I don't care of there is a 1 in 1,000,000 chance of someone being killed through the use of a taser, that's too many to justify its use in non-deadly force situations.
Yeah, it is a heck of a lot better than using their 9mm to restrain the guy. [/sarc]
Look, pepper spray and CS gas can be deadly; night clubs can be deadly, a punch can be deadly. The point is that tasers are there to give police OPTIONS other than SHOOTING which has a much higher rate of death.
AND there's the post hoc ergo propter hoc problem.
But, yeah, standards of use are necessary.
As you acknowledge, “death by taser” is extremely, extremely, rare, and when used appropriately with instruction and training and with correct protocols, they actually save hundreds/thousands of lives. By that I mean, sometimes “deadly force” is the primary alternative to the use of a taser. Once employed there is usually no residual physical harm to taser use. Other alternatives might be sprays, sticks, or 2.5 lb flashlights and those have serious consequences in terms of damage.
Applying handcuffs occasionally causes death.
Incarceration occasionally causes death.
Baton use more frequently causes death.
Physical restraint occasionally causes death.
Service weapon is likely to cause death.
Resisting the police is not a safe activity.
The alternative is nightsticks,mace or both.
They also have deadly results in certain cicumstances but nightsticks will cause major trama.
Taser’s are fine...
Then maybe you should take a reality break.
There is a much greater chance than 1 in 1,000,000 of someone being killed in an officer simply responding to any given call.