Introduction of the taser (electronic stun gun) as a less lethal option

Report: 4
Date: 4 April 2003
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report provides details of how the MPS intends to introduce the Taser for use by firearm officers as a less lethal option.

A. Recommendation

1. That the Committee notes and supports the introduction by the Metropolitan Police Service of the M26 Advanced Taser for use as a less lethal option by selected SO19 firearm officers as part of an ACPO operational 12 months trial.

B. Supporting information

1. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) remains fully committed to the introduction of suitable technology designed to provide less lethal options. This is in line with the legal and moral obligations on police to restrain violent or armed individuals using only that force which is reasonable, necessary and proportionate, whilst protecting members of the public and ensuring officer safety.

2. The introduction of a new less lethal option needs to be carefully considered. A balance must be achieved between ensuring that the people of London, and the police officers protecting them, are not put at increased risk of harm whilst at the same time maintaining the rights of an armed or potentially dangerous individual. Members will wish to bear in mind the following three points when considering this paper:

• The MPS already employs a wide range of less lethal tactical options. These include negotiation, physical restraint through approved self-defence techniques, use of equipment such as handcuffs, batons and CS spray and, where necessary, officers deployed with public order equipment or specialist officers with baton guns. The choice of an option, or options, is made following a risk assessment of the circumstances at a particular incident. Any additional less lethal option should be seen in this context.
• The agreed Home Office and Association of Chief Police Officers’ (ACPO) wording of ‘less lethal’ takes into account the fact that any use of force against a person, irrespective of the method applied, carries a degree of risk. For example, a person struck by a supposedly non-lethal weapon might fall and sustain secondary injuries or suffer medical complications. Whilst extensive scientific and medical research (as well as guidelines and training) goes some way to reducing these risks, there remains a possibility that a small number of individuals might receive fatal, albeit legally justifiable, injuries through police intervention.
• The Home Office, ACPO and the MPS agree that less lethal options should not be a replacement to the police use of firearms. It remains the case that where a person is armed with a firearm, or is otherwise so dangerous as to put life in imminent danger, firearms will continue to be deployed, albeit now supported by less lethal options. This is because the risk posed to others is invariably so great that it is considered necessary and proportionate for police to retain an option available to immediately incapacitate an individual. Currently, there are no other less lethal technologies, either available or under development, that are capable of causing immediate incapacitation at safe distance. In general, less lethal options are best utilised as a way of debilitating a suspect so that police can obtain a tactical advantage in appropriate circumstances.

Background

3. Tasers are devices designed to use the effects of electricity to incapacitate individuals. There are a variety of such weapons available but the principles of their operation remain the same. They are battery powered and use a low current, high voltage impulse shock to provide incapacitation.

4. Taser operates in the following way; a cartridge is attached to the front end of the weapon, which contains two barbs (the electrodes) each of which is attached to a coiled length of wire. The barbs are fired and attach themselves to the skin or clothing of the individual. Once attached, a current can then be passed along the wires. The weapon can also be used in a ‘drive stun’ manner. This is where there is either a used cartridge or no cartridge on the front of the weapon and the front of the weapon is placed on the subject. Once a circuit has been established the device will send a metered and pulsed current into the individual. This results in involuntary muscle spasms and severe loss of motor control. Following extensive research by PSDB, the M26 Advanced Taser (produced by Taser International) was identified as the most suitable weapon. This weapon has an optimum operational range of 15ft (4.6m) with a maximum range of 21ft (6.4m). It is this weapon that ACPO will trial.

5. The Taser is the latest less lethal technology to be approved by the Home Office and recommended for introduction as such by ACPO. As part of the research, the Taser was sent to the Defence Scientific and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) to examine its effects on the human body. Following this initial work, the matter was referred to the Defence Scientific Advisory Council (DSAC) sub committee on the Medical Implications of Less Lethal Weapons (DOMILL). A preliminary statement has been issued by DOMILL supporting the use of Taser as part of the ACPO trial.

6. As Taser is an electrical device there is clearly varying degrees of apprehension from a number of quarters ranging from the government through to civil liberty groups. To ensure a structured and transparent approach, the introduction of the Taser has been guided by ACPO through the Conflict Management Portfolio under the chairmanship of Paul Acres, the Chief Constable of Hertfordshire.

7. To date, in addition to the independent research mentioned above, a briefing paper was prepared for the attention of the Home Secretary. Paul Acres delivered this to John Denham at the Home Office, on 19 November 2002. The paper laid out the current position relating to Taser from a research perspective and proposed police use. On 30 January 2003, Mr Acres received a letter from Mr Denham giving Home Office support for the police trial of Taser.

8. In addition to the MPS there are four other forces participating in the proposed trial – North Wales, Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire and Thames Valley. Officers from these forces have drawn up policy and operational guidelines together with the creation of a comprehensive training package. Additional documentation was also drafted by this group and included information packs to medical practitioners, subject notification forms and evaluation feedback forms.

9. The trial is for a period of 12 months commencing on 21 April 2003 and will be the subject of independent evaluation by Price Waterhouse Cooper. AC Veness recommended the introduction of Taser, as part of the ACPO trial, to Management Board.

Proposed area of operational use

10. Where a person is armed with a firearm, or is otherwise so dangerous as to put life in imminent danger, conventional firearms will be deployed. However, the Taser should be available for issue and deployment at appropriate incidents as an additional tactical option in support of conventional firearms.

11. The Taser is primarily for use in situations of serious violence or the threat of such violence. Due to the nature of policing, it will never be possible to provide a definitive list of situations in which use of the Taser may be appropriate.

12. However, its use may be appropriate where immediate incapacitation is not imperative and the threat faced at the time could be controlled and neutralised without recourse to conventional firearms, and;

• There is reason to suppose that its use is necessary and proportionate to reduce a serious risk of loss of life or serious injury, and;
• Other methods of policing to neutralise the threat have been tried and failed, or by the nature of the circumstances, are unlikely to succeed if tried.

Proposed method of deployment

13. The MPS will adopt the ACPO guidelines governing the trial. These dictate that officers armed with conventional firearms will be deployed with the Taser available as a less lethal option in support.

14. The initial plan in the MPS is for two Tasers to be made available in each of the SO19 Armed Response Vehicle (ARV) supervisors’ vehicles. This will provide a maximum of three Taser equipped vehicles, consisting of three core shift vehicles available at all times. Additional Tasers will be available from certain armouries.

15. The officer in charge of the incident scene (supported by the SO19 Tactical Advisor) will consider, in the prevailing circumstances, whether deployment of the Taser is appropriate. If this is the case, the SO19 supervisor will make the Taser available for use by appropriately trained SO19 staff.

16. Full training together with written deployment guidelines, tactics and post incident procedures / investigation protocols will be in place prior to deployment.

17. The deployment of Taser will be reviewed in the context of the current assessment of ARV provision and working arrangements.

C. Equality and diversity implications

Each deployment of the Taser will be strictly monitored, taking account of equal opportunity and diversity policies and objectives of the MPA and MPS. The independent review by Price Waterhouse will be conducted through the Home Office. There are no other implications identified at this stage of development but any that emerge will be fully explored to ensure the requirements of the MPS Race Equality scheme are fulfilled.

D. Financial implications

1. There are sufficient stocks within the MPS to facilitate deployment. Each Taser costs £395 (+ VAT) with each cartridge priced at £15 (+ VAT).

2. To date £37K has been spent on the acquisition of equipment with a further £31K yet to be spent. This will cover the cost of equipment for the trial.

3. An independent assessment of the trial will be made. The MPS contribution to the cost of the evaluation will be £66K, which with equipment gives a total cost of £134K.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author: Commander Gormley, SO Department and Inspector Robert Blackburn, CO11, MPS.

For more information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback