Town Square

Post a New Topic

Tasers in Palo Alto?

Original post made by Nat on Dec 4, 2006

I'm terribly upset by the Palo Alto City Council Colleagues' Memo regarding tasers, which will be discussed by the Council tonight, December 4.

Police Chief Johnson is quoted in Sunday's (Dec. 3) Daily News as saying, as justification for acquiring these weapons, that "Our officers are running into more and more violent people, and people who are high on methamphetamine. They have super strength".

I've been following news stories on taser use for years. People on meth have been frequently reported as not responding to tasers. Either the tasers are completely ineffective or are used repeatedly to the point where the victim often dies. Drug users are the very people on whom tasers should not be used.

Police Auditor Gennaco is quoted as referring to tasers as "this traditional tool". That shows a bias in my opinion. When did these weapons become "traditional"?!

The colleagues' memo suggests, at the same time as the establishment of a task force to study the issue, both a use policy be prepared by the police chief and an application be made this month for a grant to fund these weapons. This memo chills me to the core. It appears that the powers that be in this City - the city manager, the police chief, and some council members - have already decided that Palo Alto will acqure these tools of torture, for that is what they are. And they often kill the very people upon whom they are meant to be used, people on drugs who cannot obey police orders and who may be vulnerable to heart arrythmia.

When tasers don't kill, they always torture. Even some police officers who have experienced the tasers in training have been injured, despite only one 5 second shot and support by fellow officers. Officers have attested to the excruciating pain. And suspects, usually unarmed, have routinely received multiple shots.

Comments (36)

Posted by Wolf, a resident of Palo Verde
on Dec 4, 2006 at 1:50 pm

Tasers were brought into regular policing under the excuse that their use by police is safer for the citizens than using a gun. Yet they sometimes seem to be used not as gun replacement, but as a tool of subduing the citizenry.

If the police is honest about using Tasers only to minimize gun use, our police chief should have no problem to agree with the following rules:

- Like with the use of a gun, any officer using Taser will be immediately assigned to desk duties until investigation has concluded that the use was justified.
- Abuses of Taser use will be treated identically to abuses of gun use, and have identical disciplinary consequences.
- Statistics on Taser use will be collected, and if annual review shows that Tasers are used more than guns in proportion to violent crimes (based on historical PAPD gun use rates), Taser use will be immediately discontinued.


Posted by taserisgreat, a resident of Community Center
on Dec 4, 2006 at 3:02 pm

Taser is great tool for police, ordinary citzen. People are confused and deliberately misled by such orgs, ACLU, AI. These people who is groaning about taser use are selfish. Let me ask them a question, what if they have to confront with criminal, you have to submissive to whatever criminal asking? Police are human being too, they need to treasure their lives and offer them all means they can to protect themself and us !!!

These people who complaining about taser are living in vacuum world with totally one-sided and selfish ways of thinking.


Posted by Richard Clark, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Dec 4, 2006 at 6:50 pm

Gee whiz. If you do something so crazy and so bad and so threatening that it makes a police officer reach for his/her Taser (or club, or mace, or revolver) maybe you need to be shot.

The knucklehead on the receiving end should be grateful that he has a reasonable chance of surviving the encounter at all.


Posted by Hulkamania, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Dec 4, 2006 at 6:55 pm

Tasers should be viewed as a tool to be used in place of deadly force. There is a point where deadly force is the last resort but the use of Tasers will reduce the number of times guns are needed.

I get the impression from what's been written by the no-Taser posters that they're the same people that believe a gun can be shot out of someone's hand and, in the heat of the moment, the police can just wing or wound a criminal. I was in the Army and qualified Expert with a .45 pistol. I can tell you it was damn hard to hit a piece of paper. When you've got an armed criminal that's not about to stand still and wants to kill you, it's almost impossible to hit them.


Posted by jerry, a resident of Midtown
on Dec 4, 2006 at 8:19 pm

Mr. Clark is right on! If you don't want to be taser or worse- shot, then do what the officer says. It doesn't get any clearer.


Posted by Dave, a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Dec 4, 2006 at 8:44 pm

For your consideration. This officer should have used a gun

Female Snohomish County deputy assaulted
KING5.com (subscription), WA - 5 hours ago
... The officer was attacked after dispatch radioed back that the man had a warrant for his arrest. The suspect jumped on the officer and beat her with her taser. ...

Web Link...

Female Snohomish County deputy assaulted

04:47 PM PST on Monday, December 4, 2006

KING5.com Staff

EVERETT, Wash. - A female Shohomish County deputy was assaulted by a man as she tried to question him in a park near Smokey Point.

The Snohomish County Sheriff's Dept. says the officer approached the man in the 9600 block of State Street just before 10 p.m. Saturday.

The officer was attacked after dispatch radioed back that the man had a warrant for his arrest.

An Alfy's Pizza delivery person and another citizen pulled the man off the officer.

The officer had a black eye, but the full extent of her injuries was not immediately known.

The suspect was arrested.


Posted by David, a resident of College Terrace
on Dec 4, 2006 at 8:56 pm

This story has been all over the news today. "Man dies, taser used"
Now the real story comes out and the taser had nothing to do with his death. TASER saves lives everyday but a few loud mouth liberals want to handcuff police. Don't let them
TASER's Saves Lives Everyday

Taser didn't kill man, police say
By Mike Ferenchik and Matthew Marx
The Columbus Dispatch
Monday, December 4, 2006 11:02 PM

FILE PHOTO
Columbus is considering purchasing 110 additional model X-26 Tasers for police use.

Columbus police say a Taser didn't work against a Dayton man who died after struggling with officers at a Downtown hotel this weekend.

The Franklin County coroner's office will perform an autopsy Tuesday, Dr. Brad Lewis, coroner, said.

Police identified the man tonight as Briant K. Parks, 39. Parks might have been in town visiting a sister who lives in Columbus, but she couldn't be reached last night.

Parks had a 15-year-old son who lived in Iowa, relatives said. Briant Parks was living with his grandmother in Dayton and worked at a cleaning service, a relative said.

Relatives in Springfield, Ohio, and South Carolina last night were shocked to learn of his death and the events leading to it, saying he wasn't violent or the type to get into trouble with the law.

"No, it doesn't sound like him at all," said a woman who would identify herself only as a relative.

Parks has no criminal record in Ohio or in Indiana or Illinois, where he previouslyl lived, computer records show.

His father, an ordained minister, had died in April in South Carolina, the woman said.

Tonight, the Columbus City Council heard legislation to buy 110 more Tasers for Columbus police to add to the 205 already on the street. The City Council could vote next Monday on whether to buy the X-26 Tasers, including training cartridges and street-use cartridges, for $140,975, from Vance's Outdoors.

Parks died after police fired a Taser at him and wrestled with him inside The Columbus, a Renaissance Hotel, on Sunday night.

Parks resisted when police tried to arrest him after he swung a cane at a security guard, police said.

An officer fired Taser probes, which are connected to the gun by wires. One of the probes hit the man's coat and the other probe missed entirely, police spokesman Sgt. Kevin Corcoran said. Both probes have to hit the body, creating a circuit, for 50,000 volts of electricity to fully stun the person, Columbus Public Safety Director Mitchell J. Brown explained.

Police said Parks went into cardiac arrest in the hotel lobby and died at Grant Medical Center.

He had refused to leave Bar 41, which is in the lobby of the hotel at 50 N. 3rd St.

Police refused to release the name of the officer who fired the Taser and the names of other officers involved.

"As in all in-custody deaths, a full investigation is under way by the Columbus Division of Police's Critical Incident Response Team, and no specific-incident details will be discussed until the investigation is complete," Deputy Public Safety Director Barb Seckler said.

Council member Charleta Tavares said that even if the Taser didn't work, she wants to know why the man went into cardiac arrest.

Mayor Michael B. Coleman continues to support the city's Taser purchase, his spokesman, Mike Brown, said yesterday.

"We still see them as an important tool to save lives," he said.

Some civilian Taser models are less expensive than the police model, but have a shorter range -- 15 feet compared with 21 feet for the police model, Seckler said. The legislation states that only the X-26 is acceptable for police use.

An internal police study completed this year on Taser use in 2005 said police saved 24 lives that year by using Tasers instead of resorting to deadly force.

Seckler said from late 2004 through 2005, people filed nine complaints on Taser use with the Internal Affairs Bureau. Police exonerated officers in seven incidents and said two complaints were unfounded.

During last week's hearing, Brown called Columbus officers' experience with Tasers "very positive." He said injuries to prisoners were down by nearly 27 percent and to officers by 16 percent, according to 2005 statistics. Bruce said officers haven't used batons or flashlights as much. And the fire medical director, Dr. David Keseg, told officials that of the 383 times police fired Tasers in 2005, 31 people were taken to hospitals, and four of those were admitted.

Web Link


Posted by J Nelson, a resident of Palo Alto Hills
on Dec 4, 2006 at 9:41 pm

Pepper spray, baton, or taser? Pepper spray and a baton require the officer to put him or herself in danger because they have to close to the dangerous criminal to use them. Additional, these tools can be ineffective or even used against the officer in rare instances. A taser can be used up to 21 feet and its deployment is sometimes enough in and of itself to deter the criminal. Do not forget, officers have families too and we should give them the tools to ensure their safe return to their loved ones. A career criminal facing life in prison does not understand such considerations. Honor those putting their lives on the line by giving them the tools they need!


Posted by Mark, a resident of Palo Alto Hills
on Dec 4, 2006 at 10:49 pm

9mm or a TASER....your choice....make my day!


Posted by Tom, a resident of College Terrace
on Dec 4, 2006 at 11:48 pm

I find some comedy and a whole lot of disgust when reading many of the views posted regarding police taser use. Let's put this in perspective for a moment. One resident said,

"If the police is honest about using tasers only to minimize gun use, our police chief should have no problem to agree with the following rules: Like with the use of a gun, any officer using Taser will be immediately assigned to desk duties until investigation has concluded that the use was justified.

Let me start by asking this question, do you enjoy living in a reasonably safe community such as Palo Alto? If the answer to that question is "yes" then you are a complete moron. To think that pulling officers out of an already understaffed police department to sit on desk duty for using a taser on a criminal is a smart use of resources, then there are bigger problems at work here! Not to start name calling and act in a childish manner, but think about this logically for a moment. Tasers use an incapacitating amount of electricity to shock and stun a person into submission. Deaths associated with taser use are not the fault of the device. Factually, the fault lies on the various illegal substances and other issues not controlled by police. I'm sure that a quick response from those against would say, "Well there you go. If it hurts one person then that is enough to not use them." I would respond with this, "What is the person doing that deserved to be stunned with a taser in the first place?"

Now I'm not an advocate for allowing police to stomp on the civil rights of citizens or abuse their authority by zapping any person that talks bad to them. But in continuing with our idea of incorporating logic into this conversation, what would you think that an officer should do when confronted with a criminal who is either advancing or taking a fighting stance toward them. Likely, the officer has contacted this person for some legitimate reason, i.e. a resident called in a person breaking into their home. So what should they do? Currently their choices are to physically fight with the criminal, deploy pepper spray, use their night sticks, or use their guns. Which one would you choose? Now my male ego side would immediately pick "physically fight the criminal" but we all know that this is not the best option. Why you may ask? Well we recently learned why physical confrontations with a criminal are not a great option. Does anyone remember Officer Richard May from East Palo Alto who was recently shot and killed when confronting a criminal who was fighting at a restaurant? I know many of you may say, "That was in East Palo Alto and we are talking about Palo Alto, they are two different cities." And my response to this would be, "Where are the border guards posted who are preventing criminals from entering into our wonderful city?" There are none and there are no borders. If you think that you can do the job of protecting our city and the residents who live here then I implore you to strap on the gun, pin on the badge and go to work. I'm just guessing that the first time that you encounter a 6'2" 220 pound criminal in the back of a closed business at 3:30 am and your nearest police officer to come to your aide is five to ten minutes away, you just might change your tune. As a resident of this city, I say give our cops the tools needed to not only protect us, but also protect them. If you still remain dead set against tasers, then I implore you to attend the next slain officers funeral and see just how the wife or husband react to their loved one dying to protect those vocal residents who won't protect them.


Posted by Mike, a resident of College Terrace
on Dec 5, 2006 at 1:43 am

The police should have access to tasers, and appropriate taser training. Most cops are good, caring human beings; in fact; they're encountering human pain and suffering on a daily basis. The are here to protect. Why then do we NOT see police officers denying an opportunity to use tasers? There are 10's of thousands of tasers in use.

To those who have never had to encounter someone wielding a knife or other non-firearm weapon, or someone high on drugs like meth, I suggest you walk in a police shoes before passing judgment on what kinds of weapons the police need to protect themselves, and those they are attempting to subdue.


Posted by K, a resident of Greenmeadow
on Dec 5, 2006 at 3:29 am

And people complained helmets in world ware one caused more neck injuries. They kinda ignored the fact that they caused less deaths. I wonder if this is the same way, because no one here has any evidence one way or the other. Individual cases so not make the rule.


Posted by Larry, a resident of Barron Park
on Dec 5, 2006 at 10:37 am

Police have human rights too, the assumption that people against taser made is that police are born to be suffered, they got paid to jerpodize their lives. And criminal's human rights have to be protected, ordinary citzens' rights is no important.

Can imagine if our sociaty being run by people like that.


Posted by BW, a resident of Menlo Park
on Dec 5, 2006 at 1:43 pm

Those who disagree with the use of tasers are only listing their problems with the current process, not the solution. Come to the table with a solution assuming that you can validate your problem with reasonable data. Having been a Marine officer and having to subdue people (for training purposes only), there is a chance that the aggressor might be bigger and stronger than you. What do you do then? Give us the solution, not another problem and lawsuit from the ACLU.


Posted by WHY, a resident of Gunn High School
on Dec 5, 2006 at 5:52 pm

ARTILLERY IS NECESSARY IN GENERAL WHEN THE PEOPLE IN IT CANNOT LIVE IN HARMONY. APPARENTLY THIS DOES EXIST EVERYWHERE. AS THE LAW ENFORCEMENT CANNOT BE EVERY WHERE PERHAPS IT IS TIME THAT WE ALL RETURN TO POSSESSING A SUBDUING DEVICE TO WARN OFF OFFENDERS. AS TAZERS ARE VIEWED AS "We still see them as an important tool to save lives," he said. WITH A NOTE THAT IT IS AFFORDABLE -"Some civilian Taser models are less expensive than the police model, but have a shorter range -- 15 feet compared with 21 feet for the police model, Seckler said. The legislation states that only the X-26 is acceptable AND PURCHASEABLE for police use.


Posted by Tim, a resident of Green Acres
on Dec 5, 2006 at 11:42 pm

We don't have closed borders, and as such have people from all walks of life in town 24 hours a day. If you take a drive through town at 3 am you will see a lot of questionable characters strolling through downtown, getting off the 22 bus line, and sitting in cars in dimly lit areas. What you also see are the men and women of the Palo Alto Police Department contacting these folks. I for one breathe a huge sigh of relief when I see a black and white cruiser with a well-trained police professional behind the wheel patrolling my city. 24/7/365 they are out there protecting lives and property, dealing with crooks, crackheads, and crazies. If our police say they need tasers, I support them 100%. It is foolish to not give police officers a tool that can protect THEM, as they carry out their duties protecting US.


Posted by Mike, a resident of College Terrace
on Dec 6, 2006 at 1:42 am

Righto, Tim! Just watch out for the usual group of police-bashers at next week's Council meeting [portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff]. The Council is going to discuss the tazer issue. I would encourage any and all who support our local police to go to that meeting, to support our local police, and to balance out comments from people [portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff] who are relentless in their harsh verbal and disrespectful attacks on the police, Council, and Palo Altans in general.


Posted by Mark Petersen-Perez, a resident of Downtown North
on Dec 6, 2006 at 6:22 am

Palo Alto Officials urge stun gun? as reported in Sunday's 12/03/2006 daily.

Chief Johnson's claim that equipping palo alto officers with tasers is "justifiable". Chief Johnson needs to seriously think about expanding her vocabulary. Chief Johnson in all probability would purchase RPG's (rocket propelled grenades) given the opportunity to deal with methamphetamine users who demonstrate and exhibit "super human strength".

She makes no mention of any alternative non-lethal use of force. A sad testiment to her leadership.


Posted by Hank, a resident of Menlo Park
on Dec 6, 2006 at 8:14 am

Alternative less lethal use of force...No one seems to be able to come up with anything that is statistically proven to work better than a Tazer. If it were for some of the cowardly anti-police, anti-tazer folks, PAPD would be drving electric cars, wearing hemp uniforms, and would be carrying the Koran on their hip. Come on people, wake up, take a walk down Woodland Avenue at 3am and see how you fair. There are dangerous people out there, people that will believe it or not, harm you without a second thought. We have EPA, Ease Menlo Park, and Mountain View on our borders. There are no check points or prohibitions to keep crime or criminals out. When that bad person comes to your door and you call 911, don't you want the police to have the tools necessary to protect your children, I do!


Posted by BW, a resident of Menlo Park
on Dec 6, 2006 at 8:33 am

A challenge to Mr. Mark Petersen-Perez... Please tell me what alternates to non-lethal use of force are better. We all are waiting for your response.... Tell us what weapon you would like to have in your hand if you are being threatened by two 6'4" 260lb men. Have you ever been in a situation like this or would you try to reason with them? [Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff]


Posted by CopFan, a resident of Midtown
on Dec 6, 2006 at 11:31 am

I'm all for Tasers, but I just don't want cops reaching for a Taser when they should be reaching for their pistol. If some meth-addict is charging you, I have my doubts about the taser.
If someone has a case where police used tasers "for fun," or to simply torment a human being, then by all means those police should be punished, but why not give them the benefit of the doubt and let them do their jobs with the tools they need.

Who knows though - maybe hemp uniforms would be really durable!


Posted by A Cop, a resident of another community
on Dec 7, 2006 at 5:32 am

This dialog misses the point. The more alternatives a cop has to deadly force, the better. That fact alone justifies equipping them with tasers.

The real issue is in what circumstances should the officers be allowed to use the taser. Much of the fuss centers on the public's perception that they be used as a last ditch alternative to deadly force.

The fact is, officers are trained to use tasers at a much lower level of force. Tasers are to be used before the officer has to use physical force to gain compliance. That means tasers can be used when a suspect refuses to follow verbal commands. Tasers can be used before pepper spray and batons.

Given that placement in the use of force instructions, it's no wonder they are used more frequently than deadly force. The policy is the reason for the disconnect between the public's perception that they be used infrequently and the reality of how often suspects get tased.

When cops get injured, there is a real financial impact: time off, medical bills, overtime to cover shifts. By placing tasers so low in the use of force policy, the city avoids these costs. Suspects too avoid injuries, as they need not endure wrestling or a baton. That's a win win.

Yes, some people die from taser use. They also die from pepper spray, impact weapons, and being forced to comply through take down techniques. This usually happens when the suspects' vital signs are near critical levels at the onset of the encounter due to illegal narcotics, such as methamphetamine. It's unfortunate, but it does not merit throwing the baby out with the bathwater.


Posted by kitty, a resident of Fairmeadow
on Dec 7, 2006 at 2:02 pm

No drugs except alcohol in death of Memphis man in DeSoto Co. custody
Associated Press


HERNANDO, Miss. - An autopsy shows no presence of drugs at the time of a Memphis man's death while in the custody of DeSoto County deputies on Nov. 14.

"The drug scan showed no drugs were involved," county coroner Jeffery Pounders said Tuesday when he released the results.

Earlier, the state Crime Laboratory said Darren Faulkner, 41, had a blood alcohol level of 0.06 percent, just under Mississippi's legal intoxication level of 0.08 percent.

Faulkner was pronounced dead at Baptist Memorial Hospital-DeSoto in Southaven on Nov. 14.

He had twice been hit by Tasers and had "walked through" the spray from a full can of pepper spray, District Attorney John Champion has said. Champion said Faulkner had been involved in two fights, which led to his arrest.

Champion said Faulkner turned on a deputy who broke up the fights. The deputy, he said, retreated while calling for backups and attempting to keep Faulkner at bay.

Two deputies shot Faulkner with Tasers, but deputies were only able to handcuff him after the second Taser was used.

However, after handcuffing him, the deputies rolled him over to get him to his feet to place him in a cruiser when he had difficulty breathing. Then he stopped breathing altogether, Champion said.

The autopsy, performed by the state medical examiner's office in Jackson, showed Faulkner died of heart failure and that he suffered from a hypertensive heart condition.

The Mississippi Bureau of Investigation has been investigating the incident.

"I will not rule on the death," Pounders said. "The state medical examiner's office will determine the ruling. All of my information will be passed to that office."

My comment: Police can not know if a person has a medical condition such as hypertension. There have been other deaths over the years since tasers have been used. They are not always a less than lethal force. In some cases, they are definitely a lethal force. And they are always, always, at best, a means of torture.


Posted by kitty, a resident of Fairmeadow
on Dec 7, 2006 at 2:08 pm

The above post was posted twice due to the weird reaction on the site, leading me to believe my submission wasn't posted the first time.

After first submitting the post, after imputing the code, I got the comment box again with a new code.

The changes to the system have a bug I guess. Sorry for the double post. Hope it will be corrected.

BTW, why the code? What is the purpose of it? or need?


Posted by GSB, a resident of Stanford
on Dec 7, 2006 at 3:38 pm

I guess no one was paying attention when this came up in Mountain View last year. Go back and research what happened there. May save you some time and energy.


Posted by Tyler Hanley, online editor of Palo Alto Online
on Dec 7, 2006 at 4:04 pm

Tyler Hanley is a registered user.

We've added the "verification code" to put an end to spammers placing posts on the site through automated computer programs that seek out these kind of forums. You don't see them on the site because we remove them pretty quickly, but they are an increasing problem.
The verification code system requires that a real person read the code and enter it into the box next to it. Sorry for the added inconvenience.


Posted by Mike, a resident of College Terrace
on Dec 7, 2006 at 4:24 pm

Question: How many deaths would result from NOT deploying tazers?

Also, GSB's point is well taken, as the Mt. View HRC approved taser use. That's a pretty solid endorsement.


Posted by Mike, a resident of Palo Verde
on Dec 8, 2006 at 3:15 am

In reply to:

My comment: Police can not know if a person has a medical condition such as hypertension. There have been other deaths over the years since tasers have been used. They are not always a less than lethal force. In some cases, they are definitely a lethal force. And they are always, always, at best, a means of torture.

While Faulkner's death is unfortunate, I think the article posted above only furthers the argument in favor of tasers. What are police to do when faced with a violent, intoxicated individual? Their choices include using their hands, pepper spray, night sticks, or tasers. The pepper spray didn't work in this situation, and I don't think it reasonable to ask police to engage in hand to hand combat with every person that causes a disturbance, because they are not prize fighters, they're police officers. So the police realistically had a choice of either night sticks or tasers, and I'm no doctor, but I'm guessing either one of those is potentially lethal for someone who has a hypertensive heart condition.

Of course tasers can contribute to someone's death, but so could a night stick, or tackling someone to the ground. Kitty, do you suggest these officers ask, "excuse me sir, is there anything I can do to gain your cooperation?....oh, and do you have any pre-existing medical conditions?" while they are getting punched in the face? Or perhaps they should put on their department-issued x-ray glasses to identify medical problems, and then run away when they discover one.

Finally, how are tasers "at best, a means of torture." I love it when people loosely throw around words like torture. Tasers have been safetly used thousands of times, and I'm willing to bet that police departments that started using tasers probably saw a decrease in the number of suspects and police that get hurt.

Instead of focusing distrust and suspicion on police, let's focus that energy on criminals who break into are homes and cars, get into shootouts on the streets, and would threaten our whole society if police were not there to stop them.


Posted by nat, a resident of Midtown
on Dec 14, 2006 at 1:16 pm

I have heard about the possibility of using a net on combative suspects. Research should be done on this idea. The net would be shot at the person, who would then be entangled in it.

As for tasers, they aren't used instead of a gun. Anytime a police officer is faced with an armed suspect, the officer shoots to kill (not wound). Tasers are used on unarmed but uncooperative people.
Such people include the mentally ill, immigrants who don't understand our law enforcement system or English, and are frightened by police because of experience in Eastern Europe or elsewhere, people on drugs, people having a seizure, people very upset and angry. These are not necessarily criminals. Since tasers can be fatal, they should not be used. Other means must be found. And they can be found with research.

Officers have been injured in training when they were tased and have filed lawsuits. Now, most police departments either forbid such testing on officers or make it voluntary. This is not a good tool to use on civilians.


Posted by Nat, a resident of Midtown
on Dec 18, 2006 at 2:53 pm

This was sent to me today. Please look at it.

This was just sent to me today. It is about an alternative to tasers that is being used in China today.


Web Link


An alternative to Tasers.




P.S. In the US it's manufactured by Foster-Miller. Not sure why this product never caught on.


Posted by ten18, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 19, 2006 at 2:24 pm

Great, now I have some drugged up monster, possibly armed, caught in a net - how does that help? Dangerous criminals need to be neutralized (following proper procedures of course) and if they die in the process - OH WELL! One less creep on the streets. A taser is torture? You have to be kidding me!!

If people are high on drugs, and fighting with the police, they deserve whatever they get! As someone who is very close to several police officers, I could care less if a druggie strokes out - the only thing I care is that my loved one comes home safely.


Posted by ten18, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 19, 2006 at 2:27 pm

As for the immigrants who don't understand our law enforcement system or English - Welcome to America!! You don't fight with the police here.

And sorry to say, some mentally ill people can be just as dangerous as a drug suspect.

Police officers shouldn't have to risk their lives in order to make these judgement calls.

"Nat" has clearly, obviously never had to face this sort of danger. Otherwise, his/her opinion might be different.


Posted by ignorance isbliss, a resident of Downtown North
on Dec 19, 2006 at 3:58 pm

Tasers are meant for the criminals...if your not a criminal, dont worry about it. Unless, you are a criminal...then worry!!

Every other department around PA is getting them...it will be a liability NOT to have them. "Sorry, we could have subdued him with a taser, but we had to shoot him instead...but next time, we will call another agency to take care of the crooks in our city..."

Obviously this city cares more about the criminals (who dont actually live here) than the people protecting this city...such a shame. No wonder the crooks come here....




Posted by Tim, a resident of Barron Park
on Dec 27, 2006 at 6:29 pm

To ignorance isbliss,

I could of not said it better!!! I don't worry about tasers because I do what the police tell me.


Posted by Enoch Choi, a resident of Crescent Park
on Mar 27, 2007 at 8:41 am

As a member of the task force, after reviewing the questions presented by the public, I prepared some answers to the public's questions in anticipation of tonight's meeting:
Web Link

Comments are welcome there.

Enoch Choi, MD


Posted by David E Zuskin, a resident of College Terrace
on Feb 3, 2008 at 9:06 pm

TASERS SAVE LIVES EVERYDAY.

But I do acknowledge that they are MUCH MORE DANGEROUS than Taser Inc has admitted. Especially the X26 model. Also, they're being abused too often and I wish that Taser would address the misuse more aggressively.

BUT, TASERS SAVE LIVES EVERYDAY.

And why does Taser cultivate such close relationships with coroners and medical examiners? Why would they do that? I mean those people just deal with dead bodies, so why would Taser need to cultivate such close relationships with them? I just don't understand...

BUT, TASERS SAVE LIVES EVERYDAY.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Palo Alto quietly gets new evening food truck market
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 3,599 views

See Me. Hear Me. Donít Fix Me.
By Chandrama Anderson | 2 comments | 1,794 views

Foothills Park: a world away
By Sally Torbey | 11 comments | 1,603 views

Universal Language
By Cheryl Bac | 2 comments | 1,382 views

Two Days to Save This Dog?
By Cathy Kirkman | 10 comments | 642 views