This is an opinion piece published today on The Punch. It can be seen online in its original context here.
The latest death from a police Taser in Sydney shows the need for the whole community to start asking some tough questions about the ever-expanding use of these weapons by police forces across Australia. Tasers have been presented by law enforcement agencies and their Police Ministers as “non-lethal” alternatives to firearms. However the figures on Taser use in NSW and across the world show that they are often lethal, and do not displace firearms use.
Back in 2008 when the NSW government made the decision to trial Tasers, the public was told they would reduce the use of firearms. The then government and opposition made strident calls for front-line police to be equipped with alternatives to lethal force—and Tasers were that alternative.
But if, as promised, stun guns were genuinely being used in place of firearms, police use of firearms would be decreasing. This has not been happening. Police use of firearms in NSW has not meaningfully decreased between 2006 and 2010, while the use of stun guns has increased dramatically in that time.
In 2008 there just 126 instances of Police Tasers being drawn, but by 2010 some 1200 Taser draws were happening a year. Tasers were drawn and fired by NSW Police approximately 250 times in that year.
So with Tasers not displacing firearms use, their role in policing becomes far from clear. Every general duties police officer in NSW now has a belt containing capsicum spray, a baton, a firearm and a Taser. You would think there was one document they could go to that described what to use in any given situation, but this is not the case. Instead there are only separate guidelines and procedures for each weapon.
With four weapons to hand, together with the option of engaging physically to restrain alleged offenders, is it any wonder that Police are confused about what to do in a critical incident?
The extent of the confusion was highlighted in 2009 when a young mentally ill man, Adam Salter, was shot dead by a police Glock pistol after the officer in question called out “Taser, Taser, Taser”. According to the Coroner who investigated the matter, complexity, confusion and cover-up followed in that case.
Just last month Amnesty International revealed that that “at least 500 people in the USA have died since 2001 after being shocked with Tasers either during their arrest or while in jail.”
While Taser use is much more entrenched in the US than here in Australia, this figure strikingly shows the lethal potential of these weapons.
When dealing with a weapon that can deliver 50,000 volts to an individual, people would expect that, at a minimum, the police guidelines would repeat the clear warnings the manufacturer delivers about their product. Again though, this is not the case for NSW Police.
The NSW Police Taser guidelines advise to “aim for the centre of seen target mass of the back (where possible avoid targeting the head)”. They inexplicably fail to heed the manufacture’s additional warning:”When possible, avoid intentionally targeting the ECD on sensitive areas of the body such as the head, throat, chest/breast, or known pre-existing injury areas without legal justification.”
This warning was put in place by the manufacturer after a number of incidents in the US which saw people being killed by police Taser discharges to the chest. Despite being drawn to this failure in the NSW Police Guidelines, the NSW Police Minister refuses to act.
The relationship between police and the public should be based on trust, respect and communication. This relationship is seriously being strained by the increased use of force by Police that has accompanied the widespread use of Tasers.
The Greens recognise the obvious truth that not every potentially violent incident will be able to be talked down and police must have force as a near to last option to de-escalate an incident or bring an alleged offender to justice. In that regard there may well be a limited range of incidents where Tasers could be used as a genuine alternative to lethal force.
In 2008 the NSW Ombudsman reviewed the start of Taser use in NSW and found that the “risks of using Tasers are far higher when used by general duties officers compared to specialist units, given that general duties officers receive significantly less training about managing high risk incidents, and they do not work in a team environment.
Until the guidelines and procedures for all use of force are clarified and simplified, Tasers need to be restricted to specialist units and called in where appropriate.
But with the weapons rolling out in Victoria and the NSW Premier giving them his public endorsement, you shouldn’t hold your breath for any outbreak of common sense with these weapons.