Taser has always warned users to avoid shooting people in the genitals. Maybe you could point to where Wendy showed you Taser’s material that recommends shooting in the genitals? (She is almost accurate in one way - when using a taser as a contact stun gun, the instructions do suggest pushing it into the line where legs meet torso, but suggest avoiding the genitals.)
I suppose if the victim had been calm and quiet and not agitated during the five taserings, maybe he would have survived.
This: Taser safety issues - Wikipedia lists multiple instances.
I acknowlege, a healthy calm individual tasered (i.e. in a demostratin of the tech) likely would survive. the article suggests in real life situations, odds are about 1 in 1000 to 1 in 100,000. That would be good, if the taser were used as a weapon of last resort, but the articel puts it best:
I think a taser has a legitimate place in a police arsenal - but using it because a guy at a John Kerry Q&A won’t give up the microphone is at the outer limits of absurd for a potentially lethal weapon. I also think police are well aware of the pain involved and use it as a quasi-legitimate method of applying massive amounts of pain to punish uncooperative suspects.
md2000, do you understand that the man who held an inquest into Mr. Dzienanski’s death concluded that a taser wasn’t the direct cause of death? It what sense is Mr. Dzienanski a classic case? Is it that if things were different, the result might have been different? (I agree that a relaxed Mr. Dzienanski would be fine, but then he probably wouldn’t have attracted the attention of the RCMP. I also agree the result would likely have been different if the RCMP followed a more relaxed approach.)
You’ve asserted that tasers have killed many people. Do you have evidence to prove your assertion or do you just have anecdotes? When it comes to tasers, Wikipedia merely distiller the common misperceptions about tasers.
So we’re picking nits here.
the guy was agitated and perhaps dehydrated. No drugs or alcohol in his system. he was shocked with an extremely strong, virtually incapacitating electric shock.
Are you seriously arguing that uin his current state, being thrown to the floor and held there by 4 big RCMP officers would cause a fatality? if he’'d been calm and healthy, being shocked 5 times probably would not be a problem.
In all the cases listed in the article, I suspect there was some underlying condition that helped bring on the death. Yes, sometimes people die whilesimply being locked in a jail cell, no taser, no physical injury. However, there is a correlation between a significant number of deaths where an aggravating factor was tasering.
Which brings us back to the other end of the circular argument - no, you are very unlikely to die if you are healthy and calm. However, most people who struggle with the police are not that. This is why the taser comes out in th first place. For those victims, tasering is a significant aggravating factor.
If you want me to point to a death and say “taser and nothing else contributed to this death” - obviously, not. If you want to point to a death like Robert D and say “taser had nothing to do with it”, obviously not either. (The report blames chronic conditions but also his police restraint, which by definition includes the excessive tasering. The CBC study shows that taser shocks, especially repeated, can bring on “deadly ventricular fibrillation”. )
So we’re arguing in circles.
Tasers are a useful weapon, but it is not a “100% safe” weapon by any definition. I think its use instead of a gun is a really good idea. I think its use instead of “effective negotiation, physical restraint, or other enforcement tools” in many situations is not appropriate.
My argument isn’t close to what you seem to think it is. First of all, Braidwood concluded that the taser did not have a direct effect on Mr. Dzienanski’s heart, even though he believes a taser can directly affect a heart. Second, Braidwood accepted that Mr. Dzienanski was in an agitated state that meant that further agitation could be lethal. Finally, Braidwood concluded that the entirety of the RCMP’s interaction pushed the agitation to the point that he developed a fatal arrhythmia. I don’t have any reason to dispute this, but I’d still like to know what about this you regard as a classic case.
What is your evidence of correlation. How many of the people died from a drug overdose, from heart disease, or from a gun shot wound? Are you contending that a collection of anecdotes is data that proves correlation?
I don’t know what you consider as circular, but I suspect it has something to do with your unsourced final sentence. What are you using as evidence that tasers either caused many deaths or that they were a significant aggravating factor?
You’ve said that tasers have caused many deaths, so I would like you to provide references to support your assertion. I’ll start for you. Dr. Zipes published an article where he described a mechanism where a taser can directly cause a fatal arrhythmia. He lists about 8 instances where he concluded that a person’s death was directly caused by a taser. I’ll spot you those 8 deaths, but I don’t think you meant 8 when you wrote many.
I will agree that there are many instances when a taser was used and later the person died. If you only wrote that, I wouldn’t have asked for your source. But, you’ve gone farther. I’d like to know if you are just spouting common misperceptions or whether your assertion is based on evidence.
Of course it’s not 100% safe. I understand that tasers can be misused and overused. I would just like to see your evidence for asserting that it has caused many deaths. (If your evidence is that the Internet tells you it caused many deaths, then please let me know - that would provide enough information to get me to stop asking for your source.)
Many agencies have switched from an oil based OC to a water based one solely due to the Taser.
The good news is that you can survive a taser if shot while in a diabetic coma.
Curious. I was sure I read somewhere that a shock of much less than 30 seconds can be deadly. Obviously I misremembered what I read.