Sunday, September 11, 2005
Law enforcement's attitude may drive development of safer stun gun technology and usage guidelines
Underreported developments in the industry suggest that a demand is brewing for safer stun guns. This is the natural evolution of a market that owes itself to the quest for a weapon less lethal than a firearm.
It’s already happening. The stun gun’s target markets are reaching out for a weapon that they perceive lives up to the ‘less-lethal’ label. But entrenched stockholder interest may mean we won’t see these developments in the news for a while.
A press release in late August announced the Correctional Emergency Response Team (CERT) Tactical Network’s anticipated approval of Tampa, Fla.–based Stinger Systems, Inc.’s stun gun. The release quoted members of CERT comparing Stinger’s weapon favorably to the Taser, the market-leading weapon by Tucson, Ariz.–based Taser International.
Endorsement by CERT of Stinger’s weapon is significant. The organization’s obvious interest in responsible guidelines for the use of stun guns that are apparently safer than the market leader’s is heartening. It suggests that the law enforcement community’s response to the promise of stun guns will follow advice I have been advocating for quite some time: responsible use of the weapons.
While CERT, a law enforcement–minded organization, has endorsed a stun gun by one of Taser’s rivals, reports indicated that police officers from five states are in the process of suing Taser for injuries. According to The Associated Press, the lawsuits allege that Taser encouraged “officers to get shocked during training” and hide “information on injuries to about a dozen other injured officers."
Stun gun manufacturers must be careful. The market is ready for a ‘less-lethal’ weapon that lives up to the notion, but the potential for backlash is palpable. To get anywhere in this market, a stun gun company must ride the wave of safety. Stonewalling, strong-arming, smoke, and mirrors will all backfire.
Underreported developments in the industry suggest that a demand is brewing for safer stun guns. This is the natural evolution of a market that owes itself to the quest for a weapon less lethal than a firearm.
It’s already happening. The stun gun’s target markets are reaching out for a weapon that they perceive lives up to the ‘less-lethal’ label. But entrenched stockholder interest may mean we won’t see these developments in the news for a while.
A press release in late August announced the Correctional Emergency Response Team (CERT) Tactical Network’s anticipated approval of Tampa, Fla.–based Stinger Systems, Inc.’s stun gun. The release quoted members of CERT comparing Stinger’s weapon favorably to the Taser, the market-leading weapon by Tucson, Ariz.–based Taser International.
Endorsement by CERT of Stinger’s weapon is significant. The organization’s obvious interest in responsible guidelines for the use of stun guns that are apparently safer than the market leader’s is heartening. It suggests that the law enforcement community’s response to the promise of stun guns will follow advice I have been advocating for quite some time: responsible use of the weapons.
While CERT, a law enforcement–minded organization, has endorsed a stun gun by one of Taser’s rivals, reports indicated that police officers from five states are in the process of suing Taser for injuries. According to The Associated Press, the lawsuits allege that Taser encouraged “officers to get shocked during training” and hide “information on injuries to about a dozen other injured officers."
Stun gun manufacturers must be careful. The market is ready for a ‘less-lethal’ weapon that lives up to the notion, but the potential for backlash is palpable. To get anywhere in this market, a stun gun company must ride the wave of safety. Stonewalling, strong-arming, smoke, and mirrors will all backfire.
# posted by IDTheftSecurity.com @ 10:27 AM 
