[Desert Dog]

After reading yesterday about Taser being selected for use by United Airline pilots, I took a look at the Taser web site to see what their Advanced Taser product was all about. I was only familiar with their Air Taser product. After reading the review article on the web site, I learned the famed Rodney King (Taser) failure was one of the Air Taser units with 5 watts of power. The new Advanced Taser is available in either an 18 or 26 watt configurations.

According to Taser, this EMD (Electro-Muscular Disruption) Technology is supposed to "...completely override the central nervous system and directly control the skeletal muscles. This EMD effect causes an uncontrollable contraction of the muscle tissue, allowing the M-Series to physically debilitate a target regardless of pain tolerance or mental focus. The ADVANCED TASER M-Series are EMD weapons -- specifically designed to stop even the most elite, aggressive, focused combatants."

So, my question: Is this indeed a significant advance in non-lethal weapon technology, or is Taser just over-hyping their new product? Any of our member LE friends have field experience with the Advanced Taser? What does everyone think of the idea of pilots using such a non-leathal weapon -- good idea or bad?


DD

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Desert Dog on 2001-11-16 17:09 ]</font>

 

[Kenneth Bowen]

I'm no leo, and I don't have any experience with the products you mention.

That doesn't stop me from having and opinion. I think it's a bunch of bed
wetting baloney.

Give the pilots a 38 snub with frangible or shot shell ammo. I'm sure there
have been all sorts of "what do we shoot them with inside an airplane in
flight" studies paid for with our tax dollars. Load it with _THAT_.

Enter the cockpit, get a belly/face full of that load. Then, to borrow from
Jeff Cooper, re-open the bar for the rest of the passengers. If the plane
hasn't decompressed from a hole; it's hard to drink through the o2 masks.

Sheesh, what's next? Spray the attackers with sticky foam? Drop a net on them?
This is a hijacking, not Batman.

 

[Tech]

This is a hijacking, not Batman.

LMAO!
The problem is that the general public has seen way too much Batman, James Bond, Star Trek etc...Put a door on the cockpit made out of something besides tinfoil and give the man a .38 special. Maybe it needs a new name for the public. Instead we could call it a Special Anti-terrorist Behavioral Modification Device....loaded with Magsafes!

Tech

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Tech on 2001-11-19 08:23 ]</font>

 

[Shane1911]

Tasers work best in open areas, not in airplanes with multiple targets and multiple no-hits.

Tasers have a max. range of about 20 ft. I have seen a LOT of people miss targets at this range with a SIGHTED weapon, while under stress. Tasers do not have inherant accuracy, and in the hands of a stressed operator, my money says that there are more misses than hits with Tasers.

I think this is a bad idea all around. There's gonna be a lot of terrified passengers getting lit up if this is the chosen line of defense.

 

[sheepdog]

I'm a LEO, have TASER Instructor's Certification, which just means I've been to the schools and carry one. I have taken a brief jolt from one, and seen a couple of dozen students take jolts, many more on videotape. It is a great weapon, within its limitations. The laser sight makes it easy to hit a target, and that T-wave sensation definitely takes the fight out of a person. For airliners, I see no use. What about multilple hijackers? Do you just keep the guy lying flat after he is hit but still plugged into the barbs until you get to an airport? It can be done, but who's gonna fly the plane? I like the TASER, but my vote is with the guys who favor a gun. Using less lethal responses to lethal threats works sometimes, but is tricky and dangerous, even for the well trained.