KEY POINTS:
The police's one-year trial of an electro-muscular incapacitation device, commonly known as a Taser, still has several months to run. Already, however, it is possible to make some observations about its use and value. Overwhelmingly, these point to the fears of civil libertarians and some criminal lawyers being
overstated, and to the Taser becoming a valuable addition to the police armoury after the trial in four police districts ends.
Regular police reports have detailed the use of the stun gun in individual incidents since the trial began last September. The latest of these shows that, up to April 10, Tasers have been involved on 85 occasions and fired 13 times. Since the last update report in January, they have been taken to 42 incidents and discharged only five times. Those critical of the weapon will doubtless point to the increased involvement of the Taser in incidents. But it is just as likely that, with a greater number of such episodes in the holiday period, the police are coming to appreciate the value of the Taser in dealing with unarmed or lightly armed but highly aggressive suspects, or people under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Most significantly, they have learned that the Taser can be a powerful deterrent. A 50,000-volt charge through the body is not something to be contemplated lightly, and most people will have seen television footage of police volunteers writhing on the ground after being shot during demonstrations of the Taser. The low discharge rate in the latest period suggests the mere presence of the stun gun, and the subduing of suspects through "laser-painting" with the Taser's targeting mechanism, has been enough to bring dangerous situations under control.
Indeed, it is useful to contemplate what might have happened in some of these incidents if this less lethal option to a firearm had not been available to the police. According to the police report, weapons being used by suspects included swords, metal batons, butcher's knives, screwdrivers, files, machetes and loaded firearms. The five people hit by a Taser this year included a man who stabbed a stranger, a man who tried to kill the occupants of a Wellington house, and a man who stabbed his children. It is merely stating the obvious to suggest more lethal firearms might have had to be used in such episodes if the stun gun had not been available.
A Taser was also discharged at a pit-bull dog after pepper spray proved ineffective. The terrier rushed at police and a police dog during an armed offenders squad call-out in Wellington in January. According to the police report, the dog retreated, unhurt. Nor has there been any suggestion that, whatever the short-term pain, any of the people jolted by a Taser have suffered lasting injury. This, again, suggests that the suggestion the weapon posed an unacceptable health risk was overstated.
Critics also doubted the police's ability to use the Taser only in situations of dire emergency. They said a jolt from the device would become merely another convenient means of enforcing compliance. The police statistics do not back up that fear. Indeed, more than halfway through the trial, the Taser seems, increasingly, to be achieving compliance by its mere presence.
In sum, the police reports confirm why the Taser has been adopted by the police in Britain and elsewhere. It is an extremely useful device in certain situations where the police find themselves in considerable danger. In such cases, the Taser will be their weapon of choice, just as batons, pepper spray and firearms are the preferred option in other circumstances. As such, it would be a worthy addition to the weaponry of the New Zealand police.
