This study investigates the risks and causes of fatal officer involved shootings (OIS) following ineffective applications of TASER conducted energy weapons (CEWs). Content analysis of open-source records resulted in quantitative and qualitative characteristics and conditions associated with the ineffective application of CEWs resulting in fatal OIS. Research and field-use data indicate that CEWs were ineffective in as many as 47% of applications. From 1985 through 2020, 1349 fatal OIS followed ineffective applications of CEWs in the United States. Officers were more likely first to use CEWs to subdue minority suspects before fatally shooting them than they were with White suspects. In 14 instances since 2004, suspects shot and killed 16 law enforcement officers following ineffective applications of CEWs. The policy implications of the findings are articulated. This is the first study to examine the use of deadly force following the ineffective use of TASER technology.
AdamsKJennisonV (2007) What we do not know about police use of TASERs. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management30(3): 447–465. DOI: 10.1108/13639510710778831.
2.
AlpertGP (2016) Toward a national database of officer involved shootings: a long and winding road. Criminology & Public Policy15: 237–242. DOI: 10.1111/1745-9133.12178.
3.
AlpertGSmithMKaminiskiR, et al. (2011) Police Use of Force, TASERs and Other Less-Lethal Weapons. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
4.
Amnesty International (2004) Excessive and Lethal Force? Amnesty International’s Concerns About Deaths and Ill-Treatment Involving Police Use of TASERs. New York: Author.
BaliatsasCGerbecksJDückersMLA, et al. (2021) Human health risks of conducted electrical weapon exposure: a systematic review. JAMA Network Open4(2): e2037209. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.37209.
9.
BishoppSAKlingerDAMorrisRG (2015) An examination of the effect of a policy change on the police use of TASERs. Criminal Justice Policy Review26(7): 727–746. DOI: 10.1177/0887403414543558.
10.
BozemanWPBarnesDGWinslowJE, et al. (2009) Immediate cardiovascular effects of the TASER X26 conducted electrical weapon. Emergency Medicine Journal26(8): 567–570. DOI: 10.1136/emj.2008.063560.
11.
BrandlSGStroshineMS (2017) Oleoresin capsicum spray and TASERs: a comparison of factors predicting use and effectiveness. Criminal Justice Policy Review28(3): 279–306. DOI: 10.1177/0887403415578732.
Connecticut General Assembly (2014). Public Act 14–149.
15.
DaviesDMartinF (2019) When TASERs Fail: New Devices Lead to Police Shootings in Texas. San Antonio, TX: KSTX Radio.
16.
Federal Bureau of Investigation (2019) National Use-of-Force Data Collection. https://www.fbi.gov/
17.
FerdikFVKaminskiRJCooneyMD, et al. (2014) The influence of agency policies on conducted energy device use and police use of lethal force. Police Quarterly17: 328–358.
18.
ForceR (2004). Police-involved Shootings Lowest in 14 Years. Phoenix, AZ: Phoenix Police Department Media Relations Detail.
19.
FyfeJJ (2002) Too many missing cases: Holes in our knowledge about police use of force. Justice Research and Policy4: 87–102. DOI: 10.3818/JRP.4.1.2002.87.
20.
GapsisBCHoangANazariK, et al. (2017) Ocular manifestations of TASER-induced trauma. Trauma Case Reports12: 4–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.tcr.2017.10.001.
21.
GauJMMosherCPrattTC (2010) An inquiry into the impact of suspect race on police use of TASERs. Police Quarterly13(1): 27–48. DOI: 10.1177/1098611109357332.
22.
GilbertC (2019). Despite Widespread Use, Police Rate TASERs as Less Effective than Believed. Washington, DC: National Public Radio.
23.
HoJDawesDMKunzSN, et al. (2020) A comparative study of conducted electrical weapon incapacitation during a goal-directed task. Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology16: 613–621. DOI: 10.1007/s12024-020-00284-7.
24.
HoJDawesDMinerJ, et al. (2012) Conducted electrical weapon incapacitation during a goal-directed task as a function of probe spread. Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology8(4): 358–366. DOI: 10.1007/s12024-012-9346.
25.
HopkinsPBearyK (2003) TASER Use and Officer/Suspect Injuries. Orlando, FL: Orange County Sheriff’s Office.
26.
JauchemJRSeamanRLKlagesCM (2009) Physiological effects of the TASER C2 conducted energy weapon. Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology5: 189–198. DOI: 10.1007/s12024-009-9100-1.
27.
JosephG (2019) Numbers Show NYPD TASERs Are Less Effective, and the Consequences Can Be Deadly. New York, NY: WNYC Radio.
28.
KaneRJ (2007) Collect and release data on coercive police actions. Criminology & Public Policy6: 773–780. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00485.x.
29.
KhannaR (2007). Questions Grow over HPD’s Use of TASER Guns. Houston, TX: Houston Chronicle.
30.
KleinigJ (2007) Ethical constraints on TASER use by police. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice1: 284–292.
31.
KlingerDA (2008) On the importance of sound measures of forceful police actions. Criminology & Public Policy7: 605–617. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9133.2008.00529.x.
32.
KrollMW (2009) Physiology and pathology of TASER electronic control devices. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine16: 173–177.
33.
KrollMWAdamecJWetliCV, et al. (2016) Fatal traumatic brain injury with electrical weapon falls. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine43: 12–19. DOI: 10.1016/j.jflm.2016.07.001.
34.
KrollMWRitterMBWilliamsHE (2017) Fatal and non-fatal burn injuries with electrical weapons and explosive fumes. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine50: 6–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.jflm.2017.06.001.
35.
LeeBKVittinghoffEWhitemanD, et al. (2009) Relation of TASER (electrical stun gun) deployment to increase in in-custody deaths. American Journal of Cardiology103: 877–880. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.11.046.
36.
LoftinCWiersemaBMcDowallD, et al. (2003) Underreporting of justifiable homicides committed by police officers in the United States, 1976–1998. American Journal of Public Health93: 1117–1121. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.93.7.1117.
37.
Los Angeles Police Department (2016) Use of Force Report: Year-End Review. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
38.
Los Angeles Police Department (2019) Use of Force Report: Year-End Review. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
39.
MeslohCThompsonL (2006) Evaluation of the FN 303 less lethal projectile. Journal of Testing and Evaluation34(6): 574–576.
40.
MeslohCHenychMWolfR (2008) Less Lethal Weapon Effectiveness, Use of Force, and Suspect & Officer Injuries: A Five-Year Analysis. Report to the National Institute of Justice.Award No. 2005-IJ-CX-K050.
41.
MeslohCHenychMHouglandS, et al. (2005) TASER and less lethal weapons: an exploratory analysis. Law Enforcement Executive Forum5: 67–79.
PohlJ (2017). Tasers Fail Fort Collins Police in 30% of Uses. Fort Collins, CO: The Coloradoan.
48.
Reveal News (2019, May 11). When TASERs Fail. Emeryville, CA: The Center for Investigative Reporting.
49.
Seattle Police Department (2004) Seattle Police Department TASER Use and Deployment Fact Sheet. Seattle, WA: Author.
50.
SchuckAMRabe-HempC (2005) The use of force by and against female officers. Women & Criminal Justice16(4): 91–117. DOI: 10.1300/J012v16n04_05.
51.
ShermanLWLangworthyRH (1979) Measuring homicide by police officers. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology70: 546–560.
52.
SkoganWFrydlK (2004) Fairness and Effectiveness in Policing: The Evidence. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
53.
SomersLTerrillWRosslerM, et al. (2020) Examining the effectiveness of TASERS at gaining citizen compliance. Criminal Justice Policy Review, in press. DOI: 10.1177/08874034119897953.
54.
SouzaWReadyJAultM (2010) The impact of TASERs on police use-of-force decisions: findings from a randomized field-training experiment. Journal of Experimental Criminology6(1): 35–55. DOI: 10.1007/s11292-010-9089-1.
55.
SungJ (2019) The TASER as the most effective but still limited form of non-lethal force: the need for new technologies and alternatives for detaining suspects. Philosophy, Politics & Economics1: 50–54.
56.
TerrillWPaolineEA (2017) Police use of less lethal force: does administrative policy matter?Justice Quarterly34(2): 193–216. DOI: 10.1080/07418825.2016.1147593.
57.
ThompsonCBermanM (2015). Improper Techniques, Increased Risks: Deaths Have Raised Questions about the Risk of Excessive or Improper Deployment of TASERs. Washington, DC: The Washington Post.
58.
VilkeGMSloaneCMBoutonKD, et al. (2007) Physiological effects of a conducted electrical weapon on human subjects. Annals of Emergency Medicine50: 569–575. DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.05.004.
59.
WernerJRJenkinsDMMurrayWB, et al. (2012) Human electromuscular incapacitation devices characterization: a comparative study on stress and the physiological effects on swine. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research26(3): 804–810. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31824432fb.
60.
WebsterJWillJSunH, et al. (2006) Can TASERs directly cause ventricular fibrillation?International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering Proceedings14: 3307–3310.
61.
WhiteMDReadyJ (2007) The TASER as a less lethal force alternative. Findings on use and effectiveness in a large metropolitan police agency. Police Quarterly10: 170–191. DOI: 10.1177/1098611106288915.
62.
WhiteMDReadyJ (2010) The impact of the TASER on suspect resistance: identifying predictors of effectiveness. Crime & Delinquency56: 70–102. DOI: 10.1177/0011128707308099.
63.
WhiteMDReadyJRiggsC, et al. (2013) An incident–level profile of TASER device deployments in arrest–related deaths. Police Quarterly16: 85–112. DOI: 10.1177/1098611112457358.
64.
WilliamsB (2019). TASER Use Down in Both Minneapolis, St. Paul police. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Public Radio.
65.
WilliamsH (2008) TASER Electronic Control Devices and Sudden Incustody Death: Separating Evidence and Conjecture. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher.
66.
WilliamsHEBowmanSWJungJT (2019) The limitations of government databases for analyzing fatal officer-involved shootings in the United States. Criminal Justice Policy Review30: 201–222. DOI: 10.1177/0887403416650927.
