Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cybvax0.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh
From: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.flame,net.legal
Subject: Re: A new self-defense idea!
Message-ID: <480@cybvax0.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 19-Apr-85 15:09:55 EST
Article-I.D.: cybvax0.480
Posted: Fri Apr 19 15:09:55 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Apr-85 03:46:08 EST
References: <355@idis.UUCP> <1602@ut-ngp.UUCP> <468@cybvax0.UUCP> <1107@amdcad.UUCP> <1649@ut-sally.UUCP>
Reply-To: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Organization: Cybermation, Inc., Cambridge, MA
Lines: 39
Xref: watmath net.politics:8591 net.flame:9374 net.legal:1574
Summary: 

In article <1649@ut-sally.UUCP> crandell@ut-sally.UUCP (Jim Crandell) writes:
> > > 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.

And how many other cases have you heard of?

Major disadvantes of a taser for holdups include:

1) It may not be taken seriously as a weapon, especially if it is recognized.

2) At most, it can only control one or two people at a time.

3) Misses are more serious because of the smaller number of loads.

4) It is useless if the target is protected behind so much as a sheet of
   cardboard.

It's quite likely that there are some loopholes in laws that the taser could
exploit: until law catches up with technology.  However, there is no
shortage of other laws under which a taser-wielding robber could be charged.
   useless in a shootout if.)
-- 

Mike Huybensz		...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh