Taser International (TASR) Silencing Its Critics?

As a recent victim of corporate legal bullying myself I wanted to share this story from CrunchGear which did a bit of investigating into the claims by Taser International (TASR) that its stun guns are completely safe.  What gets me is not so much the claims of safety which are questionable but how they apparently go about silencing researchers and medical examiners through legal bullying to distort the truth. Something has to be done about this kind of litigation!

A portion of the CrunchGear investigation:

"Taser’s lawsuits include cases against medical examiners in Indiana and Ohio who cited Taser-induced electrical shocks as the cause of death. But perhaps most striking is the case of James Ruggieri. In early 2006, Ruggieri published an article in the peer-reviewed Journal of the National Academy of Forensic Engineers. The study, “one of the few scientific studies of Taser’s electric jolt in which the company did not participate,” as The Arizona Republic put it, concluded that Tasers were far more powerful than the company acknowledged and that the devices are capable of causing fatal heart rhythms.

Not taking the criticism lightly, the company sued Ruggieri for defamation, claiming he lacked the expertise to make such judgments, even though his story passed through the rigors of the peer-review screening process. "

Comments

[S. Marcus]

If you are interested in the truth, then you should include some of it in your comments!

You didn't include the fact that the Ruggieri article mis-stated the power of a Taser by a factor of 50 because of a mathematical error in his calculations. That fact is not in dispute.

The fact that Taser is willing to stand up for itself and attempt to set the record straight is, in no way, legal bullying - it's their right, just as it is your right to stand up for yourself if someone makes slanderous remarks about you.

By the way, speaking of facts, you have also begun your article with an error. No one at Taser has ever said that their product was "completely safe" as you put it, the product was initially advertised as non-lethal and is now marketed as "less-lethal".

PLEASE! Your opinions are fine, but don't pass them off as facts.

[Tate]

Ok I'll admit 'completely safe' was probably not the best phrase choice but considering that Taser is willing to "taser" anyone at a trade show to me indicates that the company feels that their product is 100% safe if used responsibly. Do you not agree? Certainly at issue here is how many of these cases where the Taser gun is allegedly involved in deaths are the direct result of improper use. It's interesting to note that the company is now shipping the product with detailed warning phamphlets effective March 1, 2007 so clearly the company is backing off a bit.

As far as the Ruggieri article, mathematical error would certainly be an important part of the research at CrunchGear and absolutely should be included. I wasn't the researcher on this but am just pointing out the story to my readers. How about asking Seth why this wasn't included in his research? How about a link to this information?

I'm all for sticking up for yourself to avoid slander and protect your product. What I'm not for is threatening researchers and medical examiners with lawsuits that have conducted the only independent studies that attempt to answer the concerns of many. You aren't distinguishing between slander and scientific, peer reviewed research. Big difference there.

Finally, I should note that I have no position in Taser International (TASR).

[Electrical Theory 101]

The Taser rebuttal against Ruggieri is based on the claim that the taser waveform is 50kHz and thus a different electrocution standard applies.

Well, there's a couple of problems with this.

1) The taser waveform almost certainly includes a significant DC component.
2) The taser waveform also obviously includes a significant component at the pulse frequency of 19 Hz.

If Taser has assumed that the waveform is ~only~ 50,000 Hz, then they'd be wrong. And their claimed 15:1 isn't really that much. Put in a few bad assumptions that they've made, mix in their ignorance and hubris, and you end up with a statistical 'tail' where people occasionally DIE.

If Taser was correct, then there would never be any deaths from taser (and there have been). If Taser was correct, you could taser a victim all night with no ill-effect. Also, Taser wouldn't have to imperceptibly backing away from their claims of safety.

There are many other design defects in the taser devices.

They don't limit duration and/or number of applications. People die more often when subjected to multiple or ridiculous durations. If the taser was safe, then this statistical factor wouldn't start creeping into the equation in these cases.

From what I've read, the taser is a voltage source with the current set by the victim. If this is true, it is insane. It is not difficult to create a current source that would be more safe (but certainly still very dangerous).

Their apparent assumption about the average resistance of the human body is perhaps true most of the time. But that means it is wrong some of the time.

Taser is constantly providing misleading information. A recent IEEE Spectrum article is full of 'average' values provided by the Taser spokes-puppet with no mention of the peak values. The reader is left to calculate the actual peak current, which is far above any safe standard.

All in all, their actions are pretty creepy. They're also lawsuit happy, so if you don't mind, I'd like to post this anonymously. I'd win any fairly-conducted lawsuit, but legal fees would be a pain.