BENEFITS OF TASERS OUTWEIGH RISKS, REPORT FOR POLICE CHIEFS CONCLUDES

OTTAWA -- The advantages of tasers and other so-called "conducted energy
devices" used by police far outweigh the risks, despite a lack of
definitive research on the subject, concludes a report for Canadian police
chiefs.

Although there have been reports of deaths, no evidence exists that shows
the devices -- known in police parlance as CEDs -- alone are to blame, says
the study by the Canadian Police Research Centre which was released yesterday.

The devices are "effective law-enforcement tools that are safe in the vast
majority of cases," says the study, which includes opinions from police and
medical professionals.

"It has become evident that the emergence of CEDs as a use-of-force option
for police services has been a substantial benefit," it says.

"Proper training and use of CEDs have reduced the risk of harm to both
police officers and suspects. There is no question that the use of CEDs
can, and has, saved many lives."

The devices, which can deliver a 50,000-volt shock as they subdue
aggressive people, have become increasingly popular with North American
law-enforcement agencies.

But controversy exists over whether they are being used properly. The
human-rights group Amnesty International last November identified at least
70 incidents in which people died in police custody across North America
after being shocked by tasers or similar devices.

The new study was presented at the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police
annual meeting. It acknowledges that there are "no known, scientifically
tested, independently verified and globally accepted CED safety parameters."

But it indicates there were likely mitigating circumstances in most, if not
all, cases in which suspects died after being zapped by the devices. It
says the risk of heart attack or damage from the devices is "very low."

"Definitive research or evidence does not exist that implicates a causal
relationship between the use of CEDs and death," it says. "Existing studies
indicate that the risk of cardiac harm to subjects from a CED is very low."

The report says excited delirium, while not a universally recognized
medical condition, may explain why so many deaths have been associated with
use of the devices.

The condition, in which sufferers are often incoherent, violent or
unco-operative, is usually caused by drugs or psychiatric illness. It has
previously been associated with deaths in custody, or "in-custody- death
syndrome."

The report says multiple use of tasers and similar devices, and their
impact on respiration and other physical effects, could also play a role in
the deaths.

"Police officers should recognize that acutely agitated persons are
suffering from a medical emergency and that emergency medical services
involvement is warranted as early as possible in the restraint process."

Deaths occurred in restraint situations before the devices were used and
they will continue long after any further research sheds more light on the
situation, said Inspector Darren Laur, a co-author of the report.

"On average, every year in Canada, we have between 10 and 15 sudden and
unexpected deaths proximal to restraint where a taser isn't used," Insp.
Laur said at a news conference. "In the United States, there are between 50
and 150.

"This has been an issue since policing became a profession. . . . I truly
believe that these types of deaths will continue to take place even if we
invent the Star Trek phaser that you place on 'stun.' "

The report emphasizes that the devices have never been intended solely as
an alternative for lethal force, and it says their use in most non-lethal
incidents has been appropriate.

It suggests that police forces develop incident-reporting procedures and
databases tailored specifically to the devices.

"It would be unwise and counterproductive for any police service or
government body to develop policies and procedures that explicitly specify
in what kinds of circumstances a CED may or may not be used," it says.