Taser Advisory

Police Limit by Garey McKee
Police Limit by Garey Mckee

Taser recently issued an advisory on the use of their product. The advisory can be found here. The advisory has sparked debate on its use all through law enforcement. Is this cartoon a fair representation of Taser’s advisory? Are departments altering their policies and training with the Taser? If you carry a Taser how do you think this will change your deployment of the device?

Share This Post:
bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark


22 Comments »

  1. jmur5074 Says:

    I’ve stopped carrying my taser as a result of their recent memo. Muscle memory kicks in and under stress I will point my taser right at the suspects chest. I’ll stick with my other intermediary weapons.

    comment-bottom
  2. kjlaw Says:

    As a taser instructor I received the advisory and all of the follow-up infirmation from Taser. I beleive that the law enforcement community and the media are taking an advisory that was intended to be used under “best case sceniero” and taking it to be a hard rule. My department issues the Taser and we have not altered our training as a result of the recent information.

    comment-bottom
  3. lewisipso Says:

    Companies protect themselves. This is what is happening and nothing more. Any product designed for law enforcement is subject to a law suit including the officer. This is another way to attempt blame shift to the pockets of the agency. I don’t carry a taser. My department does not allow it. They probably never will.

    comment-bottom
  4. Ross Says:

    I think this is a bunch of crap. It is Taser just trying to cover their asses.

    comment-bottom
  5. Five-0 Says:

    I also am not issued a taser. Thanks to this advisory most likely will never get the chance. Has an officer getting exposed to taser certification ever died? Hmmmm. I wonder why not?

    comment-bottom
  6. zap Says:

    Also as a Taser instructor, I have notified our officers of the advisory. However, as kjlaw points out, those are best sceniero recommendations, not rules of engagement. The face and neck have always been a red zone for a Taser shot and will be avoided as much as possible. Shifting the preferred (not mandatory, but preferred) aim zone down away from the face and neck is a liability lessoning move in my opinion. If I need to tase someone, and the chest is all there is, that is where they will get hit.

    comment-bottom
  7. pgg Says:

    We just ordered tasers. The use of force policy regarding them has not been issued yet. I don’t know how this will effect them. I remember all the lawsuits and claims that pepper spray was killing people years ago. Just like Tasers, no death has been the direct result of pepperspray. I eventually see Tasers getting accepted as the norm like pepper spray did.

    That said, it seems to me I’m more then likely going to want to use the taser if someone is directly attacking me. That means a frontal body hit. If they want those avoided what good is it?

    comment-bottom
  8. lewisipso Says:

    Five-0
    “Has an officer getting exposed to taser certification ever died? Hmmmm. I wonder why not?”
    Not that I’m aware of and could possibly have a lot to do with we are not ususally illegal narcotics users and fight with law enforcement. But that’s just me.
    PGG
    “If they want those avoided what good is it?”
    None. Enforcement should just tase and hand over a check in the desired amount right then. It’ll save time.

    comment-bottom
  9. berserk Says:

    I think a lot of people are overreacting to the advisory. Before the advisory came out, my agency had already started training to aim a little lower in order to split the belt line w/ the probes & provide better NMI. I don’t think this advisory will significantly affect taser deployments for us.

    I still don’t carry one, but that’s just a question of personal preference and not enough room on my belt. I’m already carrying two other intermediate weapons, and most of my fights are solved by going hands-on.

    comment-bottom
  10. I’m Garey Mckee, the author of Police Limit comic strip. I have a publishing agreement with Police One.com to publish my strip on their website

    http://www.policeone.com/columnists/police-limit-comic/

    My editor at Police One unfortunately refused to run this strip. In fact Police One, as a law enforcement news portal, was VERY careful to ere on the side of caution with the opinions they chose to publish regarding the debate with Taser’s advisory. Why you ask? Come to find out Taser is one of Police One’s sponsors. I found it a bit disappointing they would care more about keeping their sponsor rather than presenting opposing sides of a debate. If anything, this concern with Taser has brought to light the fact that you have to be very careful in trusting your news sources and their biases, even the sources delivering law enforcement and tactical news.

    Who knew it was bad form to suggest your publisher’s sponsors had no balls? Ok, I knew it but I did it anyway!

    comment-bottom
  11. Pudge113 Says:

    Way to hang thousands of street cops out to dry, Taser International. If the stock prices weren’t crap you could bet I’d be selling my shares and investing in a company with some backbone.

    Unfortunately, some department trainers don’t see this as the “best case scenario” advisory it had been intended to be. I was informed of the advisory literally as I was returning from the jail after tasing a woman in the chest. She’s alive, well, and fine. My Department’s trainers have already taken this to heart, and are sure to ask us to change out methods in the next training. It’ll likely end up being blanket policy, rather than a guideline. Gee, thanks Tase.

    comment-bottom
  12. Smooth Says:

    Garey Mckee,

    If you feel this way about policeone.com why would you provide them with your comics? I think your strips are very good. If I were you I would go somewhere that appreciated the work you do.

    Policeone.com and these other law enforcement sites that are owned by companies seem to run this as a business. The thing I love most about OfficerResource.com is the fact that cops own and run the site. They have not lost touch with what sites likes these are for. They are not for someone to get rich but rather a place where cops can come and share stories, intell, tips, and just form networks.

    Hats off to you Garey Mckee for speaking you mind on this issue.

    Hats off to the owners, and staff members of OfficerResource.com for providing what I believe is the best Law Enforcement site on the internet

    comment-bottom
  13. Car 4 Says:

    On our department, Tasers are a general issue item. Nearly everyone has one and with literally thousands of uses, we have yet to have any kind of an incident. On the other hand, we have avoided countless injuries to officers, suspects and others on the periphery of an altercation by use of this instrument.

    I doubt that our agency will change our training without a thorough internal review.

    Car 4

    comment-bottom
  14. As a Uk officer about to undergo taser training(Previously only issued to firearms officers in my force)my understanding is that here taser use will be regarded as a less lethal option than a baton strike.
    Tasers limited use here is yet to see any lawsuits etc,but the feeling is that it is better to see one officer subdue with taser than 4 or 5 baton someone into submission!

    comment-bottom
  15. Jenna Says:

    Sorry your cartoon was censored, Garey McKee. It’s funny and right on target. It wouldn’t be censored here. Unlike many other sites, officerresource.com is owned and run by LEOs who do it to provide a service for the LEO community rather than for profit.

    comment-bottom
  16. Smooth, Police One does operate their websites like a business because they are a business. A business who offers to compensate their contributors financially!

    comment-bottom
  17. Smooth Says:

    Geary,

    From the tone of you comment it seems that you may be no different than P1. In it just for the money!

    comment-bottom
  18. I like the fame and the chicks too. But you asked why I allow Police One to use my work. That’s my honest answer. I don’t shy away from the truth.

    comment-bottom
  19. admin Says:

    Garey,

    We have way hotter chicks over here! I sent you an email if you want to talk!

    comment-bottom
  20. LEO GEAR Says:

    It is sad that our society has become so litigious. Taser seems to be responding to the glowing articles you see in the news so often.

    As a training company, we had the memo sent to our office. It will be mentioned during training, however, we will still focus on officer safety first. A chest hit (avoiding red zones) works. Do what you need to do so that the threat stops….period.

    It saddens me that LEO’s may hesitate to use a less lethal option because of (usually biased) news reports that cause public outcry.

    Our company also offers civilian Taser and not one civilian student has ever expressed concern over using Taser in order to save their life.

    I shall hop off soapbox now.

    Stay Safe.

    comment-bottom
  21. JohnSmith Says:

    I had to tase someone, and by chance had his back as the target, and just wanted to say that the X26 ended the fight instantly, safely, cleanly, and in a manner better for public perception than a cop dropping fists, because that was my alternative.

    comment-bottom
  22. Tom Says:

    With all the lawsuits and media attention, it was a matter of time before Taser issued something like this. As others here have stated, my dept. is looking at it as a “best case” advisory, not as a change to our ROE.

    comment-bottom

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment