[link|http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2007/11/you-gotta-ask-me-nicely-by-digby-when.html"|Digby].

When a man questions why a policeman has pulled him over and refuses to sign the ticket, the policeman electrocutes him to make him comply:

There seems to be a fundamental disconnect between the public's understanding of the purpose of a Taser and the way it is often used. My understanding is that it's a tool that is used as one step short of deadly force. Too many policemen seem to regard it as a convenient and simple way to punish people even when force isn't called for.

I was shocked to hear the explanations by Tom Smith, CEO of Taser International, on [link|http://www.cbc.ca/radioshows/AS_IT_HAPPENS/20071119.shtml|As It Happens] when he was questioned about [link|http://www.2solitudes.com/blogs-blogues/42/Tasered-to-Death-by-the-RCMP---The-Story-of-Robert-Dziekanski.html|Robert Dziekanski's death] at Vancouver International Airport. Smith said Tasers should not be used as an alternative to deadly force. They're just a "tool" like a nightstick to control a situation before it gets out of hand (or some such thing). Of course, he downplayed the dangers of the tool and denied that anyone died as a result of being tasered (the implication being that they had pre-existing conditions, etc.).

One advantage of the pervasive cameras and video on patrol cars and on street corners in many places is that abuses can be detected after the fact. But it doesn't help those who end up dying due to abuse by power-loving Sadists. Tasers may have a place in helping to control individuals without using deadly force, but it's apparent that they're being abused. Either training needs to be improved, or they need to be removed from the hands of people who abuse them. Preferably both.

Cheers,
Scott.