Shocking Designs
In 1997 the British Foreign Secretary described the M26 Taser weapon as "designed primarily for torture". In 2002, this device was apparently among others given approval by the US Department of Commerce to be exported to foreign Governments.
The United States approved licenses for exports of "discharge type arms", such as Tasers, to many countries, including Australia. The category of "discharge type arms 0A985" is defined the US Federal Register as "for example stun guns, shock batons, electric cattle prods, immobilization guns and projectiles, except equipment used exclusively to treat or tranquilize animals, and except arms designed solely for signal, flare and saluting use; and parts".
Amnesty International is "particularly concerned" that the M26 taser weapon does not only function as a taser, but also can be used close-up as an electro-shock stun weapon.
This device is now apparently, and quietly, in the hands of Australian Law Enforcement, and one wonders, perhaps other agencies and even contractors providing security at places like, say Detention Camps for asylum seekers?
Taser International in 2002 claimed to have marketed taser guns to police forces in Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Israel, Mexico, New Zealand, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, South Africa, South Korea, Slovenia, Sweden, and Venezuela. Research shows "the effect of the force delivered by the taser is, in some circumstances, going to be unpredictable and therefore arbitrary" - it is known to lead to cardiac arrest, particularly in targets who are drugged.
International human rights law, and standards agreed by the United Nations such as the UN Basic Principles for the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, requires states to avoid "arbitrary and excessive use of force by law enforcement officials", including force that inflicts "unwarranted injury or pain". Since the effects of tasers are acknowledged to be arbitrary, a police officer's ability to ensure he or she applies only "minimum force" is questionable.
Providing what is a known torture device to Australian Law agencies does seem to be a questionable use of tax dollars, not to mention a cause of some concern for those being apprehended and detained. Taser's own PR states "The Advanced TASER M26 and the new, smaller, more effective X26 are ideal for Law-Enforcement to effect non-lethal force against aggressive, non-compliant suspects or prisoners, for crowd-control functions..."
Note that it clearly states effecting force against "non-compliant suspects" and "crowds".
Amnesty International's web site has several pages of Search Results for Australia, all of which seem to be negative reports and concerns for our Human Rights record occurring since the Tampa incident, providing a clear indictment of the incumbent government's shameful record. [There is also good coverage of torture allegations by the Aussie detainees at Guantanamo at Amnesty USA's web site.]
According to one source, there also exist Taser Mats, Taser Barricades, Riot/SWAT Charged Phaser Shields, and Non-contact Crowd Control Phasers, and apparently the Long Distance Counter-Suicide Device, described as a "Long Distance Negative Ion (Counter-Depression) Transmission directly on distressed individual, Portable, Non-contact Device. Should trigger calmer, rational decisions." All part of the growing arsenal to support the criminalisation of protest action, by the way. Perhaps some concern should also be forthcoming that there is technology being marketed to Law Enforcement that changes a target's behaviour remotely ["Should trigger ... rational decisions"]; whatever the motivation, the risk of abuse needs to be evaluated and usage monitored.
[Initial report research by cryptogon.]
Item posted by AutoEditor at 11:42 am ::
