ADVANCED TASER M26 Field Report Analysis

Transcription

1 ADVANCED TASER M26 Field Report Analysis 2,050 Field Applications November 7, 2002

2 Statistical Analysis Number of Reports: 2050 Success Rate: 94.4% Success is defined that the use of the ADVANCED TASER was sufficient to bring the force confrontation to successful conclusion without any additional or alternative force used. Success Rate Against Subjects Under Influence Influence # Success # Failed Rate PCP % Cocaine % Alcohol % Methamphetamines % Misc. Drugs % Emotionally Disturbed Persons % Conclusion: There is no correlation between the presence of narcotics and the effectiveness of the M26. The weapon appears to have consistent efficacy regardless of narcotics. Success Rate By Gender Influence # Success # Failed Rate Total % of uses Male % 1,818 91% Female % 182 9% Conclusion: There is no correlation between sex and efficacy. The M26 appears equally effective on both genders. Level of Deployment # of Incidents % of Deployments Darts Fired at Subject % Stun Gun Application % Laser Only % Spark Demo % Unknown % % The figures above are most likely weighted toward dart deployments. We believe that it is more likely an officer will submit a use of force report when he has fired the cartridge, hence laser presence and spark demonstration incidents are likely to be under-represented.

3 Success Rate By Level of Deployment Level Success # of Incidents Rate Darts Fired at Subject No % Darts Fired at Subject Yes % Laser Only No % Laser Only Yes % Spark Demo No % Spark Demo Yes % Stun Gun Application No % Stun Gun Application Yes % Note: Laser only is shown at 98.91% effective. This is due to the fact that if a laser display is not effective in gaining compliance, the officer will usually escalate to firing darts or using the stun gun. Hence, the only time a laser only display is listed as unsuccessful is when the officer displays the laser, then elects to discontinue with the TASER and transition to another force option. An example would be an officer using the laser display on a female who declares she is pregnant, at which point the officer may decide that a chemical spray is a better choice given the potential adverse consequences of a fall. Success Rate By Distance of Deployment Distance Success # of Incidents Success Rate Totals % 1-3 Feet No % 1-3 Feet Yes % % 3-7 Feet No % 3-7 Feet Yes % % 7-11 Feet No % 7-11 Feet Yes % % Feet No % Feet Yes % % Feet No % Feet Yes % 40 3% Unknown No % Unknown Yes % 1, % Conclusion: The most common firing ranges are in the 3-11 foot range (68% of firings). There does not appear to be a significant effect on efficacy based upon range from target. Comparison of Effectiveness when both OC and TASER Used % of Incidents OC Effective, TASER Ineffective % OC Effective, TASER Effective % OC Ineffective, TASER Ineffective % OC Ineffective, TASER Effective % % of Cases TASER Effective 82.74% % of Cases OC Effective 33.19%

4 Conclusion: The data above is sampled from incidents where both the TASER and OC were used. These cases are likely to be especially violent individuals who have withstood at least one less-lethal as a second one was needed. The data reinforces that no single force option is a stand alone solution. There have been cases where the TASER was not a successful force option yet OC was effective. However, it should be noted that in cases where both the TASER and OC were used, TASER was rated effective 82.74% of the time compared to only 33.19% with OC spray. Injury Statistics Officer Injuries in TASER incidents Injury Level Number of Incidents % Unknown 114 N.A. None / Minor % Moderate % Severe % % Suspect Injuries in TASER incidents Injury Level Number of Incidents % Unknown 162 N.A. None / Minor % Moderate % Severe % % The injury rate to officers involved in reported TASER confrontations are experiencing an injury rate of less than 0.5%. Similarly, suspects are also found to have an injury rate of less than 2%. Considering the types of scenarios where the TASER is employed, these low injury rates should be considered a dramatic advancement in both officer and suspect safety. M26 Weapon Statistics Number of Shots Fired # of Shots # of Incidents % of Incidents Unknown 435 NA % % % 2D (from a different M26) % % % % %

5 86.12% of deployments require only one shot from the M26. It is interesting to note that, if a second shot is required, it is almost equally likely to come from a second M26 on scene as from a reload in the original unit. This data supports the usefulness of having multiple M26 weapons on scene. Number of Probes That Hit Subject When Probes Fired # of Probes In Subject # of Incidents % Unknown 45 N.A % % % % % 91.39% of the time, there are two probes in the suspect. Given that 86% of M26 confrontations involve only one discharge, this data indicates that the rate of both probes adhering to the target is high. Failure Causes Descrption # Incidents % of failures % of all Clothing % 1.41% Unknown % 1.07% Miss % 0.98% Low Nerve / Muscle Location % 0.93% Single Dart % 0.88% Low Muscle Area 6 4.0% 0.29% Low Battery 6 4.0% 0.29% Operator Error 6 4.0% 0.29% Weapon Problem 5 3.3% 0.24% Door Closed 4 2.7% 0.20% Cartridge Failure 4 2.7% 0.20% Decided not to use 3 2.0% 0.15% Animal Use 3 2.0% 0.15% Dropped / Broken 3 2.0% 0.15% Propped Up 2 1.3% 0.10% % NA* The chart above lists the most likely cause of failure in the cases marked unsuccessful. This includes both probe firings and touch stun applications. The percentage of all uses column is not additive (some incidents have multiple failure issues, hence it would not be accurate to add all failures together as a percentage of total uses).

6 Failure Causes "Stun" Mode Descrption # Incidents % of failures % of all Low Nerve / Muscle Location 15 52% 0.73% Weapon Problem 4 14% 0.20% Miss 3 10% 0.15% Unknown 2 7% 0.10% Low Battery 2 7% 0.10% Single Dart 1 3% 0.05% Low Muscle Area 1 3% 0.05% Clothing 1 3% 0.05% % 1.41% Failure Causes When probes are fired Descrption # Incidents % of failures % of all Clothing % 1.37% Unknown % 0.93% Single Dart % 0.83% Miss % 0.83% Operator Error 6 5.3% 0.29% Low Muscle Area 5 4.4% 0.24% Low Nerve / Muscle Location 4 3.5% 0.20% Low Battery 4 3.5% 0.20% Door Closed 4 3.5% 0.20% Cartridge Failure 3 2.6% 0.15% Propped Up 2 1.8% 0.10% Dropped / Broken 2 1.8% 0.10% Animal Use 2 1.8% 0.10% Weapon Problem 1 0.9% 0.05% % 5.56% Note the very distinct differences in failure modalities between stun mode and probe firings. TASER International recently published its version 8.0 training CD- ROM, which focuses on using the stun mode close to major nerve bundles to enhance bioeffectiveness. In probe firings, the greatest cause of failures is heavy clothing, although clothing failures account for less than 2% of all deployments.

7 Duration of M26 Discharges Duration # of Incidents % of known Unknown sec 14 1% 2 sec 28 2% 3 sec 45 4% 4 sec 26 2% 5 sec % More than one cycle % Total % The data seems to support that a five second discharge is optimal. The 5 second discharge is sufficient in 68% of confrontations. However the fact that 32% of incidents require additional discharges, suggests that shortening the cycle would not be recommended. The performance of the automated 5 second burst appears to be fairly optimized. Location of M26 Uses Location # of Incidents Indoor % Jail / Hospital % Outdoor % Total % M26 Incidents: Subject Statistics Ages of Subjects Age # of Incidents % % % % % % The M26 is being safely applied across a broad age range. Analysis of Call Types Call Type Success Fail Success% Total # % of Total Violent % % Resisting Arrest % % Suicide % % Civil Disturbance % % Barricade % % Serve Warrant % % Officer Assault % % %

8 The M26 is performing above 90% across all call type categories. Of particular interest is the fact that 15% of M26 uses involve suicidal persons. Analysis of Suspect Force Level Suspect Force Success Fail % Total % of Total Verbal Non-Comp % % Active Aggression % % Defensive Resist % % Deadly Assault % % % Analysis of Suspect Weapons Suspect Weapon Success Fail % Total % of Total None % % Edged Weapon % % Firearm % % Blunt Force % % %