Testimony at the Taser inquiry in Vancouver, British Columbia has led some people to believe that police officers aren’t adequately trained on when to use a Taser. It was stated that the Taser’s manual doesn’t specify the difference between active and passive resistance, and so people are now concerned that officers are going to confuse the two and possibly use a Taser in the wrong situation. Well, if we’re concerned about officers not knowing the difference between active and passive resistance, assuming they didn’t even have access to a Taser, shouldn’t we be more concerned about the fact that they’re carrying firearms? But people aren’t concerned about that, because it’s not new. Also probably because we naturally assume that police officers who pass through the Academy have enough common sense to know when to subdue someone. There are always exceptions, but luckily those are few and far between.

That said, it’s a ridiculous assumption that Tasers are unsafe because the manual doesn’t spell it out for the officers. Constable Tammy Hammell, Vancouver Police Department’s electronic control device coordinator, even testified that not every Vancouver police officer who wants to have a Taser can have one. They must be approved and recommended by their sergeant as possessing good judgment in the field.

Other testimony coming out of this inquiry included the fact that officers are no longer able to test the device on themselves or each other, but this is only due to worker’s compensation rules. Let’s face it - we all know how quick people are to cry foul when they get hurt on the job. Some cases are legit, others are not, and given the tremendous amount of scrutiny that Tasers already receive, chances are the worker’s compensation system would get hit more often as a result of over-exaggerated “injuries.”

Stay tuned for updates and commentary as the public inquiry presses on.