PDA

View Full Version : Do you think Tasers have a place in non LEO self defense?


TexasSIGMan
January 27, 2006, 09:36 AM
I'm beginning to consider one of these instead of OC as an "intermediate" weapon before the fireram.

Non-LEO sales of the things are skyrocketing and they have introduced a couple of newer models.

Do you think they have a place in the "force continuum" for non LEOs?

Twycross
January 27, 2006, 10:14 AM
Yes, Tasers do have a place in the force continuum. Just not the last place.

NDTerminator
January 27, 2006, 11:24 AM
I've been trying unsuccessfully to convince my Chief of the need for Tasers. He feels the liability is too great. I disagree vehemently, there's far more liability in knowingly depriving officers of a viable less lethal use of force option...

Glenn E. Meyer
January 27, 2006, 02:29 PM
This is a case of exaggerating vivid instances.

For the chief - yes, some folks seem to have died after a Taser.

However, what percent of instances where lethal or damaging force would have been used are now resolved with Tasers so less harm is produced as compared to the incidence of harm with Tasers?

That's the issue, not a vivid instance.

ATW525
January 27, 2006, 02:46 PM
As far as non LEO self defense goes, I just don't really see the benefit of the taser over an pepperspray/firearm combination. Perhaps it's just me, but I have a hard time envisioning a scenario where the taser be useful enough to be worth the cost.

Mikeyboy
January 27, 2006, 03:08 PM
I researched Tasers and I found some problems with them.

1) they are expensive, some cost as much as a regular firearm

2) They are a one on one weapon, while you can taser a BG and reload another cartridge to taser another bad guy (which means you need to disconnect the juice from the first BG), it takes a few seconds

3) Short range weapon

4) Possible probes not penetrating thick clothing

5) Bulky

6) Most manufactures make civilian taser "traceable" (confette with serial #, pops out when you fire a tazer) which can be a good thing, but may cause liability issues.

7) Tazer are great for LE to put someone into submission for an arrest, but bad in an civilian fire and flee situation since they either need to drop the tazer or take the time to detach the cartridge.

8) May cause heart damage.

9) Illegal to carry in some areas.

I think Tazer are good for LE, but OC or a Good Stungun is a better less that lethal option for civilians.

CraigJS
January 27, 2006, 05:33 PM
Aren't Tazers about 7-900+- each? I think I'd rather spend the money on another CZ75D PCR, some GOOD OC spray, and about 2 cases of practice ammo...

TexasSIGMan
January 27, 2006, 06:56 PM
They have one model in the 350-400 range, and the prices keep going down.

I know the prices were scary initially, but like anything that goes away with volume.

That's why I asked about them. For a grand it's a bit ridiculous, but in the $250 range rapidly approaching, I thought they deserved another look as maybe a more usable alternative to OC.

OC has lots of problems. LE departments are not moving to the Taser because of the cool yellow color.

Just trying to guage if their effectiveness applies to non LEO situations.
Ignore price for a second and then what do you guys think about them?

RandyDTC
January 27, 2006, 09:09 PM
IMO, the taser fills a 'hole' on the FC outside of LE - espeically for those who do not carry firearms.

There are a number of states that have made the devices illegal for non-government possession.

I am also a certified Taser instructor - I want to address some of the information posted in this thread.

The X series Tasers are smaller than a lot of commonly-carried handguns. That said, I really don't have room on my body to conceal more than one handgun-sized object. I wouldn't leave the firearm at home in exchange for the taser. Your situation may be different.

ALL Taser cartridges have the 'confetti'. These are called AFIDs, for 'Anti Felon identification'. When you make the purchase, the ID number from each cartridge is recorded.

The Tasers are expensive, yes. However, if you lose your Taser in a self defensive application (and you should if it is deployed as directed), Taser (the company) will replace it when you submit a copy of the police report. In that light...

The 'citizen' taser has a 10 second cycle time and it can be increased to as much as 30 seconds with a couple additional presses of the trigger after deployment. The taser is then placed on the ground while you make your escape. (I am not going to argue the merits of this tactic - certainly it can be what-if'ed to death)

The taser is a short range device. The cartridges available to non-governmental personnel only contain 15 feet of wire. (LE can get 21 and 25 feet) Of course, for a justified claim of self defense, the distances are going to be short anyway.

The arc can go through 2 inches of clothing. Heavy winter coats do represent a potential problem.

There is no evidence whatsoever of a Taser discharge ever causing heart damage. If you look at the Taser's current curve, it is well under the limits established to cause fibrillation.

Tasers are available in black and 'safety' yellow.

Here are some pictures:

XP and 'standard' probes.
http://www.dt-concepts.com/images/probes.jpg


M26 model with arc - no cartridge installed.
http://www.dt-concepts.com/images/sparking.jpg

Here are the different cartridges.
http://www.dt-concepts.com/images/tas-carts-box.jpg

Randy

Optical Serenity
January 27, 2006, 09:32 PM
I personally don't see any reason to have it for non uniform personnel. I am an LEO, and we are not issued tasers, but I think we should be. when off duty, I don't feel the need to carry a taser. I carry OC and that stuff is insane..if I need more I probably need my gun, or the two I carry when off duty.

if you think OC is not enough, spray yourself with a 10 second burst of Sabre Red...haha don't say I didn't warn you...

ATW525
January 27, 2006, 10:01 PM
I really don't have room on my body to conceal more than one handgun-sized object. I wouldn't leave the firearm at home in exchange for the taser.

That's really one reason why I don't see a use for them in the self defense role, at least for me personally. Carrying both a taser and a handgun isn't exactly practical, and given the choice I'd take the handgun anyday. Effective spray weapons can be found in a much smaller, concealable and easier to transport package than a taser and works well as a non-lethal alternative in my opinion.

I believe the taser is outstanding tool for subduing and arresting the bad guys. When it comes down to it, though, arresting the bad guys just isn't my job.

Mikeyboy
January 27, 2006, 10:13 PM
Make a effective taser the size of a Kel Tec P32, that can shoot 30 ft, and cost less than $100, and you would make millions.

OneInTheChamber
January 27, 2006, 10:14 PM
I'd have to say that, like the bean bag shotgun loads, LEO's have back up with deadly force ready to back them up. Most CCW'ers don't have a couple armed buddies with them all the time.

Don't bring a (insert less lethal weapon here) to a gun fight.

I think they are great for LEO, but if it warrants a taser for a CCW'er, it probably would have been legal with full force. Least thing you want is one of the probes missing the BG and you getting hurt.

TexasSIGMan
January 27, 2006, 10:45 PM
Well what struck my interest was the fact that neither my state nor the Feds seem to consider them firearms, so you can carry them in places you just can't otherwise.

It's for those situations that I'm seriously considering buying one.

My wife is a teacher, which means she's pretty much banned from carrying most of her day, but these things seem to, so far at least, be flying under the radar from a legal standpoint.

gamma
January 28, 2006, 12:17 AM
just a quick story...

a much larger-than-average-sized female customer was shopping in the store that i work and for some reason or another became verbally abusive, escalating to wild gesturing, screaming and threats of violence to some of my fellow employees. a manager was able to escort the uncontrollable woman outside of our facility, onto the parking lot. the local LEO's were contacted prior to this and were waiting outside (it is nice having a station about 1/2 mile form your business). the officers tried to de-escalate the situation by talking the woman down. this approach only made the woman more enraged, and the police were forced to use "less than lethal" force.

Two rounds of taser ammunition were "fired" at the woman. the first round was ineffective and necessitated the second shot to subdue the woman. the police were able to take the woman into custody, but apparently, a lawsuit has been filed against the department for excessive force. I live in a relatively conservative area so it seems very likely that the case will be thrown out as frivolous. but in either case, the liability issue is still there and this woman is continuing to waste our municipal tax dollars trying to make a buck for making an ass of herself in public.

stratus
January 28, 2006, 07:43 AM
I think tazers are like, sorta interesting, but seems sort of an expensive route to go if you want to knock someone out.

TexasSIGMan
January 28, 2006, 09:26 AM
I think tazers are like, sorta interesting, but seems sort of an expensive route to go if you want to knock someone out.

Well, my wife is 105 pounds soaking wet, she's not likely to be able to pull off any neat tricks.....

RandyDTC
January 28, 2006, 10:31 AM
The Taser will not 'knock someone out''.

Are they expensive? Yes. However, to put the costs into perspective, which will cost you more when you have to deploy it? The handgun or taser?

Randy

brickeyee
January 28, 2006, 10:51 AM
“There is no evidence whatsoever of a Taser discharge ever causing heart damage. If you look at the Taser's current curve, it is well under the limits established to cause fibrillation.”

You have bought into the Tazer companies advertising without doing any research.
The published tests of the taser show a current in excess of 500 milliamps, and that was with an unrealistic 20,000 ohm load on the unit. This is the level the infamous ‘pig tests’ were performed at (under the guidance of a doctor with an ownership interest in Taser).
If the barbs enter the skin, the resistance of the human body falls well below 20,000 ohms.
Tazers do not control the current supplied, only the voltage waveform.
Tazer also has made claims of ‘skin effect’ limiting current entry into the deeper tissues of the body. The frequency if operation of the voltage waveform is not high enough for any skin effect to occur. The current spreads out in the body in a completely unpredictable way (since the barb location is essentially random).
Tazer likes to claim an “average” current of only a few milliamps. The nervous system responds to peak currents, not averages.
After conversations with a number of MEs, they acknowledged there is no practical way to determine nerve damage or effects after the fact on a deceased if thermal damage (burning of tissue) does not occur.
Just use a gun. If you are justified in using a Tazer, as a non-LEO you should be justified in using a firearm.

Mikeyboy
January 28, 2006, 10:53 AM
the police were able to take the woman into custody, but apparently, a lawsuit has been filed against the department for excessive force. I live in a relatively conservative area so it seems very likely that the case will be thrown out as frivolous. but in either case, the liability issue is still there and this woman is continuing to waste our municipal tax dollars trying to make a buck for making an ass of herself in public.

What gets me is what other less then lethal option is there without OC or a taser??? Would it be better if she got wacked with a nightstick , like they did 30 years ago? I don't know how you LE guys get the job done without screaming somedays.

TexasSIGMan
January 28, 2006, 01:24 PM
Just use a gun. If you are justified in using a Tazer, as a non-LEO you should be justified in using a firearm.

If that is the case then why carry OC? If you are justified in using OC, just shoot the sucker.....

And, you're leaving out the part where there are places you just CAN'T have your firearm with you.

That's my question. When you can't carry, is this a better alternative than doing nothing or carrying OC?

brickeyee
January 28, 2006, 03:45 PM
I have not heard of OC being considered lethal in any jurisdiction.
Despite the protestations if Tazer Inc, the jury is still out.

ATW525
January 28, 2006, 04:47 PM
When you can't carry, is this a better alternative than doing nothing or carrying OC?

Personally there's very few places I can't carry, and I wouldn't be able to carry a tazer into those either. Typically I just avoid those places, which isn't hard since it's mainly courts and federal buildings.

Doug.38PR
January 28, 2006, 05:23 PM
guns are a more....permenant ;) solution against crime. Tazers are half measures.

Tazers would probably be good if you older parents want to ensure your grounded teenager doesn't leave the house anyway. "Dude, dad this like totally stinks main. This like just isn't fair. I'm like totally outta here, man."

"One more step son and I'll....okay, you ask for it."

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZAAAAAAP!!!

"Honey help me get Jr. to his bed. He will be staying in for tonight."

:cool:

czc3513
January 28, 2006, 06:06 PM
http://www.halfbakery.com/idea/Breed_20gunshot-resistant_20humans
lol
Most people that are shot survive.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5002a1.htm
If you dont finish the bg off, you might get sued but you wont be responsible for his death.
I dont see the need to have a less lethal weapon unless you are required to by law.

rapidarp
January 28, 2006, 06:09 PM
Personally, I don't believe these should have been released to the public. Now use LEOs (i'm a soon-to-be LEO) have one more thing we gotta watch out for when we come into contact with people.

TexasSIGMan
January 28, 2006, 06:22 PM
Personally, I don't believe these should have been released to the public. Now use LEOs (i'm a soon-to-be LEO) have one more thing we gotta watch out for when we come into contact with people.

Oh please GOD don't start out as one of "those" LEOs that think everyone else should go unarmed because you are "special".

stratus
January 28, 2006, 07:03 PM
The Taser will not 'knock someone out''.
Sorry, I should have said "incapacitate".


Are they expensive? Yes. However, to put the costs into perspective, which will cost you more when you have to deploy it? The handgun or taser?
This is only me, but I'm more likely to trust my life to a handgun than a taser. Whatever legal consequences I face are going to have to be rescinded until the crisis has passed.


Well, my wife is 105 pounds soaking wet, she's not likely to be able to pull off any neat tricks.....
Point taken. My girlfriend weighs about 90 lbs @ 5 feet, and both of us are more comfortable with her having a handgun than a taser. Yes, it's lethal force, but it's her life on the line too, right?

RandyDTC
January 28, 2006, 07:54 PM
If that is the case then why carry OC? If you are justified in using OC, just shoot the sucker.....


No, that isn't true at all. You are justified to use OC at a much lower level (reference the force continuum) than you can use your handgun. For example, you would be justified to use OC if someone put their hands on you in a threatening manner. You would not so easily be justified to use the handgun in the same situation.

Alternatively, if the situation calls for deadly force, the OC shouldn't be in your hand.


I have not heard of OC being considered lethal in any jurisdiction.


OC is considered a 'less lethal'. That is, the expected result from a proper use isn't death, but death can occur.


Despite the protestations if Tazer Inc, the jury is still out.


Quite the opposite. The jury has been 'in' on lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. So far, not ONE has been upheld. That doesn't mean people won't continue to file suit though.


guns are a more....permanent solution against crime. Tazers are half measures.


Yes, guns certainly are a permanent solution. Assuming you make good hits, the BG will be permanently injured or even possibly suffer death. Of course, that is an instance where deadly force was justified. The taser isn't a replacement for the deadly force option and shouldn't necessarily be used under those conditions. The good side about using a taser is that there is a very good chance you will not be the defendant in a criminal homicide or wrongful death suit. I am thinking that there is a general lack of understanding of the force continuum, ladder of force, or force wheel; whichever model you prefer to use.


Personally, I don't believe these should have been released to the public. Now use LEOs (i'm a soon-to-be LEO) have one more thing we gotta watch out for when we come into contact with people.


Take that position to its logical conclusion and the sheep will be allowed to own nothing. Sorry, that isn't a valid argument. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but spend a few minutes and actually read that Constitution which you are about to swear an oath to uphold. On the positive side, if you were shot with a taser would that not ultimately be better than being shot with the alternative? Think about it.

Randy

TexasSIGMan
January 28, 2006, 08:13 PM
No, that isn't true at all. You are justified to use OC at a much lower level (reference the force continuum) than you can use your handgun. For example, you would be justified to use OC if someone put their hands on you in a threatening manner. You would not so easily be justified to use the handgun in the same situation.

Alternatively, if the situation calls for deadly force, the OC shouldn't be in your hand.

That's my point. The poster I replied to said that Tasers were a level of force UP from OC, the same as a firearm.

He said why bother with the Taser, just shoot.

I replied that the Taser and OC were level, not firearm and Taser.

Point taken. My girlfriend weighs about 90 lbs @ 5 feet, and both of us are more comfortable with her having a handgun than a taser. Yes, it's lethal force, but it's her life on the line too, right?

And yes, the firearm is great, my wife has a LadySmith and carries it some.

The problem for her is that she's a teacher, so 90% of her day outside the house she's in a "gun free zone" but the Taser seems to be a nice fit in the middle somewhere.

RandyDTC
January 28, 2006, 08:30 PM
That's my point. The poster I replied to said that Tasers were a level of force UP from OC, the same as a firearm.

He said why bother with the Taser, just shoot.

I replied that the Taser and OC were level, not firearm and Taser.


Sorry, I missed that. My bad.

Randy

TexasSIGMan
January 28, 2006, 09:46 PM
No no, that's OK. I appreciate your responses.

That is pretty much the gist of what I am asking, where the Taser fits in this.

Equal to OC, a bit above but somewhere below a firearm.

"Legally" where do these things fit?

RandyDTC
January 28, 2006, 10:25 PM
Here is an image (http://www.dt-concepts.com/images/LadderOfForce.jpg) of the document we use in our classes.

Randy

TexasSIGMan
January 29, 2006, 06:01 AM
Thank you, that is EXACTLY what I was looking for.....

brickeyee
January 29, 2006, 01:52 PM
Notice that the Tazer is in the 'less lethal' range, but not considered 'non-lethal'. OC is probably a little high, since I have yet to see a jurisdiction that considers it as lethal.

shamus005
January 29, 2006, 02:37 PM
rapidarp said: Now use LEOs (i'm a soon-to-be LEO) have one more thing we gotta watch out for when we come into contact with people.

:barf:

to which, TexasSIGman replied: Oh please GOD don't start out as one of "those" LEOs that think everyone else should go unarmed because you are "special".

I agree with TexasSIGman.

gddyup
January 29, 2006, 06:25 PM
Personally, I don't believe these should have been released to the public. Now use LEOs (i'm a soon-to-be LEO) have one more thing we gotta watch out for when we come into contact with people.


If you'r THAT concerned, then maybe you should rethink your career choice.... :barf:

OneInTheChamber
January 30, 2006, 07:47 PM
Just a few ?'s

If an officer was shot IN HIS KEVLAR VEST with a taser, would he get tased?

If an officer was shot with a taser, once he recouped would he be allowed to use his firearm? I think so. What does uncle sam think about that? I hear that more BG's are carrying tasers because they are a useful tool yet aren't illegal to carry and don't carry the same penalties if used in a crime.

I certainly hope that when am old enough to become an LEO that they will issue all officers tasers; they seem to be pretty effective. As part of the academy to you have to be shot by a taser (like how you get sprayed with OC)??

Capt Charlie
January 30, 2006, 08:03 PM
If an officer was shot IN HIS KEVLAR VEST with a taser, would he get tased?
We just had to try that one :D . Answer's no.

If an officer was shot with a taser, once he recouped would he be allowed to use his firearm?
If you mean, would he be able, yes. A Taser hit hurts like hell, but the instant it kicks off, you're able to function again, although, some do experience some disorientation.

As part of the academy to you have to be shot by a taser (like how you get sprayed with OC)??
Depends on the department. Most don't require that you actually be punctured by the probes, but a lot do require the "circle jerk", where you link arms and both end guys hold one of the leads. Trust me, the effect's the same. The record take down is held by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. They took down more than 120 troopers linking arms with one Taser :eek: :D .

BreacherUp!
January 30, 2006, 08:10 PM
If an officer was shot with a taser, once he recouped would he be allowed to use his firearm?
Yes. If the officer thinks that by being tazed, he may be disarmed or put into some other life threatening situation. Same situation if a cop comes across a person experienced in martial arts. If you think the person of such force is able to incapacitate you, thus preventing you from defending yourself, deadly force is authorized.

#18indycolts
January 30, 2006, 11:34 PM
I'm no cop, but I work with them everyday. They tell me that they USUALLY draw their tasers before their glocks. Of course depending on the situation. So yes, tasers do and SHOULD have a place in the police.

Dust_Devil
February 4, 2006, 01:03 PM
For non-LEO civilian use, the Taser would probably be an attractive form of defense for those who are afraid of guns, aren't the type of person who wishes to use a deadly weapon, cannot legally own or carry an actual firearm or wish to have a firearm in their household and wish to stop their attacker with a less than lethal form of defense.
A woman carrying a purse holding a Taser for her protection or a person who keeps a Taser in his vehicle for defense against car jackers and the like would be my guess of those, other than LEOs, that would carry a Taser.

RandyDTC
February 4, 2006, 09:09 PM
If an officer was shot IN HIS KEVLAR VEST with a taser, would he get tased?


It depends upon the construction of the vest. If there were low resistance (electrically conductive) fibers in the vest, the current conducted through the person may be low to none at all.

Randy

J.D.B.
February 4, 2006, 10:38 PM
I don't think Tasers should be used by non-LEO's for one reason. When an officer uses a Taser to incapacitate someone, they are generally cuffed or otherwise restrained afterward. The "Tasee" as described above, is usually fully functional once the charge is stopped. I wonder, would a determined attacker disengage at that point? Many an attacker has stopped attacking when shot with a bullet(s), or at least slowed down to the point his quarry can escape without too much difficulty. Seems to me I'd like to "stun" an attacker for at least a few minutes so I could clear out and get help, or otherwise restrain him until help arrives. The Taser doesn't presently have a "stun" feature, so I'd rather rely on the real attack-stopping and deterrence of my conventional handgun until a real "in between" option comes along.
Josh

RandyDTC
February 5, 2006, 04:06 PM
J.D.B.

This is a commonly held opinion but also one that has been formed without all of the facts. Please research the X26c (citizen) taser. They do not operate in the same manner as the law enforcement models.

The citizen model can be set to cycle for up to 30 seconds once deployed. This gives a person plenty of time to lay their (discharding) taser unit on the ground and run away.

Randy

J.D.B.
February 5, 2006, 07:19 PM
Thanks Randy, Interesting "cycling" feature. Too bad they aren't legal here in Michigan.
Josh

TexasSIGMan
February 5, 2006, 08:50 PM
Well, after reading all this and researching I've decided to buy one of the citizen models for my wife.

Like I said, she has a LadySmith but she works in a school all week and there's just no way to carry there without severe repercussions.

So far the Tasers slide "under the radar" and appear to be appropriate for that kind of environment.

Yes they cost too damn much money, but I don't see another choice that is as good a fit. OC spray seems like a good starting point, but you'd need a place to escalate to if it doesn't work.

Thanks for all the input.

Double Naught Spy
February 6, 2006, 02:18 AM
Do tasers have a place in non-LEO self defense? Of course. Why would they not? Just how many other less lethal weapons do folks have that allow you to disable another person from a distance? Assuming things work properly, even a little old lady who is against shooting people with a firearm can use a taser, fire it accurately, and stop her attacker without undue stress.

With that said, I won't be buying one as I don't think it is a good option for my needs.

Derius_T
February 6, 2006, 01:35 PM
rapidarp wrote:

Personally, I don't believe these should have been released to the public. Now use LEOs (i'm a soon-to-be LEO) have one more thing we gotta watch out for when we come into contact with people.

Please, for all our sakes, if you are going into it with THAT attitude, pick another profession. US citizens do not have do be unarmed, defenseless, and grab their ankles because you are a cop. Remember grasshopper, wether we are armed or not, we are UPSTANDING, LAW ABIDING, CITIZENS. You have nothing to fear from us. Its police with attitudes and guns "WE" fear.....;)

Its the whole us against them, guilty until you spend the money to prove your innocent thing.....:barf:

RandyDTC
February 6, 2006, 02:41 PM
Thanks Randy, Interesting "cycling" feature. Too bad they aren't legal here in Michigan.
Josh


You guys (and gals) miss out on a lot of neat things up there.

Randy

Bo Hunter
February 6, 2006, 04:43 PM
Please, for all our sakes, if you are going into it with THAT attitude, pick another profession. US citizens do not have do be unarmed, defenseless, and grab their ankles because you are a cop. Remember grasshopper, wether we are armed or not, we are UPSTANDING, LAW ABIDING, CITIZENS. You have nothing to fear from us.

I don't think he said anything about fearing a LAW ABIDING CITIZEN with a Taser...

But, if you think he's being to "Orwellian" to think of it that way, think of it from the perspective as a defensive CCW....

In a sense, its true. While I don't agree that Tasers should be limited to LEO only, how do you regulate it? Are they considered a concealed weapon, howe about a deadly weapon? I mean think about it - if a criminal can get one without any trouble (albiet, its probably still harder and more expensive to get than a stolen gun), it would be a pretty useful tool in breaking the law.

Zap a cop, security guard, civilian you intend to rob - then do as you wish. While I realize the weapon itself is not deadly, but its debilitating effects could be very useful for a criminal. Surprise car jackings are a snap. Zap - wait for them to stop flopping - order the key's or you'll zap again - OR whack them over the head with something. Want to rob an armor truck? Two guys with Tazers set on 30 seconds could get the job done fairly easily with nary a hitch I would imagine.

Imagine being a CCW citizen, and approached by a guy with a Tazer who intends to rob you. What do you do? You aren't going to have time to draw on a tazer, while you might on a regular firearm. You are gonna go down like a wet dishrag and there isn't a thing you can do about it - whereas being shot in the gut by a .32 might allow you to get some defensive shots off. Adrenaline, guns and martial arts will do nothing for you against a Taser. You are essentially at the mercy of the battery life. Hopefully then, it isn't too late. Or, if you do shoot, is it justified? Would it be considered a good shoot? I mean, he was just going to tase you and take your wallet...

I'm all for freedom's, but just make sure how things are worded. Imagine being convicted of homocide, instead of being appluaded for being an armed citizen protecting your rights because your attacker had a "less than lethal" weapon.... Of course, you could always lie and say you thought it was a gun, but thats not something good law abiding citizens do...

DBOUNCE1
February 6, 2006, 05:16 PM
YES Already on my shopping list

RandyDTC
February 6, 2006, 10:34 PM
In a sense, its true. While I don't agree that automobiles should be limited to LEO only, how do you regulate them? Are they considered a weapon, how about a deadly weapon? I mean think about it - if a criminal can get one without any trouble (albiet, its probably still easier and less expensive to get than a stolen gun), it would be a pretty useful tool in breaking the law.


Hmmm...

Randy

Bo Hunter
February 6, 2006, 11:05 PM
:D

Good point Randy - I was just trying to get people to look at it from a different perspective - thats all. So - is it a concealed weapon? Here in NY - you can't (or aren't supposed to be able to) buy pepper spray without going through a firearms dealer...

How is a taser classified? I'm asking, as I don't know...

SrtDog
February 9, 2006, 04:06 AM
I cant wait for the day that my PD starts using tasers. I dont know how many times I showed up to a call and some methed out junkie is threatening to kill himself with a knife. Its always the kinves these poor (literally poor) jackasses have.

I had a retarded fella the other day threatening his care giver with suicide, and to cut anyone that came near him. Well I sure didnt want to shoot the guy, but I woulda had no real choice if he charged me.

I know this guy from numerous calls. He's relatively harmless, and is normally just acting up for attention. However, he is a fella who dont have all the trees in the forest, and he does have a knife. He ended up walking towards me, and I showed him my glock which I had hidden behind my leg by pointing it strait into his eyes. His eyes opened up super wide, and he dropped the knife.

If he wouldve kept walking towards me, I wouldve shot him. Not something I ever want to encounter again.

Now, this is a perfect situation for a Taser. Cops are constantly getting situations like this.

WarDoctor
February 26, 2006, 04:10 PM
Costs???
What's the problem here dudes, they cost $800-$900 bucks; peanuts. Or, what's your otherwise worthless life worth???
The real problem is clothing; I'm a ER doctor (MD), and I've seen cops have their butts kicked after firing a taser into a punk with heavy winter clothing.
Someone needs to make a more penetrative projectile.
Wardoctor (Desert Storm I)

OneInTheChamber
February 26, 2006, 04:45 PM
I think every LEO should have one; regardless of cost. They look so effective for the situations that LEO deals with every day.

I think it has good applications for ccw; but try concealing a handgun, a taser, and a spare magazine or two. For a civilian, unless you are in an environment where you have a special use (i.e. dealing with the mentally ill; whom don't deserve to be shot but still provide some basis for harm to you).