Tasers Are Not Welcome in Ukraine: Is it Time for a Reassessment?

Using tasers as a tool for law enforcement is controversial in the U.S., and outright banned in Ukraine.  American police officer Tim Field discussed the controversy with his Ukrainian counterparts while visiting his counterparts at the Kyiv Region Police HQ, and I got to listen in on the conversation.   

Field sees tasers as not only a valuable tool with outsize benefits for the American public; he also would love to see people in Ukraine take a second look at using them. To understand his position, let’s start with just what a taser is.  

A taser is a handheld device that delivers a five-second burst of electricity that causes the voluntary muscles to contract so strongly that they cause pain. The kind of pain is similar to what you might have experienced as a night cramp, or what we in the U.S. commonly call a “Charley horse.”

Members of law enforcement in the U.S. use tasers as a safer alternative to firearms. When an individual is resisting arrest, a taser can incapacitate a person temporarily without causing long-term harm. Although the possibility of injury exists if the individual has a serious health condition, this is rare, and on balance, the risk of injury from a taser is likely to be less than the risks of using a firearm or other methods for controlling someone resisting arrest.

jasonesbain (Wikimedia Commons)

In almost every case, being tasered won’t cause lasting injury. That’s because using a taser doesn’t affect the involuntary muscles such as the heart muscles or the muscles that enable us to breath. 

Among the important advantages of using a taser is that the effects don’t last. Five seconds later, the person who’s been tased has no more aftereffects than you would experience once a Charley horse is over.

The absence of lasting effects is completely different from, for example, using a firearm, or a disabling blow from a baton, or the choking and burning that comes from using mace. The effects of a taser last seconds, not hours or days, or possibly a lifetime.

Field says, “I’ve taken the ride twice. It’s not the end of the world, but I don’t want to experience it a third time.” In other words, it’s painful enough to be a deterrent. 

Field goes on to list some of the reasons American police have chosen to use tasers:

Using a taser means that a police officer can control the situation at a distance of as much as 20 feet. This is not only a major boost in safety for the officer but also for the person resisting arrest. If either party is close enough for physical contact, too often a violent person can wrestle the officer for his gun and the chance of death for either party is real. This doesn’t happen when there’s physical distance between the two.

A taser can replace the brute force which would otherwise be necessary to control a potentially vicious predator. Either tasering an individual or threatening him with a taser usually avoids the use of other more violent means of control such as using mace, a night stick (baton) or a gun. The disadvantage of taking away this tool means the likelihood of using types of force that are more damaging and long lasting.

Tasering works because the reaction to it is involuntary.   People who are high, extremely motivated, or otherwise mentally unwell may not care how much a baton hurts. With a taser, even someone high on potent drugs can’t ignore it. 

I heard members of the Ukrainian police say that the law in Ukraine would have to change for them to use tasers. Given the record of tasers as safety and deterrence tools, Field hopes that the Ukrainian people might reconsider the ban altogether.