A low goal score and a high capture score corresponded to high incapacitation effectiveness. During the review process, the video recordings were randomized and the weapon model, probe spread, and probe location (except as obvious on video) were blinded to the raters. While the expert author raters conducted the original experiments, so were quasi-blinded, the video recording ratings were done 4 months after the experiment to decrease recall bias.

Incapacitation effectiveness of CEW depends on multiple factors such as the dart location, dart-to-dart-distance, individual body habitus, pain tolerance, and motivation. In earlier studies, Ho et al. [6, 7] could prove that the primary controllable factors are probe spread and location of the probes. In this study, these variables were altered in each group, representing a specific target scenario with corresponding levels of incapacitation. Traditional dart placements were analyzed and compared to new possibilities due to the multiple-shot technology of the TASER 10.

Thirty-four subjects (four female and 30 male) were assigned to eight study groups (Fig. 1). Twenty subjects in five groups received one exposure from a TASER 10. Five subjects in group 4 received two exposures, one from a TASER 10 and a TASER 7. Nine subjects in each of two groups (groups 6 and 7) received two exposures from a TASER 10, with an additional dart added for the second exposure. A total of 48 exposures were recorded, 43 from a TASER 10 and five from a TASER 7.

A dart placement on each lower thigh (group 1) caused a complete lock of the lower extremities with a remaining ability to fully use both arms.

The modest number of subjects enrolled in this study may have underpowered our study to find differences in the CEWs and limit our conclusions.

BestExecutive Protection trainingschool

The TASER 10 in group 8 also had a large distance between the probes targeting the right upper arm and right thigh showed good results in incapacitation.

Ho JD, Dawes DM, Kunz SN (2023) Safety profile of new TASER conducted electrical weapon darts. In: 11th European Symposium on Non-Lethal Weapons. European Working Group on Non-Lethal-Weapons. Conference Booklet. Brussels, Belgium, May 22nd - 25th

All authors agree with the content of this paper, and all gave explicit consent to submit and publish. The authors state that they obtained consent from the responsible authorities at the institute/organization where the work has been carried out.

Conducted electrical weapons (CEWs) have been used by law enforcement agencies worldwide to control and restrain potentially violent persons. As new generations of these weapons are developed, effectiveness and safety need to be evaluated. The new TASER 10 uses an independently targeted probe scheme with floating polarities so that any two probes can form a connection. This is in contrast to older generation weapons, which used paired probes with fixed take-off angles. The expectation is with up to a maximum of 10 shots and independent targeting; the weapon will have a greater effectiveness. In this pilot study, we used our previously published, standardized methodology for measurement of CEW effectiveness on motivated human volunteers for several objectives: (1) to directly compare the effectiveness of the waveform on human subjects to an older generation weapon (the TASER 7), (2) to more broadly compare it to historical controls, and (3) to look at various probe configurations to determine their comparative effectiveness. The task at hand was to reach a suspended martial arts dummy 12 ft (3.65 m) away while being exposed (under power) to the electrical waveform of the TASER devices in various dart configurations. Several intervention groups were examined. We used video review with our standard methodology to rate goal achievement and limb capture. The results demonstrate that the TASER 10 has similar ability to induce neuromuscular incapacitation as the TASER 7. Additionally, the ability of the TASER 10 to place multiple darts on a specific target area to create the desired probe spread is a technological advantage over previous models. This, together with the floating polarity probes, promise to make the TASER 10 potentially more effective and flexible in the field.

If the electrodes are placed on one side (left or right) of the frontal body, the probability of a complete contraction of all muscles is unlikely. All subjects of group 2 went to the ground, but still had remaining control over parts of at least their left arm and leg. The level in incapacitation was comparable to group 1. The results of group 5 were stronger towards incapacitation, which could indicate a stronger muscular contraction, when targeting the back vs. the front. This phenomenon was also noted in our earlier studies and could be explained by larger muscle groups on the back than on the front of a body. However, due to a rather low number of cases, this assumption needs to be analyzed further.

The starting position of each participant was a balanced and stable “fighting stance” with one foot slightly forward and weight balanced on a padded training mat. For security reasons, spotters were standing on each side and behind the volunteers (Fig. 2). The task at hand was to reach and touch a suspended martial arts dummy 12 ft (3.65 m) from the starting position. The 12-ft distance was established to prevent a simple fall forward from allowing the subject to reach the target and to prevent leaping. For motivational purposes, the subjects were told that the CEW would discharge until contact was made with any part of the dummy or until 20 s of exposure had elapsed. The actual maximum possible exposure duration was one standard cycle of 5 s, which was never reached. The test was stopped as soon as the study investigator with policing experience decided that the subject was incapable of progressing. Subjects were verbally encouraged to reach the dummy during the exposures to avoid subjects just giving up. All subject exposures and their attempts to disable the dummy were video recorded using two high-speed cameras (Sony FDR-AX700 4K, 1080p HD at 50 frames per second) for follow-up analysis.

In group 7, a first exposure tested several darts in a rather small area and a second exposure enlarged the probe spread. The results support the manufacturer´s recommendation that greater probe spread increases incapacitation effectiveness.

Kunz SN, Dawes D and Ho J were equally involved in the implementation of the human study. They were present during all exposure, supervised the exposures and evaluated the data. Kunz SN was the main author of the manuscript, but Dawes, Ho and Knack edited it. Kanck was responsible for the statistics and overview the data.

Multiple hits were simulated in group 5 with three darts in the upper left back (dart spread: 2 inches (3.5 cm) each) and one in the lower left back (dart spread 12 inches). In the majority of cases, a complete incapacitation could be achieved.

Sweeney JD (2009) Transcutaneous muscle stimulation. In: Kroll MW, Ho JD (eds) TASER conducted weapons: physiology, pathology and law. Springer, New York, pp 51–62

The best results in incapacitation were achieved with dart placement on the upper and lower extremities (group 8) and on the upper left back and frontal right thigh (group 3). Here, a large dart spread was created with a complete incapacitation of the subjects.

Executive protection trainingnear me

An exposure on one upper side of the back with a 12-inch (30 cm) spread (group 4) caused immobility of both arms with the TASER 7 and TASER 10 and incomplete incapacitation of the legs.

Ho JD, Dawes DM, Kunz SN, Klein LR, Driver BE, DeVries PA, Jones GA, Stang JL (2020) The physiologic effects of a new generation conducted electrical weapon on human volunteers at rest. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 16:406–414

Dignitary and executive protection services and training require close connections and collaboration with the principal and their teams. We are 100% committed to ensuring  privacy, confidentiality and discretion are hallmarks of our services.

The test series in groups 6 and 7 demonstrated the technological advantage of the TASER 10 vs. the TASER 7. In case of small probe spread exposure, additional shots can secure incapacitation. In our studies, three darts were placed in the lower abdominal region with a too short dart-to-dart-distance. An additional shot widened the electrical field and thus induced more muscle contraction. Since the TASER 10 is able to shoot ten single darts independently from each other, a higher target rate with ten potential dart locations is possible. In addition, the TASER 10 darts are able to float polarity of the probes, increasing the number of dart combinations. In comparison, the TASER 7 only has two shots with four combined (two darts are being fired with each shot) dart locations.

During our tests, no physical abnormalities occurred and no irregularities were noted with post-exposure physical examinations.

Executive Protection trainingonline

For the groups receiving a second exposure with an additional probe (Table 4), there was a significant difference between incapacity score for the initial exposure median score 2 (95% CI 0.1–3.0) and second exposure median score 6 (95% CI 4.1–6.0). This difference was significant on Wilcoxon rank sum testing (p = 0.007).

R.L. Oatman & Associates, Inc. provides in depth and detailed threat assessment and risk management services for personal and corporate clients. Our unique interview and assessment methodology is the gold standard, enabling security teams to appropriately resource and manage their programs.

Our services and training represent a holistic view of the security and facilitation model to ensure our clients are able to fulfill the needs of their institutions. Security is an enabler, not an obstruction.

Despa F, Basati S, Zhang ZD, D’Andrea J, Reilly JP, Bodnar EN, Lee RC (2009) Electromuscular incapacitation results from stimulation of spinal reflexes. Bio Electro Magnetics 30:411–21

Freeexecutive protection training

Kroll MW, Adamec J, Wetli CV, Williams HE (2016) Fatal traumatic brain injury with electrical weapon falls. J Forensic Leg Med 43:12–19

An “off-the shelf” Axon TASER 7 was used. The TASER 10 was not yet available in its handle form-factor so the final printed circuit board and wires/probes were used. Probes were attached by hand-placing the probes at a 90° angle to the skin to the full dart depth (11.5 mm) after an isopropyl alcohol preparation of the site. Axon engineers confirmed the CEW to be operating according to manufacturer specifications with each exposure.

However, shots to the lower abdominal region seemed to have a weaker effect than shots to the upper back or combined shots including more than one extremity. Apart from muscle contraction, no additional unexpected or adverse reactions could be detected.

The probe position was one dart on each thigh — group 1, one dart on the right abdominal wall and one on the frontal thigh — group 2, two darts on the upper back and one on the frontal thigh — group 3, one dart on the upper and lower back (first exposure with T7) and on the opposite side (second exposure with T10) — group 4, two darts on the upper back and two darts on the lower back — group 5, three darts in the lower abdominal region (first exposure) and one additional dart on the opposite frontal thigh (second exposure) — group 6, three darts in the lower abdominal region (first exposure) and one additional dart on the same side frontal thigh (second exposure) — group 7, one dart on the upper arm and one dart on the same side frontal thigh — group 8. There were four volunteers in groups 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 8 and five participants in groups 4 and 6. A total of 48 exposures were performed, of which 14 participants received two exposures (Fig. 1).

The results of our study provide additional data on CEW incapacitation effectiveness and support the results of our prior studies. It further demonstrated the technical advantages of the TASER 10. The effectiveness in incapacitation depends on the placement and distance of the electrodes and increases with the maximum dart-to-dart-distance. With the TASER 10 skin penetration of at least two darts is mandatory, which will likely be offset by the number of probe firing options provided by the 10-probe magazine.

Median and interquartile range values were calculated for the incapacitation scores for each limb individually, and the total score was calculated from the pooled data. Paired analysis with Wilcoxon signed rank test was used for the TASER 10 to TASER 7 shot comparison and second shot with additional dart comparison given non-normally distributed data.

A commercial body composition monitor and scale (Omron Full Body Sensor, Model HBF-516B, Omron Healthcare, Inc., Hoffman Estates, Illinois) was used to determine participant weight that was combined with stated height to determine body mass index (BMI).

Bozeman WP, Stopyra JP, Klinger DA, Martin BP, Graham DD, Johnson JC, Mahoney-Tesoriero K, Vail SJ (2018) Injuries associated with police use of force. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 84:466–472

Comparable to earlier studies [6, 7], we could confirm an effective spread of 12 in (ca. 30 cm) or greater. The study at hand did not evaluate the dart-to-dart distances, but the target area. However, our results show that larger probe spread, together with more than one extremity caused sufficient incapacitation.

The institutional review board at the University of Minnesota approved the study. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Executive Protection trainingFlorida

We strive to provide the best possible services and training to our clients with a focus on mastering the basics and ensuring our work leaves no details untouched.

Executive protection trainingTexas

Three shots within a smaller area in the lower abdomen with an additional shot to the thigh were examined in groups 6 and 7. The second exposure and thus additional dart on the thigh increased the level of incapacitation (Table 3).

We’re always ready to deliver training to meet a variety of goals and objectives. Please contact us to inquire about onsite training for your entire team.

We specialize in executive protection training for the corporate, government, and private sectors.  Fortune 500 corporations, U.S. Government Agencies, and private families have entrusted us with the training of their personnel at our Executive Protection Training Programs since 1994.

The research took place at an Axon facility located in Scottsdale, Arizona. The participants were selected from a convenience sample, primarily consisting of individuals from law enforcement, military, and security backgrounds, but also including civilian volunteers. In exchange for their participation, the subjects received compensation in the form of an Axon CEW device. To ensure their eligibility and safety, participants completed a medical screening questionnaire, which was then reviewed by a study physician. A Hennepin Healthcare representative was specifically brought in to oversee the informed consent process. Participants were given the opportunity to address any questions they had with the study physician.

Executive protection trainingcost

In previous studies, we established a quantitative methodology to assess the incapacitation effectiveness of a CEW exposure in humans [6, 7]. An important element of our methodology was its goal-directed nature in which highly motivated test subjects are instructed to advance towards a target while being exposed to CEW waveforms.

The sole exclusion criterion for participation was pregnancy, which was verified through questioning of prospective study subjects. Those who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled on a first-come, first-enrolled basis and were assigned to different groups based on probe configuration.

There was no significant difference in total incapacity scores in the subjects receiving an exposure from TASER 10 with median score 6 (95% CI 3–12) and TASER 7 median score 5 (95% CI 3–12). No significant difference on Wilcoxon rank sum testing (p = 0.56). Goal achievement was similar between the two groups (Table 5).

Kunz, S.N., Ho, J.D., Dawes, D.M. et al. Effectiveness of a New-Generation CEW in Human Subjects with a Goal-Directed Task. Hum Factors Mech Eng Def Saf 8, 1 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41314-024-00066-x

A combined front-back placement of the darts (group 3) had a rather long dart-to-dart distance and resulted in a complete incapacitation.

In direct comparison between the TASER 7 and the TASER 10 in group 4, goal achievement and incapacitation were comparable (Table 5).

Thirty-four subjects were enrolled and assigned to eight groups based on probe configuration. There were no important adverse events observed or reported. No complications other than some minor bleeding from the dart wounds were noted, which were easily controlled with pressure and a bandage.

The results suggest that the most effective shots have a large dart spread and include an upper and lower extremity or front-to-back exposure.

In alignment with our previous study results, the target area greatly influences the remaining scope of action. With the TASER 10, a higher variability in dart placement is possible and new target zones can be realized. In group 1, the dart electrodes were placed on both thighs, causing a complete lock of the lower extremities (limb capture. Each participant immediately fell to the ground, but was still able to move both arms and thus control the fall. In a real-life situation, both legs can be targeted, when the aggressor has no weapon in his hand and/or needs to control the fall due to complex surroundings. By being able to dampen the fall, head injuries can be avoided [8].

The video analysis and evaluation of each participant was done by a quasi-blinded expert panel, the University of Minnesota Institutional Review Board (https://crsc.umn.edu/about-crsc), with significant volunteer exposure observational experience (thousands of human volunteer exposures). The authors of this paper were not part of the panel. Similar to our previous studies [6, 7], each exposure was rated for level of goal achievement and limb muscular capture (Table 1). While subjects endeavored to advance and accomplish the goal in each video recording, the authors evaluated the visually apparent degree of muscle capture/contraction in each of the four extremities. The “goal score” (primary outcome) ranged from 0 (for “no significant advancement towards the goal”) up to 2 (for “successful completion of the goal” of reaching the dummy). The “limb score” (secondary outcome) ranged from 0 (for “no evident capture”) up to 3 (for “complete and full capture,” i.e., “tetanic contraction”). For every participant, the expert panel decided on one number denoting the degree of incapacitation and mobility (Table 1 and 2). Median and interquartile range values were calculated for the goal achievement scores.

Due to individual differences such as tissue densities, body physique, pain tolerance, the anatomical target area, and the electrical probe distance, it is essential to analyze various probe placements and their effect on human volunteers when determining weapon effectiveness and thus the level of incapacitation. With a different targeting possibility than earlier weapons, the TASER 10 offers ways of strategic targeting with the goal to control the body area and extent of incapacitation.

As an interface between physical force tactics and lethal weapons, conducted electrical weapons (CEWs) are currently an effective application option for law enforcement agencies [1]. Due to the unique way in which CEWs physically incapacitate violent subjects, who pose an immediate threat, CEWs are widely used by law enforcement officers in the USA, Canada, the UK, Europe, and Australia.

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Allied UniversalExecutive Protection TrainingAcademy

CEWs operate in part on the electrical stimulation of motor neuron axonal projections to skeletal muscles. They also elicit some minimal direct muscle tissue stimulation in the area immediately adjacent to the probes where the electric field strengths are highest. This causes an involuntary uncontrollable subtetanic muscle contraction in a person who has been hit [3]. The devices may cause more distant effects through more complex mechanisms including the stimulation of reflex arcs via afferent pathways and stimulation of descending spinal tracts [4].

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Ho J, Dawes D, Miner J, Kunz SN, Nelson R, Sweeney J (2012) Conducted electrical weapon incapacitation during a goal-directed task as a function of probe spread. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 8:358–366

Axon Enterprise, Inc (Axon®), formerly TASER International (TASER®), Inc., Scottsdale, AZ, is recognized as the major manufacturer of CEWs. While the first CEWs, the Tasertron TF 76, the AIR TASER 3400, the TASER M26, and the TASER X26 had an output waveform that was the same irrespective of the load resistance, the new so-called SMART CEWs, the TASER X26P, TASER X2, and TASER 7, use feedback control to adapt the pulse charge to the load, targeting a mean pulse charge of about 65 microcoulombs. With these devices, a consistent pulse charge independent of resistance is generated by various feedback mechanisms [2].

Our approach to personal protection is grounded in the belief that the best protective assistance is an effective blend of facilitation and security. We currently provide personnel support, investigative assistance, and security advice to a number of domestic and international clients.

Incapacitation and goal achievement scores in composite and by group are presented in Table 2–5. Kruskal–Wallis analysis on total incapacitation scores (Table 3) suggests heterogeneity between the groups (p = 0.0003). However, the sample sizes are too small within groups for post hoc analysis to assess further differences.

Ho J, Dawes DM, Kunz SN, Satpathy R, Klein L, Driver B, Stang JL (2020) A comparative study of conducted electrical weapon incapacitation during a goal directed task. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 16:613–621

In group 2, the darts were placed in the lower abdominal region and on one thigh, which caused incapacitation of both legs in all volunteers.

In this pilot study, we used our previously published, standardized methodology for measurement of CEW effectiveness on motivated human volunteers for several objectives:

In group 3, the dart electrodes were placed on opposite sides (front and back) of the body, in the upper back and lower thigh. A two-sided shot to a person is only possible with the TASER 10, due to its multiple single-shot mechanism. The models X2 and TASER 7 have two bays, but probe pairs from each bay are fired simultaneously, which makes targeting two opposite body sides impossible. Due to the large probe spread and different muscle groups activated, the majority of participants showed a complete incapacitation. None of them was able to reach the dummy.

The possibility of a larger number of single shots of the TASER 10 promises an improved incapacitation performance compared to the TASER 7.

The new 10-shot TASER 10 has a comparatively low voltage system (approximately 800 V) with a newly designed adjustable waveform. The TASER 10 does not have the ability to generate a brief high voltage phase of up to around 50,000 V to enable arcing of the waveform across a small air gap. Each dart can be fired independently, instead of the electrically paired two-dart-shots of the earlier weapons. The darts are released at a velocity of up to 205 fps (62 m/s), covering a maximum effective distance of 45 feet (13.7 m) [5]. Depending on the number of probes and their distance towards each other on the body´s surface, their polarity can be changed dynamically. This is decided by algorithm, which determines which probes have the longest distance between them and the best connection. This enables the device to establish an electrical field between any two probes on a body. However, at least two of the ten darts need to penetrate the skin in order to realize an electrical circuit between them. Currently, up to four dart combinations (four pathways) can be used to transmit electrical waveforms. In addition, through the possibility of adapting charge and pulse duration to target resistance, the TASER 10 increases efficiency compared with earlier models. This new technology enables a higher variability in dart placement, which makes it necessary to examine its incapacitation potential and limitations.

The study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. No animals were harmed during the study.