u8eR

UNTIL OIL IS FOUND

Bill pls

Hi Rick,

Thanks your response to the NPR article that covered the APM Reports yearlong investigation. But I do have some followup questions and comments in response to your answer.

You state that the police data showing a decrease in effectiveness of newer models (X2 and X26P) is unreliable because how different police departments measure reliability vary and because your company also measures it differently. However, that doesn't explain, as APM Reports wrote, why the same police departments, using the same measures, show a decrease in effectiveness within those same departments. For example, it makes sense if Houston and LA have different effectiveness percentages if they measure effectiveness differently from each other. However, if both Houston and LA measure a decrease in effectiveness in the newer models compared to the older models, and a similar rate of decrease, using the same measures for both the old and newer models, it's indicitive of a decrease in effectiveness of the newer model. And this is in fact what APM Reports found when looking at data from multiple different very large police departments.

Police in New York, Los Angeles and Houston reported lower levels of effectiveness when using the X2 or X26P. While each city tracks effectiveness differently, the declines in effectiveness in New York, L.A. and Houston were remarkably similar. In each city, the lower-powered weapons were 6 to 7 percentage points less effective than previous models.

You also wrote that you are "very transparent" in your advertising of the effectiveness of TASER. Do you still stand by these claims? :

They had more "stopping power" than a .38 Special or a .357 Magnum.

Tasers had an "instant incapacitation rate" of 86%, which grew to a "field success rate" of 94% and then 97%.

The company claimed that in demonstrations and testing, Taser effectiveness reached 99% and even 100%.

You wrote, "All testing completed by Axon indicates the X2 and X26P reliably produce NMI when all conditions are met." However, as you know, police departments often use those products at distances less than 7 feet which decreases effectiveness. I think we need to measure effectiveness in real conditions, rather than lab conditions, to paint an honest picture.

Your company knows well the distance at which your products are used affects the effectiveness of them greatly, which is why your newest product (TASER 7) addresses the range issue by increasing the degree of spread of the prongs which allows police to use the device at closer ranges. But you continue to defend and, more importantly, continue to sell other models to police departments that are objectively less efficient.

Finally, you didn't address the claim that the use of TASER products can in fact increase the aggressiveness of suspects shot with them, and not effectively incapacitate them, which increases the likelihood of police killing those suspects.

More than I'll ever have. :(

I was never good at math. Dammit.