Posted by Peter Holran
New Jersey is the ONLY state in the nation where it is illegal for law enforcement to use TASER devices or other electronic control devices (ECDs) in protecting their communities. Prohibiting those who have sworn to protect and to serve from utilizing this life-saving technology is not only outdated thinking, but it puts both the officers and the communities at risk.
Electronic weapons and stun guns have been prohibited for use by law enforcement and the general public in New Jersey since 1985 — nine years before TASER International was founded. The only other three states to totally prohibit law enforcement from using stun devices have already changed their laws to allow officers to carry electronic control devices — Massachusetts (2004), Michigan (2002), and Hawaii (2001).
For more than three years, the Attorney General of New Jersey has considered allowing New Jersey law enforcement officers to use ECDs. Under New Jersey law, the Attorney General can grant permission for law enforcement to use these life-saving devices — yet she refuses.
Two years ago, Attorney General Ann Milgram formed a committee to review and evaluate alternative law enforcement use of force options, including ECDs and stun guns. While the committee has made recommendations regarding certain “less-lethal” ammunition — such as rubber bullets and bean bag rounds — they have yet to make any recommendations on TASER brand devices or any other ECDs, leaving law enforcement agencies across New Jersey, who know the value of ECDs, wanting and waiting to deploy. Read more…
Posted by Natalie
Few would argue against the notion that people have a fundamental right to be safe. Personal safety is one of life’s age old concerns. Individuals, however, have varying ideas as to what they can do to be safe. Some people simply keep a vigilant eye on their surroundings; others may take a self-defense course; and still others may decide a deterrent or weapon is best for them.
The right to select one’s own means of self-protection is something we affirm at TASER International. We believe it is important that people have choices when it comes to selecting a method with which to feel comfortable and safe — regardless of whether or not an individual chooses to protect themselves with a TASER® C2™. For instance, I do not feel comfortable carrying a gun (although I would like to be trained in how to use one), but I do feel comfortable carrying my TASER C2. By the way, it’s pink.
Read more…
Posted by Steve Tuttle
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.
Read more…