Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ut-sally.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!ut-sally!crandell
From: crandell@ut-sally.UUCP (Jim Crandell)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.flame,net.legal
Subject: Re: A new self-defense idea!
Message-ID: <1649@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 18-Apr-85 20:21:32 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.1649
Posted: Thu Apr 18 20:21:32 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Apr-85 07:30:45 EST
References: <355@idis.UUCP> <1602@ut-ngp.UUCP> <468@cybvax0.UUCP> <1107@amdcad.UUCP>
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 24
Xref: watmath net.politics:8581 net.flame:9362 net.legal:1570

> > > I personally like the 'taser' devices that have come out not-all-that-
> > > recently.

> > This has the advantage that it's not as versatile a weapon as a gun, so
> > it won't be taken up much for commiting street crime.

Interesting theory.  I say that because the first time I ever heard of the
Taser was 11 years ago, while I was in California.  The incident that brought
it into the news was its use in -- you guessed it -- an armed robbery.
``Shrewd,'' I said to myself.  ``The average individual, having no experience
with the thing, doesn't perceive it as a serious threat, so in the public (and
by rather trivial extension, legal) eye, its use doesn't constitute deadly
force.  After all, we have the manufacturer's own word that the things can
never cause fatal injury; that's why they were invented, right?  So if the
crooks get caught, they escape the assault-with-a-deadly-weapon rap a priori.
With legal fees as high as they are, that's a real plus.''

Now I don't claim to be an  expert on the workings of the criminal mind, but
it seems to me that versatility is not the only consideration in the selection
of a holdup weapon.
-- 

    Jim Crandell, C. S. Dept., The University of Texas at Austin
               {ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!crandell