Taser unveils multi-shot stun gun
July 28, 2009
A police officer demonstrates a taser gun in 2007. Manufacturers of the Taser stun gun on Monday unveiled a new handheld weapon on Monday which is capable of shocking three people without having to reload.
Manufacturers of the Taser stun gun on Monday unveiled a new handheld weapon on Monday which is capable of shocking three people without having to reload.
Arizona-based Taser International said in a statement the company's new X3 "electronic control device" was the first new handheld weapon since 2003 and featured enhanced safety details.
Taser International chief executive Rick Smith said the new multi-shot Taser would "increase officer safety through the ability to recover from a missed shot or even simultaneously stop up to three separate targets."
The company said the new weapon included a "pulse calibration system" for allowing electricity to be distributed across the outer layers of the skin of the target rather than deep into the body.
A video demonstration of YouTube showed three volunteers being floored by three successive shots before getting to their feet apparently unhurt.
Human rights activists have criticized Taser stun guns, challenging manufacturer claims that they are safe and non-lethal.
A December 2008 report from Amnesty International said 334 people had died after being shocked by Tasers between 2001 and August last year.
(c) 2009 AFP
Oct 08, 2007 |
not rated yet |
0
Do they ever bother to calculate the numbers of lives that were saved by the use of tasers?
The number of lives saved is hypothetical at best, and can't be calculated--only hypothesized.
Tasers don't tase people. People tase people.
Although, please remember that every time they approach someone they are taking a life or death risk. Yes, 90% of the time nothing happens but, it only takes one time to die permanently.
The original story I was thinking of was this one:
http://news.yahoo..._tasered
In Mobile the police bravely tasered and pepper-sprayed a deaf, mentally-disabled man who refused to leave a store bathroom. They also left a knot on his head by whacking him with the bathroom door. The police claim their actions were justified because he had an umbrella.
That way the person holding the taser knows he can be held to account if the images and sound record do not support his account of the tasing event, and the taser users will be more cautious (ideally, other weapons should be similarly equipped).
Can't quite see what's so exciting about a 3-shot tazer tbh, a basic glock has a 17-round mag so maybe they should be aiming to beat that! :-P
Rule No. 2 (out of 4) of Basic Firearm Safety:
Never... NEVER... point a firearm at anything you do not intend to destroy.
Firearms have never been meant for non-lethal action. If you are shooting at something, you had better intend to kill it. Egnite that was a very wrong, very dangerous and very ignorant statement. You obviously have never been trained in proper firearm use, please don't talk like you know anything about firearm skill.
Wow, that's pretty ignorant.
First, defunctdiety pointed out that basic firearm training contradicts your statement. Firearms are lethal weapons and should always be handled as such.
Second, striking a leg is much more difficult than a torso. And what's behind the leg that you are almost certainly going to miss? Anything downrange is a at risk, especially if you are shooting at a narrow, fast-moving target like a leg.
Finally, less-lethal weapons like tasers are being abused, period. They may be less-lethal than firearms when each are used correctly, but they are still lethal in many cases.
A perfect example of proper application of Rule No. 4 of Basic Firearm Safety.
Want to put some reference up for that one? I can think of only 2 incidents when a taser was improperly used. I can think of thousands of police shootings where an officer was maimed or killed because he didn't feel comfortable drawing down a functional firearm on a suspect.
You are extremely right sir. I can see though the first multiply-tased malcreant to die and the relatives who sue. There are taser projectiles which can be fired from a shotgun- fully self-contained.
On the other hand there are a lot of violent and vicious people out there that cops have to deal with without knowing anything about them; from people on drugs and with psychotic conditions to "protesters" who want to express their political beliefs by breaking shop windows and maybe a cop's bones. I don't want to see cops prevented from taking an action that would make a possible shooting (of himself or the subject) less likely. Between false accusations against cops and real acts of police misconduct it might soon come to the point that every second of an officer's on-duty action will need to be video recorded.
BTW, why do so many people who are beating their wives and attacking people at convenience stores and swearing at cops on those reality TV shows and on the news have their shirts off? Is their something about violent people wanting people to see them shirtless or does taking off one's shirt in public make one violent?
The increased blood flow to the skin actually causes sweating and heat loss. I think it's a "warrior thing", where you remove the "armor illusion" provided by clothing. I suppose this comes naturally sometimes.
It's interesting to note that I used to use the excuse to drink and smoke rather than do exercise as it's cardiovascular aerobics.
(of course, this is only meant for humor purposes)