I really worry about this. The point of the Taser was to use instead of a gun. Can we really say that all incidences of taser use, a gun would have been appropriate?I read that one 13 year old girl was zapped by a taser for putting her hand-cuffed arms to the front of her body. Would the police have shot her in this instance? – of course not, so why was the taser deemed appropriate? It may be safer than a gun, but it is not safe IMO.

Article here

What worries me more is that one of my relatives is epileptic. And due to the media epilepsy is very misunderstood – not everyone has the type of epilepsy which induces severe seizures where the muscles jerk violently. My relative has the type of epilepsy where she will do utterly strange things like taking clothes off, trying to cook things which cannot be cooked and more importantly abusive behaviour (usually verbal). She cannot control herself and she doesn’t remember whats happened. All her carer can do is calm her down until the seizure is over. I worry because if any police interaction happened it is likely there would be an arrest of her carer and she could in all probability be tasered. Epilepsy is a malfunction of electrical signals in the brain, it is unknown (by me anyway) what could happen to an epileptic after a taser shot during a seizure. Her carer is very capable of helping her through a seizure as would be a similar educated person.

My question is, are the police force educated enough in psychology and medical conditions?

Should they be if given the power to use tasers on anyone for any reason including those with heart complaints and other medical conditions?

Shouldn’t tasers be only used for extreme situations as they were designed particulally as substitutions for guns? ‘If you wouldn’t use a gun, you shouldn’t use a taser’?