Posted on 05/22/2005 1:00:36 PM PDT by SmithL
A "NONLETHAL" weapon that has proved deadly in the hands of trained police officers does not belong on the streets of California.
State legislators are considering two distinct responses to plans by Taser International to make a big sales push for civilians to buy a lightweight stun gun that can deliver a 50,000-volt jolt of electricity up to 15 feet. The company claims its 7-ounce stun gun -- slightly heavier than a cell phone -- can flatten and temporarily incapacitate a target with a hit anywhere on the body.
Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, responding to concerns about the deaths of people zapped by Tasers wielded by police officers, introduced AB1237 to prohibit the manufacture, sale or possession of the weapons -- with an exemption for law enforcement use. Leno's bill also calls for a study of how they are being used by police officers and the effects on the intended targets.
The federal Securities and Exchange Commission recently announced that it was investigating Taser International's claims about safety studies on its weapon.
"There's just too many unanswered questions," Leno said. "There is a big, dark cloud hanging over the head of Taser International."
Taser has mounted a full-court press in the Capitol on behalf of a competing measure, AB101, by Assemblywoman Rebecca Cohn, D-Saratoga. She has argued that Californians should have an option other than firearms to defend themselves.
Cohn's AB101 would assure that remote stun guns continue to remain legal in the state -- with the establishment of an industry-maintained registration and tracking system. Cohn's bill also would require all remote stun guns to contain an "identification tracking system" that can show the serial number of the weapon that fired the electrode darts.
"My concern is, if there are those weapons out there, then we ought to have...
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I agree. Go back to guns, and remove any incentive for perps to resist arrest. When even the midwest Pregnant woman continues to resist inspite of a non-lethal weapon its time to rethink the theory.
Could the existance of these non-lethal weapons be the cause of the recent rash of problems? What I'm getting at is, if a bad guy sees a taser he is more apt to try to run, fight or do other foolishness. If the bad guy has a shotgun pointed at his head and is sure the policeman will pull the trigger, he is more likely to stop his foolishness.
That is unless the bad guy is a raving lunatic.
This will all lead to a very amusing backfire:
Defense contractors are developing "nonlethal" microwave weapons.
A 1000 watt microwave klystron will cost you $50, not counting what you might make off the other parts of the oven you can ebay.
Homebrew "perhaps not lethal" microwave weapons will proliferate, and giving Officer Taser the long range hotfoot will become great sport.
"Nonlethal" weapons lead to other problems, too, like police swabbing Mace directly into abortion protesters' eyes.
The police willingly performed this act of torture. And you will find people on this forum that will defend them for doing it.
That is now the face of "our" government.
Mark
Specifically, if you get hit in the eye by a Taser, chances are that you're going to die - 50kV down the optic nerve to the brain, ouch.
There's no such thing as a "non-lethal" weapon. Somebody, sometime is going to die from it, no matter what it is. Taser's mistake is in making that claim and/or allowing the notion to take root. The best thing for them to do would be to shift the discussion to how many fewer people are going to die from this than, say, getting whacked in the head with a club.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.