Ah, it’s been a year of such stories. For example:
“The Royal Canadian Mounted Police said Wednesday it would curb the use of Taser stun guns after the federal force’s watchdog issued a stinging report accusing officers of zapping suspects unnecessarily.”
nationalpost.com/news/canada … ?id=596988
“While the RCMP is on the hot seat at the inquiry probing the use of Tasers in British Columbia following the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski, documents from the Mounties show their use of stun guns has more than doubled across Canada between 2005 and 2007.”
nationalpost.com/news/canada … ?id=525374
"The majority of the incidents took place in western Canada where the force does a lot of front-line policing – Quebec and Ontario have their own provincial forces.
About a third of the RCMP use of Tasers occurred in B.C., the province where Mounties deployed their 50,000-volt weapon the most. The use of Tasers in B.C. jumped from 218 incidents in 2005, to 406 in 2006 and a high of 496 in 2007.
When you look at the use of Tasers per capita, B.C. still comes first in the country with 11.26 incidents per 100,000 people. P.E.I. comes second with 11.18 incidents per 100,000 people, followed closely by Manitoba at 10.83, New Brunswick at 10.78, Saskatchewan at 10.76 and Alberta at 10.64. "
Like I said before, RCMP officers are more likely to use Tasers than other police forces. Can somebody who knows these things explain the “force model” ? Is the RCMP one much different than other the model other forces use? For example, I know the RCMP doesn’t classify the Taser as an impact weapon, so it can be used in incidents before the club, or physical force, right? Do other police forces classify it that way too?
I think there was a public perception that the Taser was a non-lethal alternative to using a gun. But the RCMP seem to classify it as an alternative to, well, what else is classified as “non-impact” ? Talking to a suspect? Verbal warnings? Shouting? Can somebody clarify that?