I’m an Australian police officer, and I have to arrest a disturbed man. He’s covered in gasoline and not obeying commands. What shall I do? OK, I’ll shoot my TASER at him. It only puts out 50,000 volts of electricity. There’s nothing to worry about sparks and gasoline, right? WRONG.
The only bright spot (sorry) in all this nonsense is that the TASER folks will no longer be able to claim that their devices are 100% non lethal. [The victim isn't dead yet, but being covered with third degree burns is not consistent with a normal life span. Many, many things kill burn victims, from shock and dehydration to infection and hypercoagulable states. Give it time.] They are less than lethal, but folks do die from them. I’ve met forensic pathologists that are afraid of being sued by the company if they certify the cause of death as due to taser-ing. (Taser application, Taser use, being tased? CrankyLitProf, Kem the Merciless Help!)
H/T Marko
I’ve actually heard the verb “tased” around here, pronounced with a long “a” and a “z” sound for the “s”
Comment by rethoryke — Wednesday, 22, July, 2009 @ 15:10 |
Tazed is the accepted usage i believe.
Comment by Jay — Thursday, 23, July, 2009 @ 09:31 |
And if it had been someone with an explosive vest, they probably would have shot a conventional firearm at him without thinking.
Comment by BobG — Thursday, 23, July, 2009 @ 14:46 |
Sounds like this guy might’ve fared better if they had simply shot him.
Comment by red rabbit — Monday, 27, July, 2009 @ 13:07 |