Exciting Times in Stun Guns Research

Taser International supports research. Even the chairman of the board welcomes scrutiny. Tom Smith says, “I encourage studies. We think it’s great…there are a lot more being done independent of us, and I think it again goes back to this being the most studied non-lethal technology available today in the world.”

One such study recently conducted has found that there is a possibility that a stun gun can stimulate cardiac muscle. It’s important to note that none of the three different and independent studies that found this were done on humans; all were performed on pigs. Also, an important factor is the placement of the barbs which conduct the pulse of electricity–those placed in a particular way across the heart had a greater impact than those placed on the abdomen.

The reason these new findings are so newsworthy is that stun guns have long been though to solely affect skeletal muscles and have no impact on internal organs, due to the density of the current. Given this information, there will certainly be those that will immediately jump to the conclusion that there is now “proof” that stun guns can kill. To counter those accusations, it’s important to note a couple of things. First of all, the researchers specifically warned against drawing conclusions about potential similar human response from the research conducted on pigs. The reason they feel the findings are even worth mentioning is that “most of the basic mechanistic concepts in cardiac fibrillation and defibrillation are derived from animal studies, not humans.” So we can definitely use this research as a catalyst in experimenting and forming solid conclusions about the effect of stun guns on human beings.

The second counter-argument arises from a statement made by the researchers involved: “In our view, it is inappropriate to conclude that stun gun discharges cannot lead to adverse cardiac consequences in all real world settings.” Wait, how can it be a good thing that stun guns may lead to “adverse cardiac consequences?” Well, it simply means that there is more to learn and discover, and if “adverse cardiac consequences cannot be ruled out, they can’t be ruled “in” either, and there is room for more study.

As Mr. Smith said, studies are great, especially ones that uncover possibly controversial issues. If stun guns may have the ability to stimulate cardiac activity, who is to say that in five or ten years, that technology can’t be channeled into a methodology for creating a weapon that quite literally saves lives, or bringing new technology to the medical field?

I believe this is what Mr. Smith is alluding to when he so adamantly encourages research – opposition will either make or break scientific research, and he strongly believes that electroshock technology will not fail in the face of adversity. In a society always on the cutting edge of scientific breakthroughs, Taser International stands only to gain from any research that is done, independent or not. As the consumers, we also will only benefit from that research.