TASER® Blog

When the use of TASER® electronic control devices (ECDs) comes under scrutiny, I often tell reporters that good science and sound facts will win the day over speculation, urban myths, and inaccurate portrayals of the impact ECDs have on our communities.

Inside the walls of TASER, we have a clear understanding of what ECDs can and can’t do. We are constantly engaged in studies and tests to determine the true impact that TASER ECDs can have. One thing we’ve come to understand over the years is the positive impact TASER devices have on law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve. Thankfully, you don’t have to take our word for it. There are numerous independent studies (approximately 80 percent of all TASER studies are independent) from third party sources not related to TASER International that back up our claims. 

One such study comes from the Michigan Municipal Risk Management Association (MMRMA) — a public entity self-insurance pool, providing liability and property coverage. The MMRMA represents 149 Michigan law enforcement agencies and the approximately 6,000 officers employed by those agencies. Ultimately, the MMRMA provides risk management, claims administration, legal defense and reinsurance services to its local government members from unexpected liability and property losses.

For some history, the MMRMA is quite familiar with TASER ECDs and has studied the impact of these devices upon its members since 2003. In fact, they actually maintain a TASER® Risk Avoidance Program (RAP).

In July 2003, after extensive review, they began partial reimbursement to clients upon purchase of TASER ECDs. The MMRMA is able to provide this reimbursement because its research indicates that agencies with a TASER program reduce use-of-force litigation and excessive force claims reported by members. 

Just this month, the MMRMA provided the most recent review of its 2003-2008 field results. The findings provide a unique snapshot of the impact TASER ECDs have on the state of Michigan. 

Of the 1,768 instances in which a TASER ECD has been used in Michigan, only 83 reported secondary injuries (4.6 percent), and only three of the injuries were considered significant. Let’s take a look:

• 1 injury reported — probe contact to the eye
• 1 injury reported — infection developed while at hospital (second party involvement)
• 1 injury reported — probe contact to the head
• 899 reported instances of substance abuse (50.8%)
• 748 involved the use of alcohol (42.3%)
• 151 instances of drug/narcotics use (8.5%)
• 152 incidents (8.5%) were involving individuals in need of psychiatric intervention 

Interestingly, the results also show a continuining decline in the number of claims filed against Michigan’s law enforcement agencies, as well as the requisite dollar amounts of these claims:

         Year                 Claims                  Claim Amounts

• 2000                   66                        $2,712,979
• 2001                   46                        $922,147
• 2002                   61                        $2,081,971
• 2003                   84                        $7,068,232*
• 2004                   125                      $6,448,316
• 2005                   68                        $6,085,516
• 2006                   57                        $831,943
• 2007                   49                        $508,340
• 2008                   17                        $366,600

*Michigan law enforcement agencies begin TASER ECD programs

Many folks have asked me why these results are so positive. I have my opinions and, quite frankly, these statistics are right in concert with the field studies that I have collected from law enforcement agencies over the past decade. As for why these results occur, and without speculating, it might help to look at some of the requirements made by the MMRMA, as this might shed facts on the matter instead of conjecture:

• Each department needs to have a use of force protocol 
• Each officer needs to be trained in the use of TASER ECDs
• Protocol must include a supervisory review of each TASER ECD use (the MMRMA actually states that it believes this is a key to success in lowering the number of claims)
• Copy of police report forwarded to MMRMA
• Medical clearance on subjects (first 18 months)
• Adopt the MMRMA model policy/procedure

We too believe these requirments help support our continuing mantra that good policies, training and oversight are the keys to successful TASER ECD programs.

As I said at the outset of this post, facts and science win the day and the findings of a risk management association provide the hard actuarial data that is the proof in the pudding.