[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

I think broken ribs are better a better option than a coffin, which does occur with too great a rate of incidence with Tasers, especially when used on a subject who is in a state of excited delirium. In subjects in a state of excited delirium the risk of a fatal outcome with Taser use is much greater, so extra caution must be used.

There really isn't much point in kicking this football around though. It's one of those cases that polarizes the two sides of the debate and the differences in views are pretty much irreconcilable. I think the only common ground between the two sides is that it's a really tragic, messed up incident, made worse by the fact that international politics are woven into the whole schmozzle.

Edit: Here's a couple links about the use of Tasers on subjects who are in a state of excited delirium.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=7622314

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/ta...-delirium.html

I ran a much more in depth article on the subject in a magazine I publish, but I don't want to post that link for privacy reasons.

Did you read the CBC link? They state that...

"This is not due to a Taser," says Deborah Mash, a neurology professor at the University of Miami who has been studying excited delirium for 20 years. "This is in the brain and they die because the mechanisms that control the heart and the lungs fail."

"Over the years, they've used various forms of restraints. Some have been hog-tied, some have been in hobble restraints, some have had baton strikes, some have had pepper spray, and more recently now the Taser," Mash says. "What I've seen is that there's no difference from pre-Taser times to the present when Tasers are used."

Which kinda contradicts your NPR link....