Not sure what "wow" means in this context. Most of the people who have died after being tased had large amounts of drugs on board. The rest have had preexisting conditions that placed them at risk for the type of high activity levels that resisting arrest brings. Their drugged state and deviant behavior brought them to the attention of the police.

Lots of people will try to draw a cause-effect relationship between being tased and their deaths. This is logically absurd. Why is it that some people fail to draw the same conclusion about their drug intoxication and their deaths but will quickly lay the blame on a tool used by the police? It couldn't be that some people don't want to accept responsibility for their own actions could it? It couldn't be that if the actual cause of death was the drug intoxication that there wouldn't be anyone to sue could it? Nah, nothing like that could ever happen.

Departments that have gone to the tool report that their rates of shootings have dropped by as much as 80%. There have also been significant drops in the number of people injured by officers during uses of force and the same of officers injured by suspects while making arrests.

It's certainly not the answer to all problems and it's not 100%, nothing is. It's not hard to avoid being tased. Millions of people do it every day.

In this thread Lou I'm being a bit of a devil's advocate. There is nothing wrong with having the tool available. Except that the darned thing has been sold as a miracle tool, kinda like when OC was first placed on the market.
I have seen it fail and have seen it used unwisely (tactically speaking). I believe in part due to the training process promoted by the manufacturer. As all things it will sort itself out in time and policies will come into line.
But, many dept.'s aren't up to speed on use of force training and the current concepts applied by progressive dept.'s.
I would like to think that simply adding a tazer didn't decrease shootings by 80%, it should have been a use force training, options, and policy change of which the tazer was one part. But, like most people selling their wares, the 80% sounds really great and to attribute it to their product even better.

 Quote:

Departments that have gone to the tool report that their rates of shootings have dropped by as much as 80%. There have also been significant drops in the number of people injured by officers during uses of force and the same of officers injured by suspects while making arrests.

 Quote:

In this thread Lou I'm being a bit of a devil's advocate. There is nothing wrong with having the tool available. Except that the darned thing has been sold as a miracle tool, kinda like when OC was first placed on the market.
I have seen it fail and have seen it used unwisely (tactically speaking). I believe in part due to the training process promoted by the manufacturer.

I understand Kevin and I'm with you. Anyone who takes a Taser to a deadly force situation needs some training. It's not an appropriate response to someone who has a club, a knife or a gun; yet many people are using it on those people, thinking that it's a "magic bullet."

LAPD reports about a 20% failure rate with OC. The rate of failure with a Taser isn't that high, but it's still not a substitute for deadly force, at least not without a well developed and executed plan that includes a backup who has a deadly force weapon. It's great for those who want to fight with fists but as soon as any kind of weapon comes into play, it's not suited anymore.

my wow was...26 watts of electical output which is a 50,000 volt shock designed to override the subject central nervous system causing uncontrollable contraction of the muscle tissue and instant collapse...