Found it:

The Harmful Effects of Conductive Energy Weapons

By mich2015

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a “stun gun” as “a weapon designed to stun or immobilize (as by electric shock) rather than kill or injure the one affected.” Despite this definition claiming that the electric shock of a stun gun is not capable of killing or injuring a person, there has been quite a few cases in which the opposite has been demonstrated. Whether these weapons are used correctly and minimally, or used excessively, conductive energy weapons are capable of causing serious side-effects. The main complication that can occur is cardiac arrhythmia, in which electrical activity in the heart is interrupted, which can lead to heart attacks. Conductive energy weapons are an unsafe method of restraining subjects as it can cause or aggravate heart complications, whether they are used by law enforcement or otherwise, and whether they are regulated or not. They have caused death in subjects who are completely healthy, even though these devices are branded as non-lethal. For this reason, conductive energy weapons should be rebranded as semi-lethal due to the complications that electric shocks can cause. Unregulated conductive energy weapons are the most dangerous form of these weapons. These weapons could have been set at any wattage by the factory, and could cause a subject’s heart to stop upon contact, as the heart can be stopped by a certain wattage being passed through the subject’s body. Most countries that allow their law enforcement to carry such devices have imposed strict regulation around the specifications of the devices such as Voltage, Wattage and the design of the metal contact that delivers the shock. In 2009, the RCMP decided to halt the use of the M-26 Taser as approximately 80% of the tested devices failed to meet the specifications that the company had claimed. In this situation, in every case of improper specification reporting of this model of Taser, the power output was less than the reported amount, and there were no casualties. This shows that conductive energy weapons must be regulated, otherwise the manufacturer can set the power level dangerously high or low, and cause heart problems for the subjects or be ineffective in the hands of law enforcement. Even when being used by trained officers employing the correct methods, conductive energy weapons can be harmful to the subject’s heart, and can even cause heart attacks or death. These problems are only aggravated by overuse of the device. On October 14th 2007, Robert Dziekański was shocked with a conductive energy weapon five times at the Vancouver International Airport, as he was deemed to be an uncooperative threat by the RCMP officers that had arrived after reports of a disturbance caused by Dziekański. Two minutes after being shocked five times, Dziekański had died due to his heart stopping. The final inquiry into this matter determined that the RCMP officers were not justified in using a conductive energy weapon in any way. This was the 16th death from Canadian law enforcement’s use of conductive energy weapons, and sparked a debate over whether such devices should be used. Amnesty international demanded that all use of these devices should be suspended until there has been studies and a restructuring of procedure around the use of these devices. TASER International responded by saying that Dziekanski’s death "appears to follow the pattern of many in-custody deaths following a confrontation with the police. Historically, medical science and forensic analysis has shown that these deaths are attributable to other factors and not the low-energy electrical discharge of the Taser." But if the shock is significant enough such that it can aggravate heart problems and other factors, should the use of these devices not be suspended until more research on the effects is done, considering these devices are meant for use on any perpetrator, whether they have heart conditions or not? In 2007, a man in Frederick, Maryland was shocked once by an officer’s conductive energy weapon, and immediately became unconscious. He was pronounced dead due to heart complications very soon after. These two situations show that whether the devices are misused or used carefully, being shocked by a conductive energy weapon can cause heart complications and death. Almost all deaths and injuries related to conductive energy weapons are caused by regulated devices. When a conductive energy weapon is designed for a specific country, the maximum power of that device is determined by the governing entity, who determine a specific power level that is considered safe and non-lethal. Despite the practice of limiting the power of conductive energy weapons, the devices carried by law enforcement are not safe and should be re-branded as semi-lethal weapons rather than non-lethal weapons used for subduing unarmed subjects. In January 2009, 17 year old Derrick Jones in Martinsville, Virginia was fatally shocked by an officer. The autopsy determined he was in perfect health at the time of the incident and had not used any substances. They determined the only cause of the death was the shock. This shows that conductive energy weapons are semi-lethal and can cause death even in healthy individuals. There are lists of fatal conductive energy weapon victims that are pages long, with a variety of different health conditions and many that are perfectly healthy individuals. The fact remains that conductive energy weapons can and do cause heart problems and sometimes death, yet they remain in the hands of law enforcement branded as non-lethal alternatives to traditional methods. For these reasons, conductive energy weapons should be considered as powerful as a fire-arm in terms of safety and usage guidelines for law enforcement personnel. Conductive energy weapons have been shown repeatedly to cause heart problems and death, yet they are still in use by law enforcement. Officers are trained to use these devices thinking they are firing a non-lethal weapon, when in fact they have been shown to cause heart complication and death in healthy subjects. The use of these weapons should be restricted to specific circumstances, and using such weapons should have the same precautions placed on them as firearms.