Further evaluation of Taser devices

Report: 4
Date: 08 April 2005
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report summarises the trial of X26 Taser device.

A. Recommendations

That the report be noted.

B. Supporting information

Summary

1. Police Scientific Development Board (PSDB) was tasked by the Home Office (HO), Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) with carrying out an evaluation of less lethal options, specifically Taser. This report concerns itself with the further testing of the M26 and initial testing of the X26.

2. This report contains the following new information:

• The laser in the sighting system has been classified as 3R (British Laser Safety Standard)
• There is a low risk of Taser affecting medical equipment
• No significant risk of affecting flight critical systems of aircraft in flight
• There is a significant risk of ignition if a Taser is used near a subject sprayed with CS or PAVA incapacitant spray

3. Throughout the trials, the X26 performs marginally better than the M26 in most areas. However, the M26 is half the cost of the X26

4. The overall conclusion is that the risk of life threatening or serious injuries from the M26 Taser is very low.

Safety of the laser sights

5. The laser sights on the M26 have now been classified as 3R according to the British laser safety standard. This class exceeds the internationally agreed maximum permissible exposure (MPE) values (1mW). Due to the safety factors in MPE values, they are unlikely to cause eye injuries for accidental exposures but intentional viewing should be avoided. The laser sight in the X26 is a different component but is built to the same specification.

Medical equipment

6. Using a Taser near medical equipment will always carry some risk. Immediate checks should be done on all electrical medical equipment where Taser is discharged within 5 metres. This is especially true around the following devices:

• Life support systems
• Vital monitoring devices
• Syringe monitoring devices
• Dialysis machines
• Automatic external defibrillators

Effect of Taser current on cardiac rhythm

7. It is considered unlikely that the electrical discharge from the M26 and X26 will influence the heart of healthy individuals. However, the possibility that other factors may have an effect cannot be excluded. These may include the following:

• Illicit drug intoxication
• Alcohol abuse
• Pre-existing Heart disease
• Cardioactive therapeutic drugs

8. It concluded that the risk of a life threatening event arising from the direct interaction of the currents of the X26 Taser with the heart, is less than the already low risk with the M26 Taser.

9. If the X26 is more effective than the M26, there will be a greater likelihood of head injury due to a less controlled fall. However, the risk of a serious head injury is still considered to be low.

Flammable environments

10. There is a significant risk of ignition if Taser is used in a flammable environment. This may occur, for example, on a subject previously sprayed with an incapacitant. CS spray is about twice as likely as PAVA spray to ignite but PAVA solvent burns with a blue flame that is difficult to see in bright light conditions. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that the taser is not used against a subject who has already been sprayed with either CS or PAVA, or when they are present with a flammable solvent. Extreme caution must also be exercised when using the taser on a subject who is suspected of being covered in any other flammable liquid, such as strong alcohol (e.g. undiluted spirits) or petroleum spirit, or in a dangerous environment, such as a petrol station.

Recommendations

• The Home Office should continue to provide the Defense of Scientific Advisory Council office on Medical Implications of Less Lethal Weapons (DOMILL) with reports outlining the circumstances of every use of the M26, the post-incident medical assessments undertaken by the Forensic Medical Examiner (FME), and the clinical consequences noted by the FME or clinical staff. This audit should include the X26 Taser if this system is made available for use.
• DOMILL should be advised as soon as practical of any primary or secondary injury that could be classed as life threatening, unexpected, or potentially leading to disability.
• DOMILL should be advised of any changes in: the specification or performance of the M26 and X26 Taser devices; the guidance to users and training practices; the policy and practice of deployment, use and audit.

Conclusions

11. This report has covered two main areas of work: addressing the residual concerns over the use of the M26 and comparing the Taser International Taser X26 to the M26 Advanced Taser (the latter has been approved for operational use in support to firearms).

Residual concerns over the M26

12. The laser sight from the M26 has been tested and can be classified as 3R according to the British laser safety standard. Although this class exceeds the internationally agreed maximum permissible exposure (MPE) values (1mW), because of the safety factors in MPE values, they are unlikely to cause eye injuries for accidental exposures. However, intentional viewing must be avoided. The laser sights in the X26 are claimed by the manufacturer to be built to the same specification as those in the M26.

13. The testing of the M26 taser against medical equipment has shown that there is a low risk of the taser affecting it in a dangerous way. Further testing commissioned by PSDB has indicated that there is no significant risk of affecting the on board systems of aircraft in flight.

14. The further testing has shown that there is a significant risk of ignition if a taser is fired at a target that has been previously sprayed with either CS or PAVA incapacitant spray. CS spray is about twice as likely as PAVA spray to ignite but PAVA solvent burns with a blue flame that is difficult to see in bright light conditions. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that the taser is not used against a subject who has already been sprayed with either CS or PAVA, when they are present with a flammable solvent, if it is possible to avoid doing so. Extreme caution must also be exercised when using the taser on a subject who is suspected of being covered in any other flammable liquid, such as strong alcohol (e.g. undiluted spirits) or petroleum spirit, or in a dangerous environment, such as a petrol station.

15. It concludes that the risk of life-threatening or serious injuries from the M26 Taser is very low.

Comparison of the Taser X26 with the M26 Advanced Taser

16. Throughout the testing and the handling trials, and when compared to the Operational Requirement the X26 taser performs better than the M26 in most areas. However, The X26 is approximately twice the cost of the M26.

17. The risk of a life-threatening event arising from the direct interaction of the currents of the X26 Taser with the heart is less than the already low risk of such an event from the M26 Advanced Taser. If the X26 is more effective than the M26 in stimulating skeletal muscle, as claimed, then there will be a greater likelihood of head injury after contact with surfaces due to the less controlled fall. However, the risk of serious head injury is still considered to be low.

Overall conclusions

18. The biggest drawback is the maximum possible range of both units which continues to be 21’ (6.4m) & general effective range.

19. Compared to the Operational requirement (O.R.), the X26’s advantages are:

• Ease of operation
• Better handling
• Full functionality in greater range of environments
• Smaller and lighter than M26
• Speed of use and reloading
• More robust audit trail with more parameters recorded
• Less risk of causing a life threatening event

20. The X26’s disadvantages are

• Double the cost of the M26
• Possible reliability issues
• Increased risk of head injury from a less controlled fall

21. Compared to the O.R., the M26’s advantages are:

• Less difficult to have a negligent discharge
• Half the cost of the X26
• More effective visual deterrent
• Easier to grip & retain

22. The M26’s disadvantages are:

• Shaped more like a firearm
• Difficult to fire due to its trigger mechanism

23. If deciding to use both weapons systems, there could be difficulties re:

• Cost
• Training
• Documentation
• Operator confusion

C. Race and equality impact

The Taser should be effective against the maximum proportion of the population, taking account of both permanent and transitory effects (e.g. ergonomics/drunkenness). All taser devices are effective against a high proportion of the population, including those who are drunk or who are suffering from the effects of drugs or a mental illness. There is no specific group likely to be impacted by the use of Taser, other than Special Population Group.

D. Financial implications

E. Background papers

• Report into Further Evaluation of Tazer Devices by David Wilkinson

F. Contact details

Report author: Sergeant Paul Anjos and Superintendent Philip Manns, Force Firearms Unit, 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