CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Jenkinson E, Neeson C, Bleetman A. J. Clin. Forensic Med. 2006; 13(5): 229-241. |
|
Affiliation |
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, 32 Rothwell Drive, Solihull B91 1HG, United Kingdom. (bleetman@enterprise.net) |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 2006, Elsevier Publishing) |
|
DOI |
|
PMID |
16442332 |
|
Abstract |
An electronic weapon, the Taser M26, has recently entered the use-of-force continuum for police officers in England and Wales and is currently licensed for use by authorised firearms officers only. The aim of this report was to assess the relative risk of injury to officers and subjects of police use-of-force options and to evaluate whether the current positioning of the M26 in the use-of-force hierarchy is appropriate. We analysed use-of-force data from Northamptonshire Police Force and M26 field use data from TASER International((R)). We found officer injury rates associated with M26 deployment were lower than those for CS spray and baton use. Subject injury rates were lower in M26 deployment than in deployment of CS spray, batons or police dogs. We suggest that the M26 should be made more widely available to police officers in the UK. |