Boston Globe Report on TASERs is Misleading
The report on Cambridge police wanting to use TASERs is misleading and
irresponsible. (Janice O'Leary, "Police will seek state OK on use of Tasers,"
Boston Globe, April 15, 2007)
"If the officer on the scene of a crime in East Cambridge in 2002, [...]
had had a TASER, [Lt. Robert] Ames said, the suspect who was shot might still be
alive."
Ames also quoted a TASER corporate document which says that persons with
disabilities have a higher tolerance level for pain. That is what police used to
say about black people.
In July 2002, the Cambridge police broke down the door on Porter Street in
East Cambridge and shot Daniel Furtado dead in his own home, with no court order
and no warrant to enter his home. He was accused of cutting a cable TV wire, a
misdemeanor. If Cambridge police had not violated state and US laws, there would
have been no death either. The police violated the US Constitution and killed a
citizen contrary to law.
Intimidating a person from the free exercise of a constitutionally
guaranteed right is a crime. Being secure in your home is one such right, the
Fourth Amendment.
If Cambridge police are negligently trained to respect the Constitution and
state laws, what is there to stop police from violating their own regulations?
The idea that "excited delirium," a non-existent PR creation is responsible
for deaths is fantasy. The Arizona Republic reported 167 deaths after being
TASEd. In March 2007 the New York Post reported another.
Canada and the United Kingdom do not permit these weapons to be used in
their countries. TASER Corp. uses the worldwide grease of money to persuade
local police to buy their weapons. Bernie Kerik, NYC Police Commissioner got $6
million in stock.
An alternative which the Cambridge police refused to consider is a net gun
which disables with no danger of of death.
Quoting Robert Winters a math instructor at Harvard, who is alleged to be
an FBI informant is like asking the Pope about religion. What do you expect he
would say? The ACLU in Massachusetts no longer criticizes the police. The ACLU
in Massachusetts works with the police. Their position on TASERs is the same as
the police's.
--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA
CAMBRIDGE
Police will seek state OK on use of Tasers
Stun guns save lives, officials say; critics see needless deaths
By Janice O'Leary,
Boston Globe Correspondent
April 15, 2007
The last time a Cambridge police officer fired a bullet in service was in 2002,
according to the Police Department. And some city officials have said that the
man who died as a result might still be alive if he'd instead been zapped with a
Taser.
The Cambridge police could be one of the first Boston-area forces to arm its
officers with the controversial stun guns. Chelsea police began using Tasers in
2005, soon after the Legislature unanimously voted to OK their use in the state.
In 2005, Brookline police introduced the idea but postponed it because of
reports of Taser-related deaths elsewhere nationally.
Cambridge police are considering Tasers "as an option, as a tool to help
officers do their jobs," said Lieutenant Paul Ames, commander of the Cambridge
police special response team.
"Not as an answer to a rabid crime problem. We want officers to be judicious in
their use. We may deploy these weapons and never use them, which would be fine
with me.
"A Taser might save one life," he said, "and if it does that, then it's worth
it, to me."
Not everyone agrees that Tasers are a good idea.
"I don't understand why we are doing this," said Lawrence Adkins, a Riverside
resident who attended a recent neighborhood meeting about the weapons.
He said that, with the use of pepper spray so low and the cost of Tasers so
high, he would rather see the money spent on additional manpower.
Cambridge police plan to submit their proposal for arming their special response
team with Tasers to the state's Executive Office of Public Safety in the next 30
days, Ames said.
Initially, Cambridge police want to order 30 Tasers. The $30,000 price tag
includes training costs. Ames said the department has not stated that it is
definitely getting the guns.
The state requires four hours of training for each operator of a stun gun, but
Cambridge plans to double that requirement, Ames said.
"We've had a mixed response from the public so far," Ames said. "There's a
little fear of it. There's a fear that Tasers kill people, even though a slew of
medical studies have been done to prove they do not cause death."
Amnesty International has linked 152 deaths to Taser use since 1999 . In 2003
and again in 2005, the organization issued a plea to suspend the purchase or use
of the stun guns until further studies could be conducted.
Regarding those reports, Ames said: "No one has listed Tasers as a cause of
death, but that they were used when someone died. We're following the guidelines
set forth by PERF," the Police Executive Research Forum. "That organization did
research and said Tasers do not cause death."
That report offers police 52 guidelines for the use of Tasers and similar
devices. It notes that "multiple activations," or repeated firing, of such
devices "appears to increase the risk of death."
The police group, a national organization, used recommendations published by the
American Civil Liberties Union to set its policy on Tasers, Ames said.
Tasers work by sending electric pulses to the muscles, causing them to contract
for five seconds.
"You can't move for those five seconds," Ames said, "allowing officers to
handcuff the suspect."
"If the alternative is to use bullets, then Tasers are preferable," said math
teacher Robert Winters , a local political observer.
"But, on the other hand, I hope this doesn't mean that if people get rowdy at an
event, the police will just Taser them."
The Amnesty International reports had an impact on Brookline's decision two
years ago to put the Tasers on hold.
The Amnesty report stated: "While in most cases deaths have continued to be
attributed to factors other than the Taser, such as 'excited delirium'
associated with drug intoxication or violent struggle, in 23 cases coroners have
listed the use of the Taser as a cause or a contributory factor in death.
"In three cases in 2005," the report continued, "the Taser was listed as the
primary cause of death."
Ames, who has been stunned by a Taser himself, said it feels "very
uncomfortable," but one reason he favors them is that "you're not using pain to
control a suspect, but rather muscle contraction. If a suspect is on drugs, he
can fight through the pain of being hit by a baton. But someone on drugs can't
fight through the Taser."
If the officer on the scene of a crime in East Cambridge in 2002, the last time
a bullet was fired by a cop on duty, had had a Taser, Ames said, the suspect who
was shot might still be alive.
He declined to give more specifics about the incident.
Cambridge City Councilor Michael A. Sullivan , who cochairs the council's Public
Safety Committee, agreed. "Maybe the result could have been different," he said.
"I could see a case made for appropriate use."
Cambridge Mayor Kenneth E. Reeves , who agreed with Sullivan that a life might
have been saved if a Taser had been used in that case, also urges caution.
"Just because it's not a bullet doesn't mean it can't cause other problems."
Adkins remains firmly against the guns. "Call me old-fashioned, but it's not
fitting for us. It's the wrong town and the wrong purpose."
Winters said: "In principle, I think they're a good idea. Execution will be the
issue."
