skip navigation

LIBRARY

Abstract Database

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

To download this abstract, check the box next to the NCJ number then click the "Back To Search Results" link. Then, click the "Download" button on the Search Results page. Also see the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 210184 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Use of Electro-Muscular Disruption Devices (EMDs) in Higher Education Law Enforcement
Journal: Campus Law Enforcement Journal  Volume:35  Issue:2  Dated:March/April 2005  Pages:29-32
Author(s): Randy Mingo; Ross Wolf; Charles Mesloh; Tina Kelchner
Date Published: March 2005
Page Count: 4
Sponsoring Agency: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Publisher: http://www.iaclea.org/ 
Type: Instructional Material
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article identifies issues that must be addressed when a campus law enforcement agency is considering whether or not to purchase electro-muscular disruption devices (EMDs) as a "less-than-lethal" weapon, and a case study is provided on the equipping of campus officers with EMDs.
Abstract: An EMD injects an electrical charge into a person's body to override the central nervous system, temporarily causing incapacitating muscle contractions. The most commonly used EMD currently on the market is the Taser. The decision about using EMDs in law enforcement has been complicated by adverse publicity that has attributed deaths to EMDs, although there is little, if any evidence, that an EMD has directly caused a death. In June 2003, the University of Central Florida Police Department (UCFPD) decided to purchase 40 M-26 Tasers for its officers in order to fill a gap in their use-of-force matrix beyond that provided by pepper spray and the expandable baton. To inform the university community and off-campus citizens about the rationale for this purchase, an article was released in the student newspaper, and interviews were granted with the UCFPD public information officer. Incident reports for June 2003 through December 2003 indicate that an EMD was discharged by campus officers six times, and each use was in accordance with departmental policy. There were 12 cases in which the EMD was unholstered but not activated due to suspect compliance, indicating the deterrent value of EMDs. Although potential liabilities are involved with any use-of-force device, this can be minimized by clear and strict policies for EMD use, proper training, an informed public, consequences for EMD misuse, and feedback from the community. Data should be kept on reduced injuries to officers and suspects when EMDs are carried by officers. 8 references
Main Term(s): Police weapons
Index Term(s): Campus police; Campus Security; Less Lethal/ Nonlethal Weapons; Police weapons use; Tasers
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=210184

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.