Electroshock weapon

It delivers an electric shock aimed at temporarily disrupting muscle functions and/or inflicting pain, usually without causing significant injury.

Though the two terms are often used interchangeably, stun guns are actually direct contact weapons that work mainly through pain compliance by affecting the sensory nervous system.

[2] In comparison, a Taser is a long range weapon that fires barbed darts and incapacitates the target by disrupting voluntary muscular control through the motor nervous system.

[2][3] However, some models of Taser blur this distinction as they are capable of delivering a "drive stun", a pain compliance technique involving placing the weapon in direct contact with the subject's body and discharging a shock without firing the probes.

[17] Manufacturers' instructions and manuals shipped with the products state that a half-second shock duration will cause intense pain and muscle contractions, startling most people greatly.

[18] Because there was no automatic stop on older model Taser devices, many officers have used it repeatedly or for a prolonged period of time, thus potentially contributing to suspects' injuries or death.

Some models are built into long flashlights also designed to administer an electric shock with its lit end's metal surround (which is split into halves insulated from each other).

[25] It subsequently transpired that the XREP had never been officially approved for use in the United Kingdom and the weapon system was provided unrequested to the police at the scene directly by the civilian company which distributes Taser International's products in the UK.

Prototype electroshock guns exist that replace the solid wire with a stream of conductive liquid (e.g., metallic solution, salt water), which offers an increase in the range of a Taser CEW (or better) and the possibility of multiple shots.

According to the proponents of this technology, problems associated with this design include:[citation needed] Since 2001, Russian developer Oleg Nemtyshkin has sought to create a repeating stun pistol, after the Axon Taser CEW.

[29] A study conducted by emergency medicine physicians at the University of California, San Diego, US showed no lasting effects of the Taser device on healthy test subjects.

], Taser devices are programmed to be activated in automatic five second bursts, and the operator can stop the energy charge by engaging the safety switch.

Concerns about the use of conducted electrical weapons have arisen from cases that include the death of the Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski[32] at the airport in Vancouver, Canada where he died after the RCMP officer, in spite of his training, repeatedly stunned him with a TASER CEW.

He died after repeated exposure to a Taser device even after being physically apprehended (by the weight of several police officers lying on top of him compressing his chest and making it hard to breathe.

Electroshock weapons have been made illegal in Germany by supplement 2 WaffG[36] if they do not carry an official seal of approval demonstrating they do not constitute a health risk.

[41] In the United Kingdom the possession and purchase of any weapon of whatever description designed or adapted for the discharge of any noxious liquid, gas or other thing is prohibited.

According to previous interpretation of the Firearms Act, Taser CEWs were considered "prohibited weapons" and could be used only by members of law-enforcement agencies after they were imported into the country under a special permit.

[50] The direct source for this information comes from an independent report produced by Compliance Strategy Group[51] for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

The purchase, possession, and carrying of Taser devices in Germany has been prohibited since April 1, 2008 (gun control law: Anlage 2, Abschnitt 1, Nr.

[61] Under Hong Kong laws, Chapter 238 Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance, "Any portable device which is designed or adapted to stun or disable a person by means of an electric shock applied either with or without direct contact with that person" is considered an "arm" and therefore, the importation, possession and exportation of Taser devices requires a license from the Hong Kong Police Force.

[citation needed] Under the Firearm and Sword Possession Control Law, import, carrying, purchase and use of stun guns or tasers is currently completely prohibited in Japan.

The section offers one of the descriptions for a firearm as "a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged or which can be adapted for the discharge of any shot, bullet or other missile and includes ... an electrical charge which when it strikes any person or animal is of sufficient strength to stun and temporarily disable the person or animal struck (such weapon being commonly known as a 'stun gun' or 'electronic paralyser' ".

The Swedish Police Authority had purchased a limited quantity of Taser CEWs, and was about to initiate field trials when these were cancelled in 2005 after an ethics commission found that the need for (and risks of) such devices was not firmly established.

[79] The 12-month trial commenced on 1 September 2007, and took place in the following forces: Avon & Somerset, Devon & Cornwall, Gwent, Lincolnshire, Merseyside, Metropolitan Police, Northamptonshire, Northumbria, North Wales and West Yorkshire.

In Bryan v. MacPherson, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a TASER CEW had been used in a way that constituted excessive force and hence a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

In the latter case Mattos v. Agarano,[82] the same Court of Appeals found that in two situations involving TASER CEW use, one in drive-stun and one in dart mode, officers had used excessive force.

[83] In 1991, an electroshock device supplied by Tasertron to the Los Angeles Police Department failed to subdue Rodney King—even after he was shocked twice with the device—causing officers to believe he was on PCP.

[85] TASER devices are considered the same as firearms by the United States government for the purposes of the Second Amendment protection, the right to keep and bear arms.

[103][104] On November 15, 2016, it was reported that New Jersey's Attorney General Christopher Porrino had conceded that the state's 1985[105] ban on stun guns is unconstitutional.

[121][122] On March 21, 2019, the Supreme Court of Illinois ruled unanimously that the ban on possession or carriage of stun guns in public is facially unconstitutional.