Taser Weapons: Use of Tasers by Selected Law Enforcement Agencies
(26-MAY-05, GAO-05-464).
Emerging domestic and international threats have generated a
growing interest in the use of less-than-lethal weapons by
government and law enforcement agencies and other entities such
as commercial airlines. One such weapon--the Taser--is a
hand-held weapon that delivers an electric shock via two
stainless steel barbs, effectively incapacitating an individual.
According to the manufacturer--Taser International, Incorporated
(Taser International)--Tasers are currently used by over 7,000 of
the 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the United States, with
more than 140,000 Tasers in use by police officers in the field
and an additional 100,000 Tasers owned by civilians worldwide.
Tasers have been used on over 100,000 volunteers, including
individuals involved in training seminars and research
experiments, and involved in over 70,000 actual field uses during
police encounters. In light of the expanding interest in the
Taser, GAO was asked to provide information on (1) the policies
and procedures related to the issues of "use-of-force," training,
operations, and safety for selected law enforcement agencies that
have purchased and used Tasers and (2) federal, state, and local
laws that specifically address Tasers, including the
Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) authority to
regulate Tasers on aircraft.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-05-464
ACCNO: A25178
TITLE: Taser Weapons: Use of Tasers by Selected Law Enforcement
Agencies
DATE: 05/26/2005
SUBJECT: Aviation security
Law enforcement
Law enforcement agencies
Police
Policy evaluation
Weapons
Safety regulation
Safety standards
Police training
Policies and procedures
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-05-464
United States Government Accountability Office
GAO Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats
and International Relations, Committee on Government Reform, House of
Representatives
May 2005
TASER WEAPONS
Use of Tasers by Selected Law Enforcement Agencies
a
GAO-05-464
What GAO Recommends
[IMG]
May 2005
TASER WEAPONS
Use of Tasers by Selected Law Enforcement Agencies
What GAO Found
The seven law enforcement agencies we contacted have established
use-of-force policies, training requirements, operational protocols, and
safety procedures to help ensure the proper use of Tasers. Although none
of the agencies have separate use-of-force policies that specifically
address Tasers, all seven agencies include the use of Tasers into their
existing policies. Taser training is required for officers who use the
weapons, and agency officials said that training for officers and other
non-law enforcement persons who are allowed to use Tasers is critically
important to help ensure their safe use. Operational protocols require
that Tasers be visually inspected daily, appropriately safeguarded, and,
in some cases, tested weekly or at the beginning of an officer's shift.
Safety procedures require that Tasers not be used on children, pregnant
suspects, or near bystanders or flammable liquids and that individuals hit
in specific body areas with Taser barbs, such as the neck or face, be
examined by a physician.
Some federal, state, and local jurisdictions have laws that address Tasers
but requirements differ. For example, at the federal level, the Army
prohibits Tasers from being brought into selected military installations
in Georgia. Also, TSA may approve the use of Tasers on aircraft but must
prescribe training rules and guidance on appropriate circumstances for
using Tasers. At the state and local levels, the state of Indiana and the
city of Chicago, Illinois, regulate the sale or possession of Tasers by
non-law enforcement persons by subjecting Tasers to the same restrictions
that apply to firearms. Other states, such as California, prohibit Tasers
from being carried into public facilities such as airports.
GAO observes that as the Taser becomes more widely used, especially by
non-law enforcement persons, training is critical to help ensure its safe,
effective, and appropriate use. TSA, Taser International, and the seven
law enforcement agencies we contacted generally agreed with the
information in this report.
Two Examples of Taser Models United States Government Accountability Office
X-26 Model Taser M-26 Model Taser
Source: GAO; Prince George's County, MD, Sheriff's Office; Prince
George's County, MD, Police Department.
Contents
Letter
Results in Brief
Background
Selected Law Enforcement Agencies Have Established Policies and
Procedures to Help Ensure Proper Taser Use Some Federal, State, and Local
Laws Address Tasers But
Requirements Differ Concluding Observations Agency Comments and Our
Evaluation
1 3 4
7
17 20 20
Appendixes
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 22
Comments from the Secretary, Transportation
Appendix II: Security
Administration 24
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 25
Table 1: Information Related to Tasers in
Tables Use-of-Force Policies for
Seven Law Enforcement Agencies 10
Table 2: Training Requirements in Seven Law
Enforcement
Agencies 11
Table 3: Operational Protocols in Seven Law
Enforcement
Agencies 14
Table 4: Safety Procedures in Seven Law 16
Enforcement Agencies
Figures Figure 1: Taser (M-26 Model) Figure 2: Taser
(X-26 Model) 5 6
Figure 3: FLETC Use-of-Force Continuum 8
Contents
Abbreviations
ATF Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
ATSA Aviation and Transportation Security Act
DOJ Department of Justice
EMT Emergency medical technician
FLETC Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
GAO Government Accountability Office
NIJ National Institute of Justice
TSA Transportation Security Administration
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.
A
United States Government Accountability Office Washington, D.C. 20548
May 26, 2005
The Honorable Christopher Shays Chairman, Subcommittee on National
Security,
Emerging Threats and International Relations Committee on Government
Reform House of Representatives
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Emerging domestic and international threats have generated a growing
interest in the use of less-than-lethal weapons1 by government and law
enforcement agencies and other entities such as commercial airlines. One
such weapon-the Taser-is a hand-held weapon that delivers an electric
shock via two stainless steel barbs, effectively incapacitating an
individual.2 According to the manufacturer-Taser International,
Incorporated (Taser International)-Tasers are currently used by over 7,000
of the 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the United States, with more
than 140,000 Tasers in use by police officers in the field and an
additional 100,000 Tasers owned by civilians world-wide. Taser
International officials told us that Tasers have been used on over 100,000
volunteers, including individuals involved in training seminars and
research experiments. They also told us that Tasers have been involved in
over 70,000 actual field uses during police encounters. In addition to law
enforcement agencies, other entities have requested that they be permitted
to use Tasers. For example, in October 2004, the Department of Homeland
Security's Transportation Security Administration (TSA) approved Korean
Airlines' request that specially trained cabin attendants be allowed to
use
1 According to the Department of Justice's (DOJ) National Institute of
Justice-the agency
within DOJ responsible for researching issues related to crime and law
enforcement-less
than-lethal weapons are designed to temporarily incapacitate or restrain
an individual when
lethal force is not appropriate. These weapons and devices include, among
others, pepper
spray, stun guns, batons, and nights sticks.
2 According to Taser International, Taser is a trademark and an acronym
for the
Thomas A. Swift Electrical Rifle, which was first developed in the 1970s.
For the purposes
of this report, the term Taser will refer to a weapon that shoots two
stainless steel barbs up
to a distance of 25 feet and results in an incapacitating 50,000 volt
electric shock.
Tasers onboard passenger flights. TSA is the federal agency that is
responsible for establishing guidelines that govern the circumstances in
which Tasers may be used on aircraft.3
In light of this expanding interest in the Taser, you asked us to obtain
information on (1) the policies and procedures related to the issues of
"use of force,"4 training, operations, and safety for selected law
enforcement agencies that have purchased and used Tasers; and (2) federal,
state, and local laws that specifically address Tasers, including TSA's
authority to regulate Tasers onboard aircraft.
To accomplish the first objective, we reviewed Taser-related policies and
procedures established by the seven state and local law enforcement
agencies that have purchased and used the largest number of Tasers for the
longest period of time. We also interviewed law enforcement officials in
the seven agencies. The agencies were the Austin, Texas, Police
Department; the Ohio Highway Patrol; the Orange County, Florida, Sheriff's
Department; the Phoenix, Arizona, Police Department; the Sacramento,
California, Police Department; the Sacramento, California, Sheriff's
Department; and the San Jose, California, Police Department. To accomplish
the second objective, we examined various federal, state, and local laws,
including statutes, regulations, and ordinances, to determine whether they
specifically address Tasers. We also reviewed the Aviation and
Transportation Security Act (ATSA)5 to obtain information on TSA's
authority concerning Tasers, including its authority to regulate Tasers
onboard aircraft. A more detailed discussion of our objectives, scope, and
methodology is included in appendix I. We conducted our work from May 2004
through February 2005 in accordance with quality standards for
investigations as set forth by the President's Council on Integrity and
Efficiency.
3 GAO will report separately on TSA's efforts to approve and oversee the
use of Tasers onboard commercial aircraft. Among other things, we will
report on the type of analysis the federal government conducted to assess
the safety and effectiveness of Tasers, what criteria TSA used to
determine whether to approve Tasers on aircraft, and whether TSA has
established a training program for flight crews.
4 For purposes of this report, use of force refers primarily to a policy
established by a law enforcement agency that provides police officers with
a clearly defined set of rules or guidance to follow when encountering a
subject based on the subject's actions, the officer's perception of the
situation, and the available types of officer responses.
5 Pub. L. No. 107-71, 115 Stat. 597 (codified as amended in scattered
sections of 49 U.S.C.).
Results in Brief The seven law enforcement agencies we contacted have
established use-of-force policies, training requirements, operational
protocols, and safety procedures to help ensure the proper use of Tasers.
All of the seven agencies had included the use of Tasers into their
existing use-of-force policies so that police officers would have guidance
on the circumstances in which the use of Tasers may be appropriate.
Officials in all seven law enforcement agencies told us that Taser
training is required for officers who use the weapons and that
training-especially for non-law enforcement individuals who may be
authorized to use Tasers-is of critical importance to help ensure the safe
use of these weapons. For the seven agencies, operational protocols, which
provide guidance on police officers' daily law enforcement activities,
require that Tasers be visually inspected on a daily basis, be
appropriately safeguarded, and, in some cases, be tested on a weekly basis
or at the beginning of an officer's shift. Safety procedures established
by all seven agencies require that the Taser not be used on children,
pregnant suspects, or near bystanders or flammable liquids and that
individuals hit in specific body areas with Taser barbs, such as the neck
or face, be examined by an emergency room physician.
Some federal, state, and local jurisdictions have laws that address Tasers
but requirements concerning such weapons differ. In some instances, the
extent to which the Taser is regulated may depend on whether it is
classified as a firearm. For example, at the federal level, the Department
of Justice's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF)
has not classified the Taser as a firearm, which exempts the weapon from
federal firearms requirements. However, the Department of the Army (Army)
has established Taser-related regulations governing the possession, use,
and sale of Tasers on specific military installations. In addition, TSA
has identified the Taser as a prohibited weapon that cannot be brought
past airport security checkpoints by unauthorized personnel. TSA also has
authority to approve the use of Tasers by flight crews onboard commercial
aircraft and must prescribe rules for training flight crews in the proper
use of Tasers and provide guidance on the circumstances under which such
weapons may be used. In addition, some state and local jurisdictions, such
as the state of Indiana and the city of Chicago, Illinois, regulate the
sale or possession of Tasers by non-law enforcement persons within their
state or municipal boundaries by subjecting Tasers to their firearms
restrictions. Other states, such as California, prohibit Tasers from being
carried into public facilities such as schools and airports.
Based on our work, we observe that as the Taser becomes more widely
available for use, especially by non-law enforcement persons, training is
critical to help ensure its safe, effective, and appropriate use.
In commenting on a draft of this report, TSA, Taser International, and the
seven law enforcement agencies generally agreed with the information in
the report. Also, TSA as well as the Department of Homeland Security's
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC),6 Taser International, and
three of the seven law enforcement agencies provided technical comments
that were incorporated into the report where appropriate.
Background Although a number of companies manufacture various non-lethal
weapons, such as stun guns, the only company that manufactures Tasers is
Taser International in Scottsdale, Arizona. First developed in the 1970s
for use by police departments, Tasers differ from stun guns in that they
can be fired from a distance and do not require contact with skin in order
to work.7
Taser International has produced various models of Taser weapons including
Air Tasers8 and the M-18, M-18L, M-26, X-26, and X-26C models. The M-18
and X-26C models are available to the civilian market. The M-26 and X-26
models are sold only to law enforcement agencies, the military, and more
recently have been made available for use in maintaining aviation
security. Both models, while varying in size, operate in the same manner
and deliver approximately the same electrical charge. For the purposes of
this report, Tasers refer to the M-26 and X-26 models. Figure 1 shows a
picture of an M-26 model Taser, and figure 2 shows a picture of an X-26
model Taser.
6 FLETC, with headquarters in Glynco, Georgia, is an interagency law
enforcement training organization for federal law enforcement personnel.
It also provides training services to state, local, and international law
enforcement agencies. FLETC's mission is to prepare law enforcement
professionals to fulfill their responsibilities safely and proficiently,
while ensuring that training is accomplished in the most cost-effective
manner.
7 Tasers can be also used in "touch stun" mode by pressing the electrical
barbs directly onto a person's skin.
8 According to Taser International, production of the Air Taser has been
discontinued.
Figure 1: Taser (M-26 Model)
Source: GAO; Prince George's County, Maryland, Police Department.
Figure 2: Taser (X-26 Model)
Source: GAO; Prince George's County, Maryland, Sheriff's Office.
The Taser fires two metal barbs that are attached to wires, which can
cover a distance of up to 25 feet.9 Once the barbs are embedded in an
individual or on the individual's clothing, the weapon delivers an
electrical charge of 50,000 volts through the wires to the barbs. This
charge causes the muscles of the individual to involuntarily contract,
which immediately incapacitates the individual for the duration of the
shock, usually lasting about 5 seconds.
The barbs need not be embedded in an individual's body in order to
function. Because of the high voltage, an individual will be shocked even
if the barbs are attached to an outer layer of clothing, such as a coat.
If the barbs penetrate the skin, it is impossible to predict how deeply
they will embed because of various factors, including wind speed and a
subject's weight and muscle mass. The manufacturer estimated that the
barbs will
9 In commenting on a draft of this report, an official from Taser
International told us that his company is developing a new cartridge that
will fire up to 35 feet and will be sold only to law enforcement agencies.
generally penetrate bare skin no more than half an inch. Once the Taser
weapon's shock subsides, the individual can recover completely in about 10
seconds. If the weapon is fired correctly and the barbs hit the
individual, no collateral damage occurs to the surrounding environment.
The Taser can be reactivated numerous times as long as the barbs remain in
the individual or the individual's clothing. Secondary electric shocks
also last for about 5 seconds. The operator has the ability to shut the
weapon off, thus ending the charge. A data port contained in the latest
models of Tasers provides information suitable for downloading onto a
computer detailing the date, time, and duration of each instance that the
Taser was fired. A visual battery level indicator is located on the back
of the hand guard. The Taser also utilizes a laser sight system. This
system enables the operator, even with limited experience, to direct the
barbs to the desired location on the individual.
Selected Law Enforcement Agencies Have Established Policies and Procedures to
Help Ensure Proper Taser Use
The seven law enforcement agencies we contacted have attempted to ensure
proper deployment of the Taser weapon by establishing and employing
use-of-force policies, training requirements, operational protocols, and
safety procedures.
Use-of-Force Policies Although none of the seven agencies had separate
use-of-force policies that specifically addressed Tasers, all of the
agencies included the use of such weapons into their existing policies so
that police officers would have guidance on the circumstances in which the
use of Tasers may be appropriate. A use-of-force policy provides police
officers with a clearly defined set of rules or guidance to follow when
encountering a subject, based on the subject's actions, the officer's
perception of the situation, and the available types of officer responses.
The use-of-force model- frequently referred to by law enforcement
officials as the use-of-force continuum-was developed using federal law
enforcement training guidelines established by FLETC. According to FLETC,
the continuum serves as a visual tool to help explain about the
application of the use-offorce policy. Specifically, the continuum
establishes for a police officer
various options to use in responding to a subject's actions, while
employing the minimum amount of force necessary under the circumstances.
Generally, an officer should employ more forceful means to control a
subject only if the officer determines that a lower level of force is
inadequate. Officials in the seven law enforcement agencies we contacted
told us that they rely on the continuum to help provide officers with
guidance in carrying out their law enforcement responsibilities.
As shown in figure 3, the use-of-force continuum includes five levels of
potential subject actions and corresponding officer responses. For
example, if a subject is compliant, an officer should use only
"cooperative controls," such as verbal commands, to control the subject.
On the other hand, the guidelines provide that if a subject is assaultive
and an officer perceives a threat of serious physical injury or death-a
lethal situation on the use-of-force continuum-the officer may use deadly
force to control the subject.
Figure 3: FLETC Use-of-Force Continuum
Source: Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, Department of Homeland
Security.
Officials in the seven law enforcement agencies we contacted stated that
each agency has a use-of-force policy in which all officers are trained.
Each of the seven agencies has incorporated the Taser into its existing
use-offorce policy.
The placement of the Taser on the use-of-force continuums of the agencies
varied.10 Specifically, we found that the seven agencies placed the Taser
at three different levels on their use-of-force continuums. As shown in
table 1, two agencies-the Sacramento Police Department and the Sacramento
Sheriff's Department-permit the use of Tasers when a police officer
perceives the situation as potentially harmful, as when a subject engages
in assaultive behavior that creates a risk of physical injury to another.
Impact weapons, such as night sticks and batons, can also be used in these
situations. They include, for example, instances in which a subject
attacks or threatens to attack an officer by fighting and kicking.
Four other police departments-the Austin Police Department, the Ohio
Highway Patrol, the Phoenix Police Department, and the San Jose Police
Department-allow the use of Tasers at a lower level in the use-of-force
continuum in situations that the officer perceives as volatile.11 This
occurs, for example, when a subject is actively resisting arrest but not
attacking the officer. The use of chemical sprays12 to subdue the subject
is another option in such a situation. Finally, one agency-the Orange
County Sheriff's Department-allows the use of Tasers in situations that an
officer perceives as tactical, such as when a subject is "passively
resisting" by not responding to the lawful, verbal commands of the
officer.
10 In their comments on a draft of this report, FLETC officials stated
that they believe that to avoid the inconsistency among law enforcement
agencies as to where Taser use is placed in the use-of-force continuum, a
standardized training program on the use of Tasers is needed. Also, they
stated that greater research into safety and deployment guidelines should
be conducted by entities not associated with the manufacturer.
11 In commenting on a draft of this report, an official from the Austin
Police Department explained that according to departmental policy, the
Taser may be used to control a dangerous or violent subject when (1)
deadly force does not appear to be justified or necessary, (2) attempts to
subdue the subject by other conventional tactics have been or are likely
to be ineffective in the situation at hand, or (3) there is a reasonable
expectation that it will be unsafe for officers to approach within contact
range of the subject.
12 Typically, chemical sprays are divided into two groups:
chlorobrnzylidene malononitrile (tear gas) and oleoresin capsicum (pepper
spray).
Table 1: Information Related to Tasers in Use-of-Force Policies for Seven Law
Enforcement Agencies
Separate Taser use
policy on incorporated into
Agency Taser use? existing policy? Other options
Austin Police No Yes Chemical spray/pepper spray
and impact
weapons
Ohio Highway No Yes Chemical spray/mace
Patrol
Orange County No Yes Verbal commands
Sheriff
Phoenix Police No Yes Chemical spray/
mace
Sacramento Police No Yes Impact weapons
Sacramento No Yes Impact weapons
Sheriff
San Jose Police No Yes Chemical spray/mace
Source: GAO analysis of information obtained from seven law enforcement
agencies.
Training Requirements Officials in all seven law enforcement agencies told
us that adequate Taser training is critically important in helping to
ensure the safe, effective, and appropriate use of Tasers not only by law
enforcement officials but also by other non-law enforcement individuals
who may be permitted to use Tasers. The officials in these agencies agreed
that it is essential to provide such training prior to issuing Tasers to
police officers and to other users. They also told us that training only
works when weapons are standardized; that is, when weapons are constructed
and manufactured in the same way. For example, an official in the Orange
County Sheriff's Department said that
"...it is of paramount importance that officers expect and receive the
same results from one Taser to another. Their confidence in the weapon is
based on the knowledge that all Tasers will operate the same each and
every time and will achieve the same desired results each and every time."
In all seven agencies, the training cycle begins by disseminating the
previously discussed use-of-force policy. Police officers also receive
mandatory firearms training. As shown in table 2, three of the agencies we
contacted-the Sacramento Police Department, the Sacramento Sheriff's
Department, and the San Jose Police Department-require a minimum of 100
hours of such training; three agencies-the Ohio Highway Patrol, the Orange
County Sheriff's Department, and the Phoenix Police Department- require a
minimum of 80 hours; and one agency-the Austin Police Department-requires
a minimum of 60 hours. In addition, all seven agencies require
Taser-specific training. This training stresses such matters
as how to (1) properly handle the weapon, (2) locate the shot, (3)
safeguard the Taser, (4) conduct proper function tests, (5) overcome
system malfunctions in a timely fashion, and (6) perform post-Taser
deployment actions. Three agencies require 8 hours of Taser training,
while three require 5 hours and one requires 4 hours. All seven agencies
require officers to demonstrate physical competency with the weapon, and
three agencies also require written tests generally consisting of
approximately 10 true or false questions related to the application of the
use-of-force policy, proper use of the weapon, and appropriate safety
measures.
Furthermore, six of the seven agencies required yearly recertification in
the use of Tasers. One agency-the San Jose Police Department-does not
require yearly recertification for Tasers and is not currently considering
the establishment of such recertification. However, an official from the
San Jose Police Department told us that the department includes Tasers in
its annual use-of-force simulations training in which officers are trained
in the use of Tasers that would be considered appropriate in various law
enforcement scenarios.
Table 2: Training Requirements in Seven Law Enforcement Agencies
Firearms minimum Taser-training Taser training Evaluation Agency training
hours provider hours criteria Recertification
Austin Police 60 Taser 8 Physical and written Yearly International and
test agency
Ohio Highway Patrol 80 Agency 5 Physical and written Yearly test
Orange County Sheriff 80 Taser 5 Physical test Yearly International and
agency
Phoenix Police 80 Taser 5 Physical and written Yearly International and
test agency
Sacramento Police 100 Taser 8 Physical test Yearly International and
agency
Sacramento Sheriff 100 Taser 8 Physical test Yearly International and
agency
(Continued From Previous Page)
Firearms minimum Taser-training Taser training Evaluation Agency training
hours provider hours criteria Recertification
San Jose 100 Taser 4 Physical test No yearly
Police
International and recertification
agency required. (Taser
training is included in
annual use-of-force
simulations training.)
Source: GAO analysis of information obtained from seven law enforcement
agencies.
We also discussed with officials from the seven agencies how training
other Taser users may differ from training law enforcement personnel in
Taser use. All the officials agreed that the length and intensity of
training must be increased for users who have no law enforcement
experience or firearms training. The officials also stressed that any
civilian training curriculum should have a very explicit use-of-force
policy. Unlike police officers, civilians are not generally experienced in
deciding whether the use of force is justified and, if so, to what extent.
Therefore, the officials told us that it should be the goal of any
civilian training curriculum to remove the need for independent
decision-making as much as possible. Officials from all seven agencies
agreed that training for non-traditional law enforcement individuals
should involve as many "real life" scenarios as possible so that the
trainee understands what level of force is appropriate.
Operational Protocols The seven law enforcement agencies we contacted have
operational protocols, which are written policies and procedures that
address and provide guidance on the daily activities of a law enforcement
agency's officers. These protocols address a wide range of issues such as
deployment of law enforcement personnel and weapons, inspection
techniques, proper use of weapons, and post-incident procedures. Regarding
Tasers, the protocols in the seven agencies require, among other things,
that Tasers be visually inspected on a daily basis, be appropriately
safeguarded, and, in some cases, be tested on a weekly basis or at the
beginning of an officer's shift.
With regard to Taser deployment, three of the seven agencies we contacted
issued the Taser to all of their officers. Three of the agencies deployed
Tasers only to patrol officers because they were considered to be the most
likely personnel to have use for the device during the course of their
work. The remaining agency issued Tasers to its patrol officers and
members of some specialized police units such as narcotics.
Regarding inspections, all seven agencies we contacted required a daily
function test for Tasers. Officials in the seven agencies told us that
this test generally consists of visually inspecting the weapon for any
signs of damage or unusual wear and tear, inspecting the firing cartridge
to ensure that there is no damage or obvious tampering, and checking the
battery strength indicator located on the rear of the weapon. Furthermore,
one of the seven agencies required that on a weekly basis, officers
conduct a test fire of Tasers in which the officer initiates an arcing of
the electric probes by pulling the trigger of a Taser that does not
contain a firing cartridge. In addition, two of the seven agencies require
that each officer conduct such a test at the beginning of the officer's
shift. All of the agencies mandated that the Taser be safeguarded in the
same fashion as a firearm issued by the agency.
Once the law enforcement agency's internal policies and procedures were
satisfied, including compliance with the use-of-force policy, the method
and manner prescribed for Taser use did not significantly differ among the
agencies we contacted. Officials in the seven agencies stated that the
Taser is to be aimed at the center of an individual's largest amount of
body mass, which is oftentimes the chest or, in some circumstances, the
back. Shots to the neck or face are not advisable unless a significant
danger exists to the officer or others, and this area is the only target
area presented. All seven agencies we contacted required the officer
involved in a use-of-force incident to complete an official form detailing
the type of force used. As shown in table 3, three of the agencies
required the officer to complete a specific form whenever a Taser was
used. These forms included a description of barb placement, the effects
achieved, and the subject's behavior before and after the Taser
deployment. Following the use of the Taser, all seven agencies required
that the subject be restrained, with handcuffs or an emergency restraint
belt, to ensure that there would be no further threat of physical
aggression.
Table 3: Operational Protocols in Seven Law Enforcement Agencies
Special Post-Taser
incident
Daily Special report
Agency Deployment inspection inspection for restraint?
Tasers?
Austin Patrol officers Visual and Test fire at No Yes
Police and battery the
members of some tests beginning of
officer's
specialized units shift
(e.g., narcotics)
Ohio Highway Full (all Visual and Weekly test Yes Yes
Patrol officers) battery fire
tests
Orange
County Patrol officers Visual and None No Yes
Sheriff (56% of the battery
department) tests
Phoenix Patrol officers Visual and Test fire at No Yes
Police (50% of the battery the
department) tests beginning of
officer's
shift
Sacramento Patrol officers Visual and None Yes Yes
Police (57% of the battery
department) tests
Sacramento Full (all Visual and None No Yes
Sheriff officers) battery
tests
San Jose Full (all Visual and None Yes Yes
Police officers) battery
tests
Source: GAO analysis of information obtained from seven law enforcement
agencies.
Safety Procedures Officials we interviewed in all seven law enforcement
agencies stated that they developed procedures and guidelines to help
ensure the safe use of Tasers. The officials told us that they make every
effort to use the Taser as safely as possible but cautioned that it can
still be dangerous.13 As an official from the Ohio Highway Patrol stated,
any time a Taser is used,
"...the officer runs the risk of injuring the intended target. A Taser is
by nature a weapon and carries with it inherent dangers."
13 For example, of the seven agencies we contacted, two-the Orange County
Sheriff's Department and the Sacramento County Sheriff's
Department-reported post-Taser use deaths. From 2001 to 2004, Orange
County reported that, of the 1,655 individuals on which Tasers were used,
four later died. However, toxicology tests conducted by the county coroner
revealed that all four subjects had lethal levels of drugs in their
systems. Similarly, although Sacramento reported a post-Taser use death,
the deceased was later found to have died of a cocaine overdose.
As shown in table 4, the seven agencies' safety guidelines provide that
the Taser should not be used on children, pregnant suspects, or near
bystanders or flammable liquids. All the agencies we contacted require an
emergency room physician to examine the subject in the event of Taser barb
placement in the face or neck. The Orange County Sheriff's Department also
requires any female subject shot in the breast or groin area to be seen by
an emergency room doctor. Six of the seven agencies provide officers with
the discretion to remove the barbs themselves or to request that emergency
medical technicians (EMT) respond to the scene. Once removed, the barbs
should be placed in a "Sharps" container to ensure safe and hygienic
disposal.14 For these agencies, if the officer observes an adverse
reaction to the electrical shock, he or she can request that the subject
be transported to a local hospital emergency room. No other medical
follow-up is required. The remaining agency-the San Jose Police
Department-does not provide its officers with the discretion to remove
Taser barbs. The San Jose Police Department calls for officers to
transport subjects hit with Taser barbs to a hospital so that medical
personnel can remove the barbs. Also, San Jose officers do not routinely
call EMTs to the scene of Taser use. They do so only if other life
threatening needs or medical treatment is needed. If such treatment is not
needed, the officer transports the suspect to a hospital for medical
clearance prior to being booked in the county jail.
14 Sharps containers are used for the disposal of needles, syringes, or
other sharp objects to guard against exposure to bloodborne pathogens,
such as HIV and hepatitis.
Table 4: Safety Procedures in Seven Law Enforcement Agencies
Barb removal by officer, Avoid using Tasers on EMT, or hospital medical
Agency or near:a personnel? Emergency room visit required?
Austin Police o Children, Officer's discretion Impact on face
and neck
o pregnant suspects,
bystanders, and
o flammable
substances
Ohio Highway o Children, Officer's Impact on face
Patrol discretion and neck
o pregnant suspects,
bystanders, and
o flammable
substances
Orange County o Children, Officer's Impact on face and neck; also
Sheriff discretion breast and
o pregnant groin (female only)
suspects,
bystanders, and
o flammable
substances
Phoenix Police o Children, Officer's Impact on face
discretion and neck
o pregnant suspects,
bystanders, and
o flammable
substances
Sacramento Police o Children, Officer's Impact on face
discretion and neck
o pregnant suspects,
bystanders, and
o flammable
substances
Sacramento Sheriff o Children, Officer's Impact on face
discretion and neck
o pregnant
suspects,
bystanders, and
o flammable
substances
San Jose o Children, Hospital medical Impact on face
Police personnel and neck
o pregnant suspects,
bystanders, and
o flammable
substances
Source: GAO analysis of information obtained from seven law enforcement
agencies.
aUse of the Taser in these situations is strongly discouraged but in
certain exigent circumstances, an officer may use a Taser to prevent loss
of life or serious bodily injury.
Some Federal, State, and Local Laws Address Tasers But Requirements Differ
In reviewing various laws, including statutes, regulations, and
ordinances, we found that Tasers were addressed in some federal, state,
and local jurisdictions. We also found that these jurisdictions had
different requirements for regulating Tasers. In some instances, the
extent to which Tasers are regulated in these jurisdictions may depend on
whether the Taser is classified as a firearm. For example, at the federal
level, ATF has not classified Taser as a firearm, which exempts Taser from
federal firearms requirements. However, we identified other federal
agencies, such as the Army, that have established Taser-related
regulations for the possession, use, and sale of Tasers. In addition, TSA
has identified the Taser as a prohibited weapon that cannot be brought
past airport security checkpoints by unauthorized personnel.15 TSA also
has authority to approve the use of Tasers by flight crews on commercial
aircraft. We also found that the state of Indiana and the city of Chicago,
Illinois regulate the sale or possession of Tasers by non-law enforcement
persons by requiring that the same restrictions that apply to firearms
must also apply to Tasers. Other states, such as California, prohibit
Tasers from being carried into public facilities such as schools and
airports.
15 In our review of federal, state, and local laws, we found that
typically, law enforcement personnel are exempt from requirements that
prohibit or restrict the use of Tasers. Thus, under these laws,
requirements related to Tasers generally apply to non-law enforcement
persons who seek to possess, use, purchase, or sell these devices.
At the federal level, we found that ATF-the federal agency responsible for
determining whether a weapon should be classified as a firearm, which
would make the weapon subject to federal firearms regulations-does not
classify the Taser as a firearm.16 Thus, the Taser is not subject to any
federal regulations regarding the distribution, sale, and possession of
firearms. As a result, Tasers can be manufactured and distributed
domestically without federal restriction.17 However, we identified some
federal agencies that have established regulations that specifically
prohibit the sale, possession, and transfer of Tasers. For example, Army
regulations prohibit the sale, possession, carrying, or transportation of
Tasers on or within specific installations in Georgia, including Fort
Gordon and Fort Stewart, which also includes the Hunter Army Airfield.18
In addition, TSA has a regulation that prohibits unauthorized individuals
from carrying weapons, explosives, and incendiaries beyond airport
security checkpoints.19 To help provide guidance in implementing its
regulation, TSA has developed a chart outlining specific items that are
prohibited in carry-on baggage and has identified Tasers as a prohibited
weapon. TSA also has broad authority under the Aviation and Transportation
Security Act, as amended by Section 1405 of the Homeland Security Act of
2002, to approve the use of less-thanlethal weapons by flight deck crew
members, as long as the TSA Secretary prescribes "...rules requiring that
any such crew member be trained in the proper use of the weapon..." and
"...guidelines setting forth the
16 In general, a device is classified as a firearm when it "expel[s] a
projectile by the action of an explosive." 18 U.S.C.S: 921 (a)(3)(A).
Because the original Taser used gunpowder to fire electrical barbs, the
ATF in 1976 ruled that Taser was a firearm, " [s]ince the projectiles are
expelled by the action of an explosive..." ATF Rul. 76-6. However, in
1994, ATF examined a different model Taser-Taser Model 34000-and
determined it not to be a firearm "...based on the fact that the
device...does not expel a projectile by the action of an explosive..."
Also, neither the M-26 nor the X-26 Model Taser is classified as a firearm
because they do not expel projectiles by means of an explosive. Instead of
gunpowder, they use a combination of a battery and nitrogen cartridges to
fire the barbs.
17 The United States regulates Taser export sales. Licenses must be
obtained for all export shipments (excluding those to Canada) from the
United States Department of Commerce. 15 C.F.R. pt. 774, Supp. 1 (2004).
18 32 C.F.R. S:S: 552.127 and 552.101 (2003).
19 49 C.F.R. S: 1540.111 (2004). Some individuals, such as police
officers, U.S. marshals, and federal agents may be authorized to carry
weapons, explosives, and incendiaries beyond airport security checkpoints
when they are performing law enforcement duties. For example, a U.S.
marshal may carry a weapon when transporting a prisoner by air.
circumstances under which such weapons may be used."20 Based on this
authority, in October 2004, TSA approved a request from Korean Airlines
that specially trained cabin attendants be permitted to use Tasers on
commercial flights in U.S. airspace. TSA officials told us they anticipate
that in the future, other airlines will also submit requests to deploy
lessthan-lethal weapons.
In reviewing various state and local laws, we identified some state
statutes and municipal ordinances that specifically regulate the sale or
possession of Tasers by non-law enforcement persons within their state or
municipal boundaries. For example, in the state of Indiana, Tasers are
subject to the same licensing requirements as other handguns.21 Therefore,
in order to lawfully possess a Taser in Indiana, prospective purchasers
are required to meet certain license requirements and consent to a
criminal history background check.22 In addition, dealers in Indiana
cannot sell a Taser until after requesting and receiving criminal history
information on prospective purchasers.23 Similarly, in Chicago, Illinois,
prospective purchasers are required to obtain a permit to lawfully
purchase Tasers.24 Also, in the state of Pennsylvania and the city of
Wilmington, Delaware, it is unlawful for non-law enforcement persons to
manufacture, make, sell, or possess a Taser.25 In addition, individuals in
various states, including California, Illinois, and Virginia, are
prohibited from carrying Tasers in such areas as airports, courthouses,
schools, prisons, or public buildings.26
20 See 49 U.S.C. S: 44903(i) (2001). In 2001, the Aviation and
Transportation Security Act directed the National Institute of Justice
(NIJ) within the Department of Justice to assess the range of
less-than-lethal weaponry available for use by flight deck crew members to
incapacitate an individual who represents a clear and present danger to
the safety of the aircraft, its passengers, or individuals on the ground
and to make this report available to TSA for review. NIJ conducted its
review and determined that stun devices, specifically Tasers, were the
most viable less-than-lethal option for aviation security. As part of its
review, NIJ stated that any weapon chosen should be in current use by law
enforcement agencies to ensure that it has been tested and proven.
21 Ind. Code Ann. S: 35-47-8-4 (Michie 2004).
22 Ind. Code Ann. S:S: 35-7-2-1 and 35-7-2.5-3 (Michie 2004).
23 Ind. Code Ann. S: 35-47-2.5-4 (Michie 2004).
24 Chicago, Il. Municipal Code, S: 4-144-010 (2005).
25 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. S: 908(a) (2004); Wilmington, De. City Code, S:
36-161 (2004).
26 Cal. Penal Code S:S: 171.5 and 171b; 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann.
5/31A-1.2 (2004); and Va. Code Ann. S:S: 18.2-287.01 and 18.2.308-1
(2004).
Concluding Observations
The seven law enforcement agencies we contacted have established policies
and procedures to attempt to ensure proper use of Tasers. Specifically,
the agencies employ use-of-force policies, training requirements,
operational protocols, and safety procedures, although specific practices
vary from agency to agency. For example, the seven agencies place the
threshold at which Taser use may be deemed appropriate at three different
levels on their use-of-force continuums. However, even when these policies
are strictly enforced, each situation in which a Taser may be used is
unique. An officer must rely on prior experience and training and exercise
good judgment to determine whether using the Taser constitutes an
appropriate level of force. Consequently, officials in the seven law
enforcement agencies we contacted stressed that proper training is
essential for successful deployment. If Taser use becomes more widespread,
particularly among non-law enforcement personnel who have little or no
firearms experience, we believe that this training will become even more
critical for safe, effective, and appropriate use of the weapon.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
We received written comments on a draft of this report from TSA, which are
included in appendix II. In its comments, TSA stated that it generally
concurred with the information in the report. Also, TSA stated that it
agreed that training and oversight are essential for the use of Tasers. In
addition, TSA discussed its authority to approve the use of
less-than-lethal weapons by air carriers. Among other things, TSA
explained that under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, as
amended by Sec. 1405 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, air carriers
are to contact TSA to request permission to carry less-than-lethal weapons
aboard their aircraft. TSA would review the air carrier's request as well
as the training program that the air carrier would provide for the
proposed use of the weapon. After TSA approves the air carrier's request,
an amendment to the air carrier's security program must be made to allow
for the weapon's use while the aircraft is in flight. Requirements could
also be mandated for storage of the weapon while the aircraft is standing
at an airport. Furthermore, TSA stated that it has received a number of
requests from air carriers as they attempt to enhance aircraft security
and will continue to evaluate such requests and review training programs
provided by air carriers. In addition, TSA and FLETC provided technical
comments that we incorporated into this report where appropriate.
We also received comments from Taser International and the seven law
enforcement agencies we contacted. They generally agreed with the
information in the report. In addition, Taser International and three of
the seven law enforcement agencies-the Austin, Texas, Police Department;
the Phoenix, Arizona, Police Department; and the San Jose, California,
Police Department-provided some technical comments that we incorporated
into this report where appropriate.
As agreed with your office, unless you announce the contents of this
report earlier, we will not distribute it until 30 days after its issuance
date. At that time, we will send it to the Chairmen and Ranking Members of
the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the
House Committee on Government Reform. We will also send it to the Chairman
and Ranking Member of the House Committee on Homeland Security and the
Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats
and International Relations, Committee on Government Reform. We will also
provide copies to the Secretary of the Transportation Security
Administration and will make copies available to others upon request. In
addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at
http://www.gao.gov. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix
III. If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report,
please contact me at (202) 512-7455 or at [email protected].
Sincerely yours,
Robert J. Cramer Managing Director, Office of Special Investigations
Appendix I
Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
For this report, our first objective was to obtain information on the
policies and procedures related to the issues of use of force, training,
operations, and safety for selected law enforcement agencies that have
purchased and used Tasers. We conducted this work for the purpose of
providing information about the policies, procedures, and practices these
agencies use to help ensure safe and successful deployment of the Taser.
We did not attempt to draw conclusions about whether Tasers are in fact
safe. Our second objective was to obtain information on federal, state,
and local laws that specifically address Tasers, including the
Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) authority to regulate
Tasers on aircraft.
To address the first objective, we used Taser International Incorporated's
(Taser International) customer database to identify all U.S. law
enforcement agencies that had purchased Tasers. As the sole manufacturer
of Tasers, Taser International maintained the only centralized database
from which we could obtain this information. Around the time we began our
work in May 2004, Taser International reported that a total of over 7,000
law enforcement agencies had purchased Tasers. Time constraints would not
permit us to contact all these agencies. Thus, we determined that the most
reasonable approach for selecting law enforcement agencies to contact
would be to focus on those agencies that had the largest number of Tasers
for the longest period of time. To do this, we identified two key data
elements for each agency-the date that the agency made its first Taser
purchase and the total number of Tasers that the agency purchased. In
identifying the initial Taser purchase date, we were able to determine how
long ago various agencies had begun buying Tasers. We focused on this date
because we determined that by the time we began our work, the agencies
that had made the earliest Taser purchases would have been more likely to
have established policies and procedures to help ensure the safe and
appropriate use of Tasers.
In addition to the initial purchase date, we identified for each agency
the total number of Tasers that they had purchased. We determined that
those agencies that purchased a significant number of Tasers would have
been more likely to deploy them widely, which increased the chances that
more law enforcement personnel would have used Tasers in training and
field situations. As such, we reasoned that to help ensure that Tasers
would be safely and appropriately used, law enforcement agencies would
take steps as quickly as possible to establish Taser-related policies and
procedures.
Using these two data elements, we identified seven law enforcement
agencies that had deployed the largest number of Tasers for the longest
Appendix I
Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
period of time. These agencies were the Austin, Texas, Police Department;
the Ohio Highway Patrol; the Orange County, Florida, Sheriff's Department;
the Phoenix, Arizona, Police Department; the Sacramento, California,
Police Department; the Sacramento, California, Sheriff's Department; and
the San Jose, California, Police Department. Our efforts in selecting the
seven agencies constituted a case-study approach. Because we conducted
case studies rather than a statistical survey, the results of our work can
be applied only to the seven agencies we contacted; our work results
cannot be applied to all law enforcement agencies that, according to Taser
International's data, have purchased Tasers.
With the assistance of GAO methodologists, we drafted a series of
questions related to use-of-force policies, training requirements,
operational protocols, and safety procedures. We asked officials in all
seven agencies the same questions to ensure that we could compare their
responses.
To address the second objective, we researched various federal and state
laws, including statutes and regulations, to determine whether Tasers are
regulated at the federal and state levels. In addition, we reviewed
information obtained from the Department of Justice's Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives on local ordinances that regulate
Tasers. Also, we researched various published local ordinances to
determine whether Tasers are regulated at the local level. In addition, we
reviewed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act to ascertain federal
requirements for approving the use of Tasers onboard aircraft.
We conducted our work from May 2004 through February 2005 in accordance
with quality standards for investigations as set forth by the President's
Council on Integrity and Efficiency.
Appendix II
Comments from the Secretary, Transportation Security Administration
Appendix III
GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
GAO Contact Robert J. Cramer, (202) 512-7455
Acknowledgments In addition to the individual named above, Jennifer
Costello, Richard Egan, Joseph Funk, Barbara Lewis, Latesha Love, John
Ryan, and Barry Shillito made key contributions to this report.
GAO's Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation
and investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO
documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO postsGAO
Reports and newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its
Web site. To Testimony have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products
every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out
to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25
percent. Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061
To Report Fraud, Contact:
Waste, and Abuse in Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [email protected] Programs Automated answering system: (800)
424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Congressional Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4400 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
Relations Washington, D.C. 20548
Public Affairs Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
Presorted Standard
Postage & Fees Paid
GAO
Permit No. GI00
United States
Government Accountability Office
Washington, D.C. 20548-0001
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
Address Service Requested
*** End of document. ***