Joe - Great Morning!!!

... I would think the "real questions" include:

1. How much medical and scientific reseaerch exists supporting acute agitated delirium, and excited delirium (acute agitated delirium caused by chronic drug abuse or neurolepic use (including Ritilin))? Also, please see neuroleptic malignant syndome. The answer (for anyone who bothers to do the research) is enormous (100s of articles and several texts) and dates back to 1849 (Journal of Insanity, article by Dr. Luther Bell -- "Bell's Mania").

2. How much medical and scientific researech exists that prove that an electronic control device (ECD) is unreasonably dangerous? The answer is none -- other than some speculative dicta in a very small minority of documents.

3. How much medical and scientific research exists that show that ECDs are safer and more effective alternative use of force tools than other law enforcement use of force tools and techniques? Here, ECDs have undergone more scrutiny and scientific testing and analysis than any other law enforcement use of force tool or technique. And, these studies include mutiple countries, multiple governments, etc.

4. As far as risk benefit analysis -- many law enforcement agencies have seen large double digit benefits from use of ECDs, including, but not limite to: decreases in use of deadly force, decreases in officer and suspect injuries, decreases in suspect complaints and lawsuits, etc.

5. As far as case law -- there are now close to 100 cases where courts have ruled on the appropriateness of ECD use by law enforcement officers. Again -- do the research.

6. Why criminals (in the eyes of some) are no longer responsible for their own actions, or more to the point: the effects of their long term life's choices?

7. Why ignorance (lack of knowledge, unwillingness to do the research) and greed (deep pocket causation theory -- as opposed to actual causation) seems to be the impetus for baseless criticism (and lawsuits)?

Have a sensational week!!!

Michael Brave