An analysis of the effectiveness and use by the New Zealand Police of the TASER from 2009 to 2017

Abstract

A number of police agencies around the world have introduced conductive energy devices such as the TASER as a less-than-lethal weapon to restrain physically violent subjects. Despite the increase in TASER use, there is a limited amount of literature available that examines its use and effectiveness. The New Zealand Police introduced the TASER in 2009 following a successful trial of the device. This research examines the use and effectiveness of the TASER by the New Zealand Police for the period 2010 to 2017 and shows that the use of the device has increased year-on-year. The analysis also found that while use of the device has increased at violent events, the form of that use has changed. Over the period of analysis, use of the discharge mode has increased compared with the show mode and as the use of the TASER increased, injuries sustained by subjects and officers also increased. The research also highlights the limitations of the methodology adopted to measure the effectiveness of TASER use and discusses options that could assist future research in examining use of the TASER by police agencies.

Keywords

TASER conductive energy devices New Zealand police tactical options

Introduction

Force used by the police has been defined by the International Association of Chiefs of Police as the ‘amount of effort required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling subject’ (United States Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 2012). The United Nations also advise that the basic principles of the use of force by law enforcement is that they may only use force when it is strictly necessary and only to the extent that is required for performing their duties (United Nations, 1990). The accepted approach for the use of force is that police officers should not use more force than is necessary to maintain control of an incident, to carry out an arrest, or to protect the public or themselves from the threat of injury or death (United States Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 2012). Several factors are involved when a police officer decides whether to use force, and include the location of the encounter, the type of people involved, their mental capabilities and whether drugs and alcohol are involved (Taylor and Woods, 2010).

Definitions by police agencies provide police officers with decision-making principles that are helpful in determining whether it is appropriate to use force and the type of force that should be used in particular situations. The definitions usually cover the use of all forms of force, including verbal and physical restraint, less-than-lethal and lethal force (United States Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 2012). There are many ways in which police agencies have implemented less-than-lethal force, such as by using conductive energy devices (CEDs). The purpose of this research is to examine one device in the less-than-lethal force category: the TASER and its use by the New Zealand Police.

CEDs have been used by the police for more than 40 years (Ariel et al., 2019) and more than 600 000 devices are now used by police officers around the world (APM Reports, 2019). Although the use of TASERs by the police has been criticized, for example, its over-use and in relation to the death of subjects (Ariel et al., 2019), TASERs have been effective in subduing subjects in situations in which lethal force would have otherwise been used by an officer (White and Ready, 2007).

Many police agencies allow officers to use the TASER on aggressive or threatening subjects when alternative less-than-lethal force options are not practicable (Police Executive Research Forum, 2011). The main objective in having the TASER available for officers is to provide the officer with an optional tactic that could be used rather than having them use lethal force to control violent individuals (American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, 2013).

The New Zealand Police use a Tactical Options framework to provide their officers with ‘a training and operational guidance tool…to appropriately decide when, how, and at what level to use tactical option(s)’ (Locker, 2017: 15). The framework provides a reference for officers ‘to use force that is necessary and proportionate, given all the circumstances known at the time’ (Locker, 2017: 15). Use of the TASER is one option in the Tactical Options framework. This means that use of the TASER is one of a number of tactical options available to the officer when their perceived cumulative assessment¹ of a situation is that a subject’s behaviour is within or beyond assaulting the officer and poses a threat to the officer’s life (New Zealand Police Tactical Options Card, n.d.a). When an officer can use a TASER is clearly specified in the Tactical Options Card and it may be used only to defend the officer or other people, make an arrest or prevent the escape of an offender (New Zealand Police Tactical Options Card, n.d.a).

The use of the TASER by the New Zealand Police has not been independently evaluated. This article is the first independent evaluation and analysis of the use and effectiveness of the TASER by the New Zealand Police from 2009 to 2017. The analysis includes an examination of the use of the TASER, the demographics of the subjects, and the injuries sustained by the subject and the police officer. The primary aim of the research is to provide an independent review and evaluation of the use of the TASER by the New Zealand Police.

The first section of the article presents a short of review of the TASER literature and their use by police agencies. The second section examines the history of the TASER by the New Zealand Police. This is followed by a discussion of the methodology used to evaluate the strategy. The fourth section presents a review of the use of the TASER by the New Zealand Police for the period 2010 to 2017 and the fifth section summarizes and discusses this information. The final section includes the conclusion and comments on future research directions.

Existing research on the use of TASERs

Despite the large number of TASER devices being used by police agencies in the USA and other countries around the world (Police Executive Research Forum, 2011), the body of empirical research on their use is limited (Ariel et al., 2019). Furthermore, only a limited number of researchers have examined the effectiveness of the use of the TASER by law enforcement officers (Alpert and Dunham, 2010; Ariel et al., 2019; Thomas et al., 2010).

In studies that have examined use of the TASER, it was found that more than 75% of incidents occurred indoors (White and Ready, 2010) and that more than 80% of the subjects were male and had an average age of 35 years (Lindberg, 2012). This earlier research also found that more than half of the subjects were of African American descent and approximately 27% were Hispanic, whereas fewer than 20% were White (White and Ready, 2007, 2010). Most of the subjects showed signs of mental instability and just under 20% of subjects were intoxicated at the time of the encounter. Forty per cent of subjects were armed and approximately 95% of subjects displayed violent behaviour, particularly towards the officer (White and Ready, 2007, 2010).

Introducing the TASER has shown to be effective. It is a valuable alternative to the use of deadly force and has led to a reduction in injuries to the subject, especially injuries that require medical attention (Taylor and Woods, 2010; Thomas et al., 2010). Early research by White and Ready (2007), documented that there was no evidence that application of the TASER resulted in death, and later research by White et al. (2012), found that in more than half of fatal TASER incidents, the subjects had mental health or substance abuse disorders. It was also found that subjects with mental health or substance abuse disorders were more likely to act in an aggressive manner and continue to resist after the application of the device (Kesic et al., 2012; Lindberg, 2012).

One disadvantage with police agencies using the TASER is that a ‘weapons effect’ may be induced (Ariel et al., 2019). In a study of police officers in London, who attended 5,981 incidents and were visibly armed with a TASER, it was found that officers used force 48% more often than unarmed officers, and were more likely to be assaulted than officers on unarmed shifts (Ariel et al., 2019). This led researchers to suggest that TASERs can trigger a ‘weapons effect’: a psychological phenomenon in which the sight of a weapon increases aggressive behaviour.

Use of the TASER by the police has become a topic of scrutiny, especially in relation to the options available to the police in the application of less-than-lethal force in the USA (Ariel et al., 2019; Dymond, 2014). This article adds a different perspective to the debate on the use of the TASER by the police, as New Zealand police officers do not routinely carry firearms. This means that the analysis of the use of the TASER by New Zealand police officers was not be influenced by the presence of firearm- equipped officers (Ariel et al., 2019).

The history of taser use by the New Zealand Police

Two reports compiled by the New Zealand Police acknowledged the potential value of the TASER as a tactical option for their officers in situations that could require the use of less-than-lethal force (Tactical Options Research Team, 2013). The first report was the 2001 Marshall Shuey report, which noted that the TASER had undergone extensive testing and was in use in police forces in Australia, Canada, Europe and the USA (Marshall and Shuey, 2001). The report also documented that less-than-lethal weapon options had a place in the immediate and strategic direction of the New Zealand Police (Marshall and Shuey, 2001).

The second report by Matthews (2003) was instigated by the then Commissioner of New Zealand Police following the fatal shooting of an offender by the police in 2001. The offender had used a golf club to break a number of shop windows in a small rural town and when confronted by a lone police officer, refused to comply with the officer’s request and was subsequently fatally shot. During the investigation into the shooting, it was found that the offender had a history of mental health issues, which led to the public and media questioning the actions of the police officer and why the officer did not use a less-than-lethal weapon.

The second report examined a range of less-than-lethal weapons for managing violent subjects with the aim of ensuring that the equipment and tactics used by the New Zealand Police were effective and did not endanger the safety of police officers and members of the public. The report made a number of recommendations on less-than-lethal weapon options that could be suitable for use in the New Zealand policing environment. A key recommendation was use of the TASER as a potentially suitable less-than-lethal weapon. The report concluded that ‘overall, the TASER offers considerable advantages to the frontline officer as a personal less lethal weapon option’ (Matthews, 2003: 90).

The New Zealand Police introduced the TASER X26 model on 1 March 2009 following a successful 12-month trial, conducted from 1 September 2006 to 31 August 2007 (Monreal, 2017). The trial was evaluated and conducted in four districts: Auckland, Waitematā, Counties Manukau and Wellington (New Zealand Police, 2008). The evaluation found that the TASER was effective in 75% of the cases in which it was used, although only eight events in which the TASER was used were analysed (New Zealand Police, 2008). The effectiveness of the use of the TASER during the trial period can be summarized in the following quote from an officer involved in the trial:

In the majority of incidents in which a Taser was deployed in presentation and discharge modes, police officers surveyed observed a positive change in subjects’ behaviour, such as increased cooperation and a general de-escalation of volatile situations. In six out of eight incidents in which officers in the survey used discharge mode against a subject they described how it had served to immediately incapacitate the subject or make the subject immediately cooperative. For two remaining incidents, officers reported that rather than becoming cooperative, they had punched the Taser, and in the other incident where dry stun was used the subject pushed the Taser away. (New Zealand Police, 2008: 137)

Following the success of the trial, the TASER was reintroduced to the four trial police districts and in March 2010 was deployed in the remaining eight police districts (Monreal, 2017). By December 2013, the New Zealand Police had introduced a programme to gradually replace the TASER X26 model with the X2 model (Monreal, 2017). This replacement program was completed during 2016 (Monreal, 2017).

Framework for ensuring accountability

To ensure that the New Zealand Police were transparent about the introduction and use of the TASER, the police documented its use during the trial period, during its reintroduction into the trial districts and during its introduction into the remaining police districts. The various stages of the programme were documented in the Taser Reintroduction Period Research Report (2013), the Taser National Roll-out Research Report (2013a) and the biannual TASER reporting framework that was used from July 2011 to June 2013 (see New Zealand Police, 2013a, 2013b; Monreal, 2017).

The two reports and the TASER reporting framework enabled a comparison to be undertaken of the effectiveness of the device during the trial period and the reintroduction period. The reports provided a basis to develop TASER training, policy and practice to ensure officer and public safety (Monreal, 2017). Reviewing the effectiveness of the TASER was of limited value, however, because no research was undertaken on its use between the time that the Taser National Roll-out Research Report (2013a, 2013b) was documented and the report that was developed by Monreal (2017). Nor was any research undertaken to compare the effectiveness of the X26 model with the X2 model.

Methodology

The literature contains three broad methods that define the effectiveness of the use of the TASER: its effectiveness in reducing instances of lethal force, its effectiveness in reducing officer injuries and its ability to incapacitate a potentially violent individual (see Brandl and Stroshine, 2017; Thomas et al., 2010; White and Ready, 2007). Use of the TASER to incapacitate potentially violent individuals provides an appropriate performance measure with which to analyse the effectiveness of TASER use in New Zealand and that is why it has been chosen for this research.

The data used to form the basis of this research were taken from the Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation TASER, bi-annual and annual Tactical Options database reports. These reports provide a comprehensive set of secondary data that enabled a review of TASER use by the New Zealand Police to be undertaken. Primary data for this research were not obtained because the analysis does not include the development of statistical approaches such as the use of regression analysis.

These reports are published by the New Zealand Police and are available to the public from their website. The primary unit for analysis of the use and effectiveness of the TASER by the New Zealand Police is the TASER event. A TASER event is defined by the New Zealand Police as including to ‘show’ or to present, laser paint or arcing the device, and to ‘use’ or to discharge the device or contact stun (New Zealand Police, n.d.b: 5). This approach has been adopted for two reasons. First, the effectiveness of the TASER over the course of a use of force event provides a more complete picture of TASER performance and second, the records held in the Tactical Options Report database of individual TASER discharges can be inconsistent (Monreal, 2017). New Zealand Police Research and Evaluation staff have, for example, noted that TASER discharges can be recorded as separate deployments or as multiple cycles or that the probes have been fired but have collapsed (Monreal, 2017).

There are a number of limitations in the analysis of the use and effectiveness of the TASER by the New Zealand Police. The first is that the reports rely on the completion and filing of the use of force report by individual officers. This means that the reports may not identify all of uses of the TASER by officers. The second is that nothing is known about the police officers that submitted the TASER-use report that was entered into the Tactical Options Report database and the third is that the analysis does not take into account the influence of some of the variables that have an effect on TASER use, for example, weather conditions or the sobriety of the subject. These factors are not recorded in the Tactical Options Report.

The last limitation relates to information relating to officer and subject injuries from the use of the TASER. This information is contained in the Tactical Options Reports and is recorded by the officer at the time of the TASER event in the use of force report. The weakness in this recording process is that only the most serious injury is recorded, and the level of the injury is based on the officer’s perception. However, there are three categories recorded: minor, which includes self-treatment; moderate, which is the need for medical treatment but not admission to hospital; and severe, which is the admission to hospital (Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation, 2012).

Use of TASERs from 2010 to 2017 by the New Zealand Police

TASER use by New Zealand police officers for every month from July 2010 to October 2016 is presented in Figure 1. The information in Figure 1 includes both the show of force or presentation of the TASER and the use of force or discharge of the TASER by either stun contact or by firing the probes. The trend lines indicate an increase in TASER presentation and a marginal increase in the TASER use of force over the period. The slope of the TASER presentation trend line is 0.38 compared with the slope of the TASER use of force or discharge trend line of 0.06.

Figure 1.

Monthly use of the TASER by New Zealand Police from July 2010 to October 2016.

According to the Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation (2011, 2014), TASER events accounted for 0.3% of all face-to-face contacts between the police and the public in 2010 and 0.4% in 2013. These early Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation Tactical Options reports (2011 to 2013), also provided information in relation to the subjects involved in a TASER event, the discharge scenario, discharge effectiveness and unintentional discharges.

In 2010, approximately two-thirds of subjects involved in an event in which a TASER was discharged were armed with a weapon, and in just under three-quarters of such events, the police used only a single TASER discharge against a person (Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation, 2011). Eighty-two per cent of events in which the TASER was shown and 73% of the discharges were deemed to be effective in de-escalating or resolving an incident (Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation, 2011). The effectiveness of the discharge of the TASER increased slightly from 80% in 2011, to 83% in 2013 (Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation, 2012, 2014).

The earlier reports also identified that in 2010, the TASER was not deployed in any incidents that involved persons with mental health issues or who had attempted suicide (Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation, 2011). However, in 2011, the TASER was used against subjects who had a mental illness (19%) and those displaying suicidal behaviours (12%) (Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation, 2012). Although of extreme interest, this information was not recorded again in any report after 2012. The 2011 report also identified that the most common location for an event involving a TASER was a residential property (65%), followed by street/highway/motorway (16%) and outdoor public places (11%). There were also 32 events in which the TASER was deployed against a dog that was posing a threat to police officers or to public safety.

Early TASER events were typified by verbal threats, physical violence and assaults with weapons against the police. The majority of these events involved subjects who were impaired by alcohol (56%) or drugs (14%). The TASER was deployed mostly against males aged 30 years or younger.

A better understanding of use of the TASER by New Zealand police officers can be seen by examining the data in Table 1, which presents information pertaining to the presentation, laser painting, arching, stun, discharge and the total number of events. Also presented in Table 1 is the ratio of the total number of TASER events per 10,000 offenders who were apprehended during a 12-month period by the New Zealand Police. Although there has been a variation in the use of the TASER, the data presented Table 1 indicate that there has been an increase in all categories over the 8-year period.

Table 1.

Use of the TASER by New Zealand Police from 22 March 2010 to 31 December 2017.

Year	Presented or shown	Laser painting	Arcing	Stun	Discharge	Total events	Per 10,000 offenders apprehended
2010^a	155	574	7	N/R	110	846	31
2011^b	60	208	2	N/R	53	323	29
2012	156	643	12	N/R	114	925	50
2013	180	758	6	N/R	146	1090	63
2014	169	719	7	11	108	1014	65
2015	173	681	18	10	116	998	58
2016	237	848	15	15	175	1290	74
2017	176	792	35	14	172	1189	77

Source: Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation reports 2011 to 2018

^a Figures are for the period 22 March 2010 to 30 June 2011.

^b Figures are for the period 1 July to 31 December 2011.

All other figures are for the period 1 January to 31 December of that year.

An important point to note about the information in Figure 1 and Table 1 is that the increase in the number of TASER presentations and discharges was accompanied by a growth in the number of TASERs made available to New Zealand Police Officers, which increased from 681 in 2010 to 1,609 in 2016 (Monreal, 2017). The increase in the number of TASERs made available to police officers may have had an influence on the increase in the number of TASER presentations and discharges.

A different presentation of the use of the TASER for the period 2010 to 2017 is included in Table 2. The table presents percentage TASER presentation or shown, discharged, show to discharge ratio, average number of TASER events per month and the percentage of TASER events to all Tactical Option Report events. As can be seen from Table 2, the percentage presented or shown remains within the range of 84 to 88 during the 8-year period and the discharge percentage remains at 12 to 16 over the period. The results are similar for the show to discharge ratio, which stays within a range, but increases initially from 5:1 in 2011 to a high of 8:1 in 2014, and then decreases to 5:1 in 2017.

Table 2.

Percentage of TASER presentation and discharge, average TASER events per month and percentage of TASER events from 22 March 2010 to December 2017.

Year	Presented, laser painting or arcing (%)	Stun or discharged (%)	Show to discharge ratio	Average TASER events per month	TASER event percentage of all Tactical Options Report Events
2010^a	87	13	6:1	56	14
2011^b	84	16	5:1	54	16
2012	88	12	7:1	77	19
2013	87	13	6:1	91	21
2014	88	12	8:1	84	21
2015	87	13	7:1	83	20
2016	85	15	6:1	107	26
2017	84	16	5:1	99	25

Source: Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation reports 2011 to 2018.

^a Figures are for the period 22 March 2010 to 30 June 2011.

^b Figures are for the period 1 July to 31 December 2011.

All other figures are for the period 1 January to 31 December of that year.

The last two columns of Table 2 present information that pertains to the average number of TASER events per month and the percentage of TASER events to the total Tactical Options Report events. Both columns indicate increasing use of the TASER. The average number of TASER events per month increases from 56 in 2010 to 99 in 2017 and the percentage of TASER events to total events increases from 14 in 2010 to 25 in 2017.

A second area of analysis is the ethnicity of the subject of the TASER incident. Table 3 presents the ethnicity of the TASER subject as recorded by the police officer who completed the Tactical Options Report. Table 3 clearly indicates an increase in TASER use between 2010 and 2017 and that Māori make up the largest number of subjects compared with other ethnicities. The percentage of Māori subjected to the TASER increased during that period from 50% to 56%. An interpretation of the data may create the perception that Māori are over-represented as subjects in the use of the device. Māori comprise 16.5% of the total New Zealand population (Stats New Zealand, 2018).

Table 3.

TASER events by ethnicity 2010 to 2017.

	2010	2011	2012	2013	2015	2016	2017
Māori	401	153	462	579	537	704	674
European	312	115	327	347	318	412	335
Pacific	111	51	112	141	116	148	146
Asian	0	0	0	0	13	13	18
MELAA	0	0	0	0	8	8	13
Other	22	4	24	23	6	5	3
Total	846	323	925	1090	998	1290	1189

Source: Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation reports 2011 to 2018. MELAA: Middle Eastern, Latin American or African.

The last area of analysis relates to injuries sustained by the subject and police officer following TASER use. In 2012, a total of 10 injuries were sustained by the subject from the use of the TASER. The total number of injuries sustained by the subject increased to 22 in 2017 with the largest increase being in the serious category. The severity of the injury and the total number of injuries sustained by the subject for each 12-month period has been presented in Table 4.

Table 4.

Subject injuries by severity resulting from TASER discharges 2010 to 2017.

	2010	2011	2012	2013	2015	2016	2017
Minor	5	0	1	6	4	6	5
Moderate	1	4	8	4	9	16	7
Serious	1	0	1	2	1	7	10
Total	7	4	10	12	14	29	22

Source: Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation reports 2011 to 2018.

The Tactic Options Report database reveals similar information in relation to injuries sustained by police officers at a TASER incident. In 2012, officers sustained a total of 44 injuries and by 2017 the number had increased to 83. The increase in the injuries sustained, however, was primarily in the minor and moderate severity categories although the number in the serious category also increased. This information has been presented in Table 5.

Table 5.

Staff injuries by severity at TASER events 2010 to 2017.

	2010	2011	2012	2013	2015	2016	2017
Minor	21	11	36	31	41	55	54
Moderate	5	5	7	11	10	17	23
Serious	2	0	1	2	3	5	6
Total	28	16	44	44	54	77	83

Source: Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation reports 2011 to 2018.

Discussion and conclusion

The information from the Tactical Options Reports for the period 2011 to 2018 clearly indicates that there has been an increase in TASER use, both in the presentation mode and the discharge mode of the device. Use in the presentation modes increased from 811 in 2012 to 1,003 in 2017 (23.6% increase), while discharge of the TASER has increased from 114 in 2012 to 186 in 2017 (63% increase). The data also indicate that there has been a decrease in the presentation to discharge ratio. This means that police officers have changed their approach to the use of the device from one of in which the device was presented more often to one of in which the device is presented only when there is a high chance of it being used. In this regard could, however, the TASER could be used either be in the presentation mode or actually be discharged.

The change in use of the TASER may be a response to the change in the operating environment between 2010 to 2017. Recorded crime statistics for the period 2010 to 2017 show a decrease in minor assaults on police officers, year-on-year of 35.1%, but at the same time, there was an increase in serious assaults on police officers (Locker and Peck, 2016). This could be linked to a decrease in the number of minor assaults and a result of the increasing use of the TASER by the police. An analysis of long-term TASER use by the New Zealand Police also indicates that there has been a slight decline in the sufficiency of TASER discharge events and in TASER discharges since 2013. This trend was more evident in 2016 with a steady decrease in the show mode to discharge ratio.

Changes in the types of assault on police officers, however, need to be balanced with a decrease in the level of reported crime in New Zealand since 2009. Figure 2 presents the reported level of eight selected crimes that contain an element of violence. As shown, all these crimes have steadily decreased over the period 2009 to 2018.

Figure 2.

Number of Reported Selected Crimes in New Zealand from 2009.

In summary, the use of the TASER by New Zealand Police Officers has increased year on year with the ratio of the ethnicity of the subject also increasing. At the same time, officers are discharging the TASER more in comparison with using the show mode. The data also show that injuries sustained by subjects and officers are increasing with the increase in TASER use. An alternative argument is that the officer could have sustained more serious injuries if the TASER were not available.

Reasons for the increase in use of the TASER by New Zealand Police officers are hard to identify. There was a decrease in the level of crime during the research period, but an increase in the number of serious assaults on police officers. There was also an increase in the number of emergency events attended by the New Zealand Police to 869 170 in 2017 from 708 079 in 2009 (22.7% increase). These factors could mean that individual police officers may have perceived that they were attending an ever-increasing number of emergency events and that there was an increased probability of being seriously assaulted, which resulted in their resorting to using the TASER in preference to other tactical options. The increase in the percentage of TASER events in comparison with the use of other tactical options supports this hypothesis. The use of firearms by the police during the research period, however, does not. The New Zealand Police only used firearms on between one and six occasions from 2009 to 2017, with no discernible trend during the period. This information is presented in Table 6.

Table 6.

New Zealand Police use of firearms from 2009 to 2017.

Year	Fatal	Miss	Non-fatal	Unintentional discharge	Sponge round	Total
2009	2		1			3
2010			1			1
2011	2		2			4
2012			2			2
2013	2	2	1	1		6
2014			1		1	2
2015	3		3			6
2016	3	1	2			6
2017	2		1			3
Total	14	3	14	1	1	33

Source: Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation reports 2011 to 2018.

The analysis and effectiveness of the use of the TASER by the New Zealand Police provide limited insight in two areas. First the effectiveness of the TASER is a complex variable that is not readily observable. The problem is that the effectiveness of the TASER is best understood as a construct comprising a number of other variables or factors that combine to generate an outcome. The challenge is to define what observable factors best explain and measure the effectiveness of TASER use. Another conceptual issue in relation to measurement of the effectiveness of the TASER is whether the police should measure the effectiveness of each TASER discharge or the TASER event in aggregate (Monreal, 2017).

The second area of insight relates to tactical decision-making in each event where the TASER has been deployed, which, according to White and Ready (2007), could be a critical driver in measuring the effectiveness of TASER use. Other critical variables associated with measuring the effectiveness of the TASER could be managed through planning and continual reassessment of the tactical options available to a police officer at the time of an event. The disconnects of the TASER probes from clothing, for example, could potentially be reduced by choosing a more appropriate tactical option based on assessment of the subject’s clothing. Similarly, the TASER, as a more advanced and complex tactical option, demands a high level of fine motor skills, which are known to be affected by the stressful situations that confront police officers (Bertilsson et al., 2017).

Future research on tactical decision-making and responses by police officers in stressful situations could include an initial qualitative investigation to assess the common issues and patterns experienced. A short supporting survey of a larger sample or a stratified sample of police officers, based on specific demographic characteristics, could explore these themes and this could increase our understanding of the factors that comprise a police officer’s decision-making in violent situations. The survey data would also provide greater confidence in the patterns identified in the qualitative study and this would help to ensure that they are representative of the wider police officer population.

This research analysed the effectiveness and use of the TASER by the New Zealand Police from 2009 to 2017 and found that while the use of the device has increased at violent events, the form of that use has changed. Over the period of analysis, use of the discharge mode has increased compared with the show mode and as the use of the TASER increased, injuries sustained by subjects and officers also increased. The research also highlighted limitations of the methodology adopted to measure the effectiveness of TASER use and discussed options that could assist future research to examine the use of the TASER by police agencies.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Garth den Heyer

Note

References

Alpert

Dunham

(2010) Policy and training recommendations related to police use of CEDs: overview of findings from a comprehensive national study. Police Quarterly 13(3): 235–259.

American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan (2013) Standards for Stun Guns. Available at: http://aclumich.org/sites/default/files/taserrevision2-2013.pdf (accessed 1 October 2019).

APM reports (2019) When tasers fail: Tasers are less reliable than their maker has claimed. May 9. Available at: https://www.apmreports.org/story/2019/05/09/when-tasers-fail (accessed 1 October 2019).

Ariel

Lawes

Weinborn

Henry

Chen

Brants Sabo

(2019) The ‘less-than-lethal weapons effect’— Introducing TASERs to routine police operations in England and Wales: a randomized controlled trial. Criminal Justice and Behavior 46(2): 280–300.

Bertilsson

Petersson

Frederiksson

Magnusson

Fransson

(2017) Use of pepper spray in policing: retrospective study of situational characteristics and implications for violent situations. Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 18(4): 391–406.

Brandl

Stroshine

(2017) Oleoresin capsicum spray and TASERs: a comparison of factors predicting use and effectiveness. Criminal Justice Policy Review 28(3): 279–306.

Dymond

(2014) The flaw in the Taser debate is the Taser debate: what do we know about Taser in the UK, and how significant are the gaps in our knowledge? Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice 8(2): 165–173.

Kesic

Thomas

Ogloff

(2012) Analysis of fatal shootings: Time, space and suicide by police. Criminal Justice and Behavior 39(8): 1107–1125.

Lindberg

(2012) Police use of force: a review of the literature. Criminology and Criminal Justice Senior Capstone Project. Paper 6. Available at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=ccj_capstone (accessed 1 October 2019).

10.

Locker

(2017) TEN-R Model Review. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

11.

Locker

Peck

(2016) Environmental Risk Scan: Body Armour Replacement Programme. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

12.

Marshall

Shuey

(2001) A Strategic Evaluation of the New Zealand Police Position Concerning the Use of Force When Responding to Potentially Violent Situations: A Review of Best Practice, Policy and Training. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

13.

Matthews

(2003) Project Lincoln: A Review of Less Lethal Weapons and Related Issues. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

14.

Monreal

(2017) Describing, Understanding and Defining TASER Effectiveness. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

15.

New Zealand Police (n.d.a) Tactical Options Card. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

16.

New Zealand Police (n.d.b) TASER (Electronic Control Devices). Wellington: New Zealand Police.

17.

New Zealand Police (2008) Operational Evaluation of the New Zealand Taser Trial. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

18.

New Zealand Police (2013a) New Zealand Police TASER National Roll-out Research Report. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

19.

New Zealand Police (2013b) New Zealand Police TASER Reintroduction Period Research Report. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

20.

Police Executive Research Forum (2011) Use of Technology in Policing: The Chief’s Perspective. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.

21.

Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation (2011) New Zealand Police Taser National Roll-Out Research Report: 22 March 2010 to 30 June 2011. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

22.

Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation (2012) New Zealand Police Biannual Taser report #1: 1 January to 31 December 2011. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

23.

Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation (2013) New Zealand Police Annual Taser report #1: 1 January to 31 December 2012. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

24.

Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation (2014) New Zealand Police Annual Taser report #2: 1 January to 31 December 2013. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

25.

Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation (2015) New Zealand Police Annual Tactical Options Research Report #3: 1 January to 31 December 2014. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

26.

Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation (2016) New Zealand Police Annual Tactical Options Research Report #4: 1 January to 31 December 2015. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

27.

Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation (2017) New Zealand Police Annual Tactical Options Research Report #5: 1 January to 31 December 2016. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

28.

Response and Operations: Research and Evaluation (2018) New Zealand Police Tactical Options Research Report: 2017. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

29.

Stats New Zealand (2018) Māori population estimates: at 30 June 2018. Available at: https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/maori-population-estimates-at-30-june-2018 (accessed 1 October 2019).

30.

Tactical Options Research Team (2013) New Zealand Police TASER Reintroduction Period Research Report: 1 March 2009 to 21 March 2010. Wellington: New Zealand Police.

31.

Taylor

Woods

(2010) Injuries to officers and suspects in police use of force cases: a quasi-experimental evaluation. Police Quarterly 13(3): 260–289.

32.

Thomas

Collins

Lovrich

(2010) Conducted energy device use in municipal policing: results of a national survey on policy and effectiveness assessments. Police Quarterly 13(3): 290–315.

33.

United Nations (1990) Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. New York: United Nations.

34.

United States Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice (2012) Police use of force. Available at: http://www.nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/officer-safety/use-offorce/welcome.htm (accessed 1 October 2019)

35.

White

Ready

(2007) The TASER as a less lethal force alternative: findings on use and effectiveness in a large metropolitan police agency. Police Quarterly 10(2): 170–191.

36.

White

Ready

(2010) The impact of the TASER on suspect resistance: identifying predictors of effectiveness. Crime & Delinquency 56(1): 70–102.

37.

White

Ready

Riggs

Dawes

Hinz

(2012) An incident- level profile of Taser device deployments in arrest-related deaths. Police Quarterly 16(1): 85–112.