This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-05-464 
entitled 'Taser Weapons: Use of Tasers by Selected Law Enforcement 
Agencies' which was released on June 27, 2005. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging 
Threats and International Relations, Committee on Government Reform, 
House of Representatives: 

May 2005: 

Taser Weapons: 

Use of Tasers by Selected Law Enforcement Agencies: 

[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-464]

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-05-464, a report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on 
National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations, 
Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives: 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

Emerging domestic and international threats have generated a growing 
interest in the use of less-than-lethal weapons by government and law 
enforcement agencies and other entities such as commercial airlines. 
One such weapon—the Taser—is a hand-held weapon that delivers an 
electric shock via two stainless steel barbs, effectively 
incapacitating an individual. According to the manufacturer—Taser 
International, Incorporated (Taser International)—Tasers are currently 
used by over 7,000 of the 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the United 
States, with more than 140,000 Tasers in use by police officers in the 
field and an additional 100,000 Tasers owned by civilians worldwide. 
Tasers have been used on over 100,000 volunteers, including individuals 
involved in training seminars and research experiments, and involved in 
over 70,000 actual field uses during police encounters. 

In light of the expanding interest in the Taser, GAO was asked to 
provide information on (1) the policies and procedures related to the 
issues of “use-of-force,” training, operations, and safety for selected 
law enforcement agencies that have purchased and used Tasers and (2) 
federal, state, and local laws that specifically address Tasers, 
including the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) authority 
to regulate Tasers on aircraft. 

What GAO Found: 

The seven law enforcement agencies we contacted have established use of 
force policies, training requirements, operational protocols, and 
safety procedures to help ensure the proper use of Tasers. Although 
none of the agencies have separate use-of-force policies that 
specifically address Tasers, all seven agencies include the use of 
Tasers into their existing policies. Taser training is required for 
officers who use the weapons, and agency officials said that training 
for officers and other non-law enforcement persons who are allowed to 
use Tasers is critically important to help ensure their safe use. 
Operational protocols require that Tasers be visually inspected daily, 
appropriately safeguarded, and, in some cases, tested weekly or at the 
beginning of an officer’s shift. Safety procedures require that Tasers 
not be used on children, pregnant suspects, or near bystanders or 
flammable liquids and that individuals hit in specific body areas with 
Taser barbs, such as the neck or face, be examined by a physician. 

Some federal, state, and local jurisdictions have laws that address 
Tasers but requirements differ. For example, at the federal level, the 
Army prohibits Tasers from being brought into selected military 
installations in Georgia. Also, TSA may approve the use of Tasers on 
aircraft but must prescribe training rules and guidance on appropriate 
circumstances for using Tasers. At the state and local levels, the 
state of Indiana and the city of Chicago, Illinois, regulate the sale 
or possession of Tasers by non-law enforcement persons by subjecting 
Tasers to the same restrictions that apply to firearms. Other states, 
such as California, prohibit Tasers from being carried into public 
facilities such as airports. 

GAO observes that as the Taser becomes more widely used, especially by 
non-law enforcement persons, training is critical to help ensure its 
safe, effective, and appropriate use. TSA, Taser International, and the 
seven law enforcement agencies we contacted generally agreed with the 
information in this report. 

Two Examples of Taser Models: 

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-464. 

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on 
the link above. For more information, contact Robert J. Cramer at (202) 
512-7455 or cramerr@gao.gov. 

[End of section]

Contents: 

Letter: 

Results in Brief: 

Background: 

Selected Law Enforcement Agencies Have Established Policies and 
Procedures to Help Ensure Proper Taser Use: 

Some Federal, State, and Local Laws Address Tasers But Requirements 
Differ: 

Concluding Observations: 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

Appendixes: 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology: 

Appendix II: Comments from the Secretary, Transportation Security 
Administration: 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Tables: 

Table 1: Information Related to Tasers in Use-of-Force Policies for 
Seven Law Enforcement Agencies: 

Table 2: Training Requirements in Seven Law Enforcement Agencies: 

Table 3: Operational Protocols in Seven Law Enforcement Agencies: 

Table 4: Safety Procedures in Seven Law Enforcement Agencies: 

Figures: 

Figure 1: Taser (M-26 Model): 

Figure 2: Taser (X-26 Model): 

Figure 3: FLETC Use-of-Force Continuum: 

Abbreviations: 

ATF: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives: 

ATSA: Aviation and Transportation Security Act: 

DOJ: Department of Justice: 

EMT: Emergency medical technician: 

FLETC: Federal Law Enforcement Training Center: 

GAO: Government Accountability Office: 

NIJ: National Institute of Justice: 

TSA: Transportation Security Administration: 

Letter May 26, 2005: 

The Honorable Christopher Shays: 
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and 
International Relations: 
Committee on Government Reform: 
House of Representatives: 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

Emerging domestic and international threats have generated a growing 
interest in the use of less-than-lethal weapons[Footnote 1] by 
government and law enforcement agencies and other entities such as 
commercial airlines. One such weapon--the Taser--is a hand-held weapon 
that delivers an electric shock via two stainless steel barbs, 
effectively incapacitating an individual.[Footnote 2] According to the 
manufacturer--Taser International, Incorporated (Taser International)-
-Tasers are currently used by over 7,000 of the 18,000 law enforcement 
agencies in the United States, with more than 140,000 Tasers in use by 
police officers in the field and an additional 100,000 Tasers owned by 
civilians world-wide. Taser International officials told us that Tasers 
have been used on over 100,000 volunteers, including individuals 
involved in training seminars and research experiments. They also told 
us that Tasers have been involved in over 70,000 actual field uses 
during police encounters. In addition to law enforcement agencies, 
other entities have requested that they be permitted to use Tasers. For 
example, in October 2004, the Department of Homeland Security's 
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) approved Korean Airlines' 
request that specially trained cabin attendants be allowed to use 
Tasers onboard passenger flights. TSA is the federal agency that is 
responsible for establishing guidelines that govern the circumstances 
in which Tasers may be used on aircraft.[Footnote 3]

In light of this expanding interest in the Taser, you asked us to 
obtain information on (1) the policies and procedures related to the 
issues of "use of force,"[Footnote 4] training, operations, and safety 
for selected law enforcement agencies that have purchased and used 
Tasers; and (2) federal, state, and local laws that specifically 
address Tasers, including TSA's authority to regulate Tasers onboard 
aircraft. 

To accomplish the first objective, we reviewed Taser-related policies 
and procedures established by the seven state and local law enforcement 
agencies that have purchased and used the largest number of Tasers for 
the longest period of time. We also interviewed law enforcement 
officials in the seven agencies. The agencies were the Austin, Texas, 
Police Department; the Ohio Highway Patrol; the Orange County, Florida, 
Sheriff's Department; the Phoenix, Arizona, Police Department; the 
Sacramento, California, Police Department; the Sacramento, California, 
Sheriff's Department; and the San Jose, California, Police Department. 
To accomplish the second objective, we examined various federal, state, 
and local laws, including statutes, regulations, and ordinances, to 
determine whether they specifically address Tasers. We also reviewed 
the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA)[Footnote 5] to 
obtain information on TSA's authority concerning Tasers, including its 
authority to regulate Tasers onboard aircraft. A more detailed 
discussion of our objectives, scope, and methodology is included in 
appendix I. We conducted our work from May 2004 through February 2005 
in accordance with quality standards for investigations as set forth by 
the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency. 

Results in Brief: 

The seven law enforcement agencies we contacted have established use-of-
force policies, training requirements, operational protocols, and 
safety procedures to help ensure the proper use of Tasers. All of the 
seven agencies had included the use of Tasers into their existing use-
of-force policies so that police officers would have guidance on the 
circumstances in which the use of Tasers may be appropriate. Officials 
in all seven law enforcement agencies told us that Taser training is 
required for officers who use the weapons and that training--especially 
for non-law enforcement individuals who may be authorized to use 
Tasers--is of critical importance to help ensure the safe use of these 
weapons. For the seven agencies, operational protocols, which provide 
guidance on police officers' daily law enforcement activities, require 
that Tasers be visually inspected on a daily basis, be appropriately 
safeguarded, and, in some cases, be tested on a weekly basis or at the 
beginning of an officer's shift. Safety procedures established by all 
seven agencies require that the Taser not be used on children, pregnant 
suspects, or near bystanders or flammable liquids and that individuals 
hit in specific body areas with Taser barbs, such as the neck or face, 
be examined by an emergency room physician. 

Some federal, state, and local jurisdictions have laws that address 
Tasers but requirements concerning such weapons differ. In some 
instances, the extent to which the Taser is regulated may depend on 
whether it is classified as a firearm. For example, at the federal 
level, the Department of Justice's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 
Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) has not classified the Taser as a 
firearm, which exempts the weapon from federal firearms requirements. 
However, the Department of the Army (Army) has established Taser- 
related regulations governing the possession, use, and sale of Tasers 
on specific military installations. In addition, TSA has identified the 
Taser as a prohibited weapon that cannot be brought past airport 
security checkpoints by unauthorized personnel. TSA also has authority 
to approve the use of Tasers by flight crews onboard commercial 
aircraft and must prescribe rules for training flight crews in the 
proper use of Tasers and provide guidance on the circumstances under 
which such weapons may be used. In addition, some state and local 
jurisdictions, such as the state of Indiana and the city of Chicago, 
Illinois, regulate the sale or possession of Tasers by non-law 
enforcement persons within their state or municipal boundaries by 
subjecting Tasers to their firearms restrictions. Other states, such as 
California, prohibit Tasers from being carried into public facilities 
such as schools and airports. 

Based on our work, we observe that as the Taser becomes more widely 
available for use, especially by non-law enforcement persons, training 
is critical to help ensure its safe, effective, and appropriate use. 

In commenting on a draft of this report, TSA, Taser International, and 
the seven law enforcement agencies generally agreed with the 
information in the report. Also, TSA as well as the Department of 
Homeland Security's Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 
(FLETC),[Footnote 6] Taser International, and three of the seven law 
enforcement agencies provided technical comments that were incorporated 
into the report where appropriate. 

Background: 

Although a number of companies manufacture various non-lethal weapons, 
such as stun guns, the only company that manufactures Tasers is Taser 
International in Scottsdale, Arizona. First developed in the 1970s for 
use by police departments, Tasers differ from stun guns in that they 
can be fired from a distance and do not require contact with skin in 
order to work.[Footnote 7]

Taser International has produced various models of Taser weapons 
including Air Tasers[Footnote 8] and the M-18, M-18L, M-26, X-26, and X-
26C models. The M-18 and X-26C models are available to the civilian 
market. The M-26 and X-26 models are sold only to law enforcement 
agencies, the military, and more recently have been made available for 
use in maintaining aviation security. Both models, while varying in 
size, operate in the same manner and deliver approximately the same 
electrical charge. For the purposes of this report, Tasers refer to the 
M-26 and X-26 models. Figure 1 shows a picture of an M-26 model Taser, 
and figure 2 shows a picture of an X-26 model Taser. 

Figure 1: Taser (M-26 Model): 

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Figure 2: Taser (X-26 Model): 

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

The Taser fires two metal barbs that are attached to wires, which can 
cover a distance of up to 25 feet.[Footnote 9] Once the barbs are 
embedded in an individual or on the individual's clothing, the weapon 
delivers an electrical charge of 50,000 volts through the wires to the 
barbs. This charge causes the muscles of the individual to 
involuntarily contract, which immediately incapacitates the individual 
for the duration of the shock, usually lasting about 5 seconds. 

The barbs need not be embedded in an individual's body in order to 
function. Because of the high voltage, an individual will be shocked 
even if the barbs are attached to an outer layer of clothing, such as a 
coat. If the barbs penetrate the skin, it is impossible to predict how 
deeply they will embed because of various factors, including wind speed 
and a subject's weight and muscle mass. The manufacturer estimated that 
the barbs will generally penetrate bare skin no more than half an inch. 
Once the Taser weapon's shock subsides, the individual can recover 
completely in about 10 seconds. If the weapon is fired correctly and 
the barbs hit the individual, no collateral damage occurs to the 
surrounding environment. 

The Taser can be reactivated numerous times as long as the barbs remain 
in the individual or the individual's clothing. Secondary electric 
shocks also last for about 5 seconds. The operator has the ability to 
shut the weapon off, thus ending the charge. A data port contained in 
the latest models of Tasers provides information suitable for 
downloading onto a computer detailing the date, time, and duration of 
each instance that the Taser was fired. A visual battery level 
indicator is located on the back of the hand guard. The Taser also 
utilizes a laser sight system. This system enables the operator, even 
with limited experience, to direct the barbs to the desired location on 
the individual. 

Selected Law Enforcement Agencies Have Established Policies and 
Procedures to Help Ensure Proper Taser Use: 

The seven law enforcement agencies we contacted have attempted to 
ensure proper deployment of the Taser weapon by establishing and 
employing use-of-force policies, training requirements, operational 
protocols, and safety procedures. 

Use-of-Force Policies: 

Although none of the seven agencies had separate use-of-force policies 
that specifically addressed Tasers, all of the agencies included the 
use of such weapons into their existing policies so that police 
officers would have guidance on the circumstances in which the use of 
Tasers may be appropriate. A use-of-force policy provides police 
officers with a clearly defined set of rules or guidance to follow when 
encountering a subject, based on the subject's actions, the officer's 
perception of the situation, and the available types of officer 
responses. The use-of-force model--frequently referred to by law 
enforcement officials as the use-of-force continuum--was developed 
using federal law enforcement training guidelines established by FLETC. 
According to FLETC, the continuum serves as a visual tool to help 
explain about the application of the use-of-force policy. Specifically, 
the continuum establishes for a police officer various options to use 
in responding to a subject's actions, while employing the minimum 
amount of force necessary under the circumstances. Generally, an 
officer should employ more forceful means to control a subject only if 
the officer determines that a lower level of force is inadequate. 
Officials in the seven law enforcement agencies we contacted told us 
that they rely on the continuum to help provide officers with guidance 
in carrying out their law enforcement responsibilities. 

As shown in figure 3, the use-of-force continuum includes five levels 
of potential subject actions and corresponding officer responses. For 
example, if a subject is compliant, an officer should use only 
"cooperative controls," such as verbal commands, to control the 
subject. On the other hand, the guidelines provide that if a subject is 
assaultive and an officer perceives a threat of serious physical injury 
or death--a lethal situation on the use-of-force continuum--the officer 
may use deadly force to control the subject. 

Figure 3: FLETC Use-of-Force Continuum: 

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Officials in the seven law enforcement agencies we contacted stated 
that each agency has a use-of-force policy in which all officers are 
trained. Each of the seven agencies has incorporated the Taser into its 
existing use-of-force policy. 

The placement of the Taser on the use-of-force continuums of the 
agencies varied.[Footnote 10] Specifically, we found that the seven 
agencies placed the Taser at three different levels on their use-of- 
force continuums. As shown in table 1, two agencies--the Sacramento 
Police Department and the Sacramento Sheriff's Department--permit the 
use of Tasers when a police officer perceives the situation as 
potentially harmful, as when a subject engages in assaultive behavior 
that creates a risk of physical injury to another. Impact weapons, such 
as night sticks and batons, can also be used in these situations. They 
include, for example, instances in which a subject attacks or threatens 
to attack an officer by fighting and kicking. 

Four other police departments--the Austin Police Department, the Ohio 
Highway Patrol, the Phoenix Police Department, and the San Jose Police 
Department--allow the use of Tasers at a lower level in the use-of- 
force continuum in situations that the officer perceives as 
volatile.[Footnote 11] This occurs, for example, when a subject is 
actively resisting arrest but not attacking the officer. The use of 
chemical sprays[Footnote 12] to subdue the subject is another option in 
such a situation. Finally, one agency--the Orange County Sheriff's 
Department--allows the use of Tasers in situations that an officer 
perceives as tactical, such as when a subject is "passively resisting" 
by not responding to the lawful, verbal commands of the officer. 

Table 1: Information Related to Tasers in Use-of-Force Policies for 
Seven Law Enforcement Agencies: 

Agency: Austin Police; 
Separate policy on Taser use? No; 
Taser use incorporated into existing policy? Yes; 
Other options: Chemical spray/pepper spray and impact weapons. 

Agency: Ohio Highway Patrol; 
Separate policy on Taser use? No; 
Taser use incorporated into existing policy? Yes; 
Other options: Chemical spray/mace. 

Agency: Orange County Sheriff; 
Separate policy on Taser use? No; 
Taser use incorporated into existing policy? Yes; 
Other options: Verbal commands. 

Agency: Phoenix Police; 
Separate policy on Taser use? No; 
Taser use incorporated into existing policy? Yes; 
Other options: Chemical spray/mace. 

Agency: Sacramento Police; 
Separate policy on Taser use? No; 
Taser use incorporated into existing policy? Yes; 
Other options: Impact weapons. 

Agency: Sacramento Sheriff; 
Separate policy on Taser use? No; 
Taser use incorporated into existing policy? Yes; 
Other options: Impact weapons. 

Agency: San Jose Police; 
Separate policy on Taser use? No; 
Taser use incorporated into existing policy? Yes; 
Other options: Chemical spray/mace. 

Source: GAO analysis of information obtained from seven law enforcement 
agencies. 

[End of table]

Training Requirements: 

Officials in all seven law enforcement agencies told us that adequate 
Taser training is critically important in helping to ensure the safe, 
effective, and appropriate use of Tasers not only by law enforcement 
officials but also by other non-law enforcement individuals who may be 
permitted to use Tasers. The officials in these agencies agreed that it 
is essential to provide such training prior to issuing Tasers to police 
officers and to other users. They also told us that training only works 
when weapons are standardized; that is, when weapons are constructed 
and manufactured in the same way. For example, an official in the 
Orange County Sheriff's Department said that: 

"…it is of paramount importance that officers expect and receive the 
same results from one Taser to another. Their confidence in the weapon 
is based on the knowledge that all Tasers will operate the same each 
and every time and will achieve the same desired results each and every 
time."

In all seven agencies, the training cycle begins by disseminating the 
previously discussed use-of-force policy. Police officers also receive 
mandatory firearms training. As shown in table 2, three of the agencies 
we contacted--the Sacramento Police Department, the Sacramento 
Sheriff's Department, and the San Jose Police Department--require a 
minimum of 100 hours of such training; three agencies--the Ohio Highway 
Patrol, the Orange County Sheriff's Department, and the Phoenix Police 
Department--require a minimum of 80 hours; and one agency--the Austin 
Police Department--requires a minimum of 60 hours. In addition, all 
seven agencies require Taser-specific training. This training stresses 
such matters as how to (1) properly handle the weapon, (2) locate the 
shot, (3) safeguard the Taser, (4) conduct proper function tests, (5) 
overcome system malfunctions in a timely fashion, and (6) perform post-
Taser deployment actions. Three agencies require 8 hours of Taser 
training, while three require 5 hours and one requires 4 hours. All 
seven agencies require officers to demonstrate physical competency with 
the weapon, and three agencies also require written tests generally 
consisting of approximately 10 true or false questions related to the 
application of the use-of-force policy, proper use of the weapon, and 
appropriate safety measures. 

Furthermore, six of the seven agencies required yearly recertification 
in the use of Tasers. One agency--the San Jose Police Department--does 
not require yearly recertification for Tasers and is not currently 
considering the establishment of such recertification. However, an 
official from the San Jose Police Department told us that the 
department includes Tasers in its annual use-of-force simulations 
training in which officers are trained in the use of Tasers that would 
be considered appropriate in various law enforcement scenarios. 

Table 2: Training Requirements in Seven Law Enforcement Agencies: 

Agency: Austin Police; 
Firearms minimum training hours: 60; 
Taser-training provider: Taser International and agency; 
Taser training hours: 8; 
Evaluation criteria: Physical and written test; 
Recertification: Yearly. 

Agency: Ohio Highway Patrol; 
Firearms minimum training hours: 80; 
Taser-training provider: Agency; 
Taser training hours: 5; 
Evaluation criteria: Physical and written test; 
Recertification: Yearly. 

Agency: Orange County Sheriff; 
Firearms minimum training hours: 80; 
Taser-training provider: Taser International and agency; 
Taser training hours: 5; 
Evaluation criteria: Physical test; 
Recertification: Yearly. 

Agency: Phoenix Police; 
Firearms minimum training hours: 80; 
Taser-training provider: Taser International and agency; 
Taser training hours: 5; 
Evaluation criteria: Physical and written test; 
Recertification: Yearly. 

Agency: Sacramento Police; 
Firearms minimum training hours: 100; 
Taser-training provider: Taser International and agency; 
Taser training hours: 8; 
Evaluation criteria: Physical test; 
Recertification: Yearly. 

Agency: Sacramento Sheriff; 
Firearms minimum training hours: 100; 
Taser-training provider: Taser International and agency; 
Taser training hours: 8; 
Evaluation criteria: Physical test; 
Recertification: Yearly. 

Agency: San Jose Police; 
Firearms minimum training hours: 100; 
Taser-training provider: Taser International and agency; 
Taser training hours: 4; 
Evaluation criteria: Physical test; 
Recertification: No yearly recertification required. (Taser training is 
included in annual use-of-force simulations training.)

Source: GAO analysis of information obtained from seven law enforcement 
agencies. 

[End of table]

We also discussed with officials from the seven agencies how training 
other Taser users may differ from training law enforcement personnel in 
Taser use. All the officials agreed that the length and intensity of 
training must be increased for users who have no law enforcement 
experience or firearms training. The officials also stressed that any 
civilian training curriculum should have a very explicit use-of-force 
policy. Unlike police officers, civilians are not generally experienced 
in deciding whether the use of force is justified and, if so, to what 
extent. Therefore, the officials told us that it should be the goal of 
any civilian training curriculum to remove the need for independent 
decision-making as much as possible. Officials from all seven agencies 
agreed that training for non-traditional law enforcement individuals 
should involve as many "real life" scenarios as possible so that the 
trainee understands what level of force is appropriate. 

Operational Protocols: 

The seven law enforcement agencies we contacted have operational 
protocols, which are written policies and procedures that address and 
provide guidance on the daily activities of a law enforcement agency's 
officers. These protocols address a wide range of issues such as 
deployment of law enforcement personnel and weapons, inspection 
techniques, proper use of weapons, and post-incident procedures. 
Regarding Tasers, the protocols in the seven agencies require, among 
other things, that Tasers be visually inspected on a daily basis, be 
appropriately safeguarded, and, in some cases, be tested on a weekly 
basis or at the beginning of an officer's shift. 

With regard to Taser deployment, three of the seven agencies we 
contacted issued the Taser to all of their officers. Three of the 
agencies deployed Tasers only to patrol officers because they were 
considered to be the most likely personnel to have use for the device 
during the course of their work. The remaining agency issued Tasers to 
its patrol officers and members of some specialized police units such 
as narcotics. 

Regarding inspections, all seven agencies we contacted required a daily 
function test for Tasers. Officials in the seven agencies told us that 
this test generally consists of visually inspecting the weapon for any 
signs of damage or unusual wear and tear, inspecting the firing 
cartridge to ensure that there is no damage or obvious tampering, and 
checking the battery strength indicator located on the rear of the 
weapon. Furthermore, one of the seven agencies required that on a 
weekly basis, officers conduct a test fire of Tasers in which the 
officer initiates an arcing of the electric probes by pulling the 
trigger of a Taser that does not contain a firing cartridge. In 
addition, two of the seven agencies require that each officer conduct 
such a test at the beginning of the officer's shift. All of the 
agencies mandated that the Taser be safeguarded in the same fashion as 
a firearm issued by the agency. 

Once the law enforcement agency's internal policies and procedures were 
satisfied, including compliance with the use-of-force policy, the 
method and manner prescribed for Taser use did not significantly differ 
among the agencies we contacted. Officials in the seven agencies stated 
that the Taser is to be aimed at the center of an individual's largest 
amount of body mass, which is oftentimes the chest or, in some 
circumstances, the back. Shots to the neck or face are not advisable 
unless a significant danger exists to the officer or others, and this 
area is the only target area presented. All seven agencies we contacted 
required the officer involved in a use-of-force incident to complete an 
official form detailing the type of force used. As shown in table 3, 
three of the agencies required the officer to complete a specific form 
whenever a Taser was used. These forms included a description of barb 
placement, the effects achieved, and the subject's behavior before and 
after the Taser deployment. Following the use of the Taser, all seven 
agencies required that the subject be restrained, with handcuffs or an 
emergency restraint belt, to ensure that there would be no further 
threat of physical aggression. 

Table 3: Operational Protocols in Seven Law Enforcement Agencies: 

Agency: Austin Police; 
Deployment: Patrol officers and members of some specialized units 
(e.g., narcotics); 
Daily inspection: Visual and battery tests; 
Special inspection: Test fire at the beginning of officer's shift; 
Special incident report for Tasers? No; 
Post-Taser restraint? Yes. 

Agency: Ohio Highway Patrol; 
Deployment: Full (all officers); 
Daily inspection: Visual and battery tests; 
Special inspection: Weekly test fire; 
Special incident report for Tasers? Yes; 
Post-Taser restraint? Yes. 

Agency: Orange County Sheriff; 
Deployment: Patrol officers (56% of the department); 
Daily inspection: Visual and battery tests; 
Special inspection: None; 
Special incident report for Tasers? No; 
Post-Taser restraint? Yes. 

Agency: Phoenix Police; 
Deployment: Patrol officers (50% of the department); 
Daily inspection: Visual and battery tests; 
Special inspection: Test fire at the beginning of officer's shift; 
Special incident report for Tasers? No; 
Post-Taser restraint? Yes. 

Agency: Sacramento Police; 
Deployment: Patrol officers (57% of the department); 
Daily inspection: Visual and battery tests; 
Special inspection: None; 
Special incident report for Tasers? Yes; 
Post-Taser restraint? Yes. 

Agency: Sacramento Sheriff; 
Deployment: Full (all officers); 
Daily inspection: Visual and battery tests; 
Special inspection: None; 
Special incident report for Tasers? No; 
Post-Taser restraint? Yes. 

Agency: San Jose Police; 
Deployment: Full (all officers); 
Daily inspection: Visual and battery tests; 
Special inspection: None; 
Special incident report for Tasers? Yes; 
Post-Taser restraint? Yes. 

Source: GAO analysis of information obtained from seven law enforcement 
agencies. 

[End of table]

Safety Procedures: 

Officials we interviewed in all seven law enforcement agencies stated 
that they developed procedures and guidelines to help ensure the safe 
use of Tasers. The officials told us that they make every effort to use 
the Taser as safely as possible but cautioned that it can still be 
dangerous.[Footnote 13] As an official from the Ohio Highway Patrol 
stated, any time a Taser is used,

"…the officer runs the risk of injuring the intended target. A Taser is 
by nature a weapon and carries with it inherent dangers."

As shown in table 4, the seven agencies' safety guidelines provide that 
the Taser should not be used on children, pregnant suspects, or near 
bystanders or flammable liquids. All the agencies we contacted require 
an emergency room physician to examine the subject in the event of 
Taser barb placement in the face or neck. The Orange County Sheriff's 
Department also requires any female subject shot in the breast or groin 
area to be seen by an emergency room doctor. Six of the seven agencies 
provide officers with the discretion to remove the barbs themselves or 
to request that emergency medical technicians (EMT) respond to the 
scene. Once removed, the barbs should be placed in a "Sharps" container 
to ensure safe and hygienic disposal.[Footnote 14] For these agencies, 
if the officer observes an adverse reaction to the electrical shock, he 
or she can request that the subject be transported to a local hospital 
emergency room. No other medical follow-up is required. The remaining 
agency--the San Jose Police Department--does not provide its officers 
with the discretion to remove Taser barbs. The San Jose Police 
Department calls for officers to transport subjects hit with Taser 
barbs to a hospital so that medical personnel can remove the barbs. 
Also, San Jose officers do not routinely call EMTs to the scene of 
Taser use. They do so only if other life threatening needs or medical 
treatment is needed. If such treatment is not needed, the officer 
transports the suspect to a hospital for medical clearance prior to 
being booked in the county jail. 

Table 4: Safety Procedures in Seven Law Enforcement Agencies: 

Agency: Austin Police; 
Avoid using Tasers on or near:[A]: 
* Children, 
* pregnant suspects, bystanders, and; 
* flammable substances; 
Barb removal by officer, EMT, or hospital medical personnel? Officer's 
discretion; 
Emergency room visit required? Impact on face and neck. 

Agency: Ohio Highway Patrol; 
Avoid using Tasers on or near:[A]: 
* Children, 
* pregnant suspects, bystanders, and; 
* flammable substances; 
Barb removal by officer, EMT, or hospital medical personnel? Officer's 
discretion; 
Emergency room visit required? Impact on face and neck. 

Agency: Orange County Sheriff; 
Avoid using Tasers on or near:[A]: 
* Children, 
* pregnant suspects, bystanders, and; 
* flammable substances; 
Barb removal by officer, EMT, or hospital medical personnel? Officer's 
discretion; 
Emergency room visit required? Impact on face and neck; 
also breast and groin (female only). 

Agency: Phoenix Police; 
Avoid using Tasers on or near:[A]: 
* Children, 
* pregnant suspects, bystanders, and; 
* flammable substances; 
Barb removal by officer, EMT, or hospital medical personnel? Officer's 
discretion; 
Emergency room visit required? Impact on face and neck. 

Agency: Sacramento Police; 
Avoid using Tasers on or near:[A]: 
* Children, 
* pregnant suspects, bystanders, and; 
* flammable substances; 
Barb removal by officer, EMT, or hospital medical personnel? Officer's 
discretion; 
Emergency room visit required? Impact on face and neck. 

Agency: Sacramento Sheriff; 
Avoid using Tasers on or near:[A]: 
* Children, 
* pregnant suspects, bystanders, and; 
* flammable substances; 
Barb removal by officer, EMT, or hospital medical personnel? Officer's 
discretion; 
Emergency room visit required? Impact on face and neck. 

Agency: San Jose Police; 
Avoid using Tasers on or near:[A]: 
* Children, 
* pregnant suspects, bystanders, and; 
* flammable substances; 
Barb removal by officer, EMT, or hospital medical personnel? Hospital 
medical personnel; 
Emergency room visit required? Impact on face and neck. 

Source: GAO analysis of information obtained from seven law enforcement 
agencies. 

[A] Use of the Taser in these situations is strongly discouraged but in 
certain exigent circumstances, an officer may use a Taser to prevent 
loss of life or serious bodily injury. 

[End of table]

Some Federal, State, and Local Laws Address Tasers But Requirements 
Differ: 

In reviewing various laws, including statutes, regulations, and 
ordinances, we found that Tasers were addressed in some federal, state, 
and local jurisdictions. We also found that these jurisdictions had 
different requirements for regulating Tasers. In some instances, the 
extent to which Tasers are regulated in these jurisdictions may depend 
on whether the Taser is classified as a firearm. For example, at the 
federal level, ATF has not classified Taser as a firearm, which exempts 
Taser from federal firearms requirements. However, we identified other 
federal agencies, such as the Army, that have established Taser-related 
regulations for the possession, use, and sale of Tasers. In addition, 
TSA has identified the Taser as a prohibited weapon that cannot be 
brought past airport security checkpoints by unauthorized 
personnel.[Footnote 15] TSA also has authority to approve the use of 
Tasers by flight crews on commercial aircraft. We also found that the 
state of Indiana and the city of Chicago, Illinois regulate the sale or 
possession of Tasers by non-law enforcement persons by requiring that 
the same restrictions that apply to firearms must also apply to Tasers. 
Other states, such as California, prohibit Tasers from being carried 
into public facilities such as schools and airports. 

At the federal level, we found that ATF--the federal agency responsible 
for determining whether a weapon should be classified as a firearm, 
which would make the weapon subject to federal firearms regulations-- 
does not classify the Taser as a firearm.[Footnote 16] Thus, the Taser 
is not subject to any federal regulations regarding the distribution, 
sale, and possession of firearms. As a result, Tasers can be 
manufactured and distributed domestically without federal 
restriction.[Footnote 17] However, we identified some federal agencies 
that have established regulations that specifically prohibit the sale, 
possession, and transfer of Tasers. For example, Army regulations 
prohibit the sale, possession, carrying, or transportation of Tasers on 
or within specific installations in Georgia, including Fort Gordon and 
Fort Stewart, which also includes the Hunter Army Airfield.[Footnote 
18] In addition, TSA has a regulation that prohibits unauthorized 
individuals from carrying weapons, explosives, and incendiaries beyond 
airport security checkpoints.[Footnote 19] To help provide guidance in 
implementing its regulation, TSA has developed a chart outlining 
specific items that are prohibited in carry-on baggage and has 
identified Tasers as a prohibited weapon. TSA also has broad authority 
under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, as amended by 
Section 1405 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, to approve the use 
of less-than-lethal weapons by flight deck crew members, as long as the 
TSA Secretary prescribes "…rules requiring that any such crew member be 
trained in the proper use of the weapon…" and "…guidelines setting 
forth the circumstances under which such weapons may be used."[Footnote 
20] Based on this authority, in October 2004, TSA approved a request 
from Korean Airlines that specially trained cabin attendants be 
permitted to use Tasers on commercial flights in U.S. airspace. TSA 
officials told us they anticipate that in the future, other airlines 
will also submit requests to deploy less-than-lethal weapons. 

In reviewing various state and local laws, we identified some state 
statutes and municipal ordinances that specifically regulate the sale 
or possession of Tasers by non-law enforcement persons within their 
state or municipal boundaries. For example, in the state of Indiana, 
Tasers are subject to the same licensing requirements as other 
handguns.[Footnote 21] Therefore, in order to lawfully possess a Taser 
in Indiana, prospective purchasers are required to meet certain license 
requirements and consent to a criminal history background 
check.[Footnote 22] In addition, dealers in Indiana cannot sell a Taser 
until after requesting and receiving criminal history information on 
prospective purchasers.[Footnote 23] Similarly, in Chicago, Illinois, 
prospective purchasers are required to obtain a permit to lawfully 
purchase Tasers.[Footnote 24] Also, in the state of Pennsylvania and 
the city of Wilmington, Delaware, it is unlawful for non-law 
enforcement persons to manufacture, make, sell, or possess a 
Taser.[Footnote 25] In addition, individuals in various states, 
including California, Illinois, and Virginia, are prohibited from 
carrying Tasers in such areas as airports, courthouses, schools, 
prisons, or public buildings.[Footnote 26]

Concluding Observations: 

The seven law enforcement agencies we contacted have established 
policies and procedures to attempt to ensure proper use of Tasers. 
Specifically, the agencies employ use-of-force policies, training 
requirements, operational protocols, and safety procedures, although 
specific practices vary from agency to agency. For example, the seven 
agencies place the threshold at which Taser use may be deemed 
appropriate at three different levels on their use-of-force continuums. 
However, even when these policies are strictly enforced, each situation 
in which a Taser may be used is unique. An officer must rely on prior 
experience and training and exercise good judgment to determine whether 
using the Taser constitutes an appropriate level of force. 
Consequently, officials in the seven law enforcement agencies we 
contacted stressed that proper training is essential for successful 
deployment. If Taser use becomes more widespread, particularly among 
non-law enforcement personnel who have little or no firearms 
experience, we believe that this training will become even more 
critical for safe, effective, and appropriate use of the weapon. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

We received written comments on a draft of this report from TSA, which 
are included in appendix II. In its comments, TSA stated that it 
generally concurred with the information in the report. Also, TSA 
stated that it agreed that training and oversight are essential for the 
use of Tasers. In addition, TSA discussed its authority to approve the 
use of less-than-lethal weapons by air carriers. Among other things, 
TSA explained that under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, 
as amended by Sec. 1405 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, air 
carriers are to contact TSA to request permission to carry less-than- 
lethal weapons aboard their aircraft. TSA would review the air 
carrier's request as well as the training program that the air carrier 
would provide for the proposed use of the weapon. After TSA approves 
the air carrier's request, an amendment to the air carrier's security 
program must be made to allow for the weapon's use while the aircraft 
is in flight. Requirements could also be mandated for storage of the 
weapon while the aircraft is standing at an airport. Furthermore, TSA 
stated that it has received a number of requests from air carriers as 
they attempt to enhance aircraft security and will continue to evaluate 
such requests and review training programs provided by air carriers. In 
addition, TSA and FLETC provided technical comments that we 
incorporated into this report where appropriate. 

We also received comments from Taser International and the seven law 
enforcement agencies we contacted. They generally agreed with the 
information in the report. In addition, Taser International and three 
of the seven law enforcement agencies--the Austin, Texas, Police 
Department; the Phoenix, Arizona, Police Department; and the San Jose, 
California, Police Department--provided some technical comments that we 
incorporated into this report where appropriate. 

As agreed with your office, unless you announce the contents of this 
report earlier, we will not distribute it until 30 days after its 
issuance date. At that time, we will send it to the Chairmen and 
Ranking Members of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs and the House Committee on Government Reform. We 
will also send it to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House 
Committee on Homeland Security and the Ranking Member of the 
Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International 
Relations, Committee on Government Reform. We will also provide copies 
to the Secretary of the Transportation Security Administration and will 
make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report 
will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at [Hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov]. Key contributors to this report are listed in 
appendix III. If you or your staff have any questions concerning this 
report, please contact me at (202) 512-7455 or [Hyperlink, at 
cramerr@gao.gov]. 

Sincerely yours,

Signed by: 

Robert J. Cramer: 
Managing Director, Office of Special Investigations: 

[End of section]

Appendixes: 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology: 

For this report, our first objective was to obtain information on the 
policies and procedures related to the issues of use of force, 
training, operations, and safety for selected law enforcement agencies 
that have purchased and used Tasers. We conducted this work for the 
purpose of providing information about the policies, procedures, and 
practices these agencies use to help ensure safe and successful 
deployment of the Taser. We did not attempt to draw conclusions about 
whether Tasers are in fact safe. Our second objective was to obtain 
information on federal, state, and local laws that specifically address 
Tasers, including the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) 
authority to regulate Tasers on aircraft. 

To address the first objective, we used Taser International 
Incorporated's (Taser International) customer database to identify all 
U.S. law enforcement agencies that had purchased Tasers. As the sole 
manufacturer of Tasers, Taser International maintained the only 
centralized database from which we could obtain this information. 
Around the time we began our work in May 2004, Taser International 
reported that a total of over 7,000 law enforcement agencies had 
purchased Tasers. Time constraints would not permit us to contact all 
these agencies. Thus, we determined that the most reasonable approach 
for selecting law enforcement agencies to contact would be to focus on 
those agencies that had the largest number of Tasers for the longest 
period of time. To do this, we identified two key data elements for 
each agency--the date that the agency made its first Taser purchase and 
the total number of Tasers that the agency purchased. In identifying 
the initial Taser purchase date, we were able to determine how long ago 
various agencies had begun buying Tasers. We focused on this date 
because we determined that by the time we began our work, the agencies 
that had made the earliest Taser purchases would have been more likely 
to have established policies and procedures to help ensure the safe and 
appropriate use of Tasers. 

In addition to the initial purchase date, we identified for each agency 
the total number of Tasers that they had purchased. We determined that 
those agencies that purchased a significant number of Tasers would have 
been more likely to deploy them widely, which increased the chances 
that more law enforcement personnel would have used Tasers in training 
and field situations. As such, we reasoned that to help ensure that 
Tasers would be safely and appropriately used, law enforcement agencies 
would take steps as quickly as possible to establish Taser-related 
policies and procedures. 

Using these two data elements, we identified seven law enforcement 
agencies that had deployed the largest number of Tasers for the longest 
period of time. These agencies were the Austin, Texas, Police 
Department; the Ohio Highway Patrol; the Orange County, Florida, 
Sheriff's Department; the Phoenix, Arizona, Police Department; the 
Sacramento, California, Police Department; the Sacramento, California, 
Sheriff's Department; and the San Jose, California, Police Department. 
Our efforts in selecting the seven agencies constituted a case-study 
approach. Because we conducted case studies rather than a statistical 
survey, the results of our work can be applied only to the seven 
agencies we contacted; our work results cannot be applied to all law 
enforcement agencies that, according to Taser International's data, 
have purchased Tasers. 

With the assistance of GAO methodologists, we drafted a series of 
questions related to use-of-force policies, training requirements, 
operational protocols, and safety procedures. We asked officials in all 
seven agencies the same questions to ensure that we could compare their 
responses. 

To address the second objective, we researched various federal and 
state laws, including statutes and regulations, to determine whether 
Tasers are regulated at the federal and state levels. In addition, we 
reviewed information obtained from the Department of Justice's Bureau 
of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives on local ordinances that 
regulate Tasers. Also, we researched various published local ordinances 
to determine whether Tasers are regulated at the local level. In 
addition, we reviewed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act to 
ascertain federal requirements for approving the use of Tasers onboard 
aircraft. 

We conducted our work from May 2004 through February 2005 in accordance 
with quality standards for investigations as set forth by the 
President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency. 

[End of section]

Appendix II: Comments from the Secretary, Transportation Security 
Administration: 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security: 
Washington, DC 20528: 

April 22, 2005: 

Mr. Robert J. Cramer: 
Managing Director: 
Office of Special Investigations:
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Dear Mr. Cramer,

The Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Security 
Administration (TSA) would like to thank the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) for the study entitled, "TASER WEAPONS: Use of Tasers by 
Selected Law Enforcement Agencies," GAO-05-464 (Job Code 601268). TSA 
generally concurs with the study and agrees that training and oversight 
are essential for this program. 

Under the authority of the Aviation Transportation Security Act (ATSA), 
as amended by Sec. 1405 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, TSA 
requires that an air carrier contact the TSA for permission to carry 
Less Than Lethal Weapons (LTLW) aboard their aircraft, after which TSA 
would review the request by an air carrier for the deployment of a LTLW 
on the aircraft. TSA would also review the training program provided by 
that air carrier for the use of the proposed LTLW. After TSA approves 
an air carrier's application for the deployment of LTLW, an amendment 
to that air carrier's security program must be made that allows for use 
of the LTLW while the aircraft is in flight. Particular requirements 
could also be mandated for storage of the LTLW while the aircraft is 
standing at an airport. 

TSA has received a number of applications from air carriers as they 
attempt to enhance the security of their commercial aircraft through 
means in addition to a reinforced flight deck access door or 
governmental agents who may be armed with lethal weapons. TSA will 
continue to evaluate requests and review training programs provided by 
commercial air carriers as they attempt to enhance the security of 
their passengers and aircraft. 

Thank you again for your work in this area. For further information 
from TSA on this report, please contact TSA public affairs at (571) 227-
2829. 

Sincerely,

Signed by: 

Steven J. Pecinovsky: 
Acting Director: 
Departmental GAO/OIG Liaison Office: 

[End of section]

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

Robert J. Cramer, (202) 512-7455: 

Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the individual named above, Jennifer Costello, Richard 
Egan, Joseph Funk, Barbara Lewis, Latesha Love, John Ryan, and Barry 
Shillito made key contributions to this report. 

(601268): 

FOOTNOTES

[1] According to the Department of Justice's (DOJ) National Institute 
of Justice--the agency within DOJ responsible for researching issues 
related to crime and law enforcement--less-than-lethal weapons are 
designed to temporarily incapacitate or restrain an individual when 
lethal force is not appropriate. These weapons and devices include, 
among others, pepper spray, stun guns, batons, and nights sticks. 

[2] According to Taser International, Taser is a trademark and an 
acronym for the Thomas A. Swift Electrical Rifle, which was first 
developed in the 1970s. For the purposes of this report, the term Taser 
will refer to a weapon that shoots two stainless steel barbs up to a 
distance of 25 feet and results in an incapacitating 50,000 volt 
electric shock. 

[3] GAO will report separately on TSA's efforts to approve and oversee 
the use of Tasers onboard commercial aircraft. Among other things, we 
will report on the type of analysis the federal government conducted to 
assess the safety and effectiveness of Tasers, what criteria TSA used 
to determine whether to approve Tasers on aircraft, and whether TSA has 
established a training program for flight crews. 

[4] For purposes of this report, use of force refers primarily to a 
policy established by a law enforcement agency that provides police 
officers with a clearly defined set of rules or guidance to follow when 
encountering a subject based on the subject's actions, the officer's 
perception of the situation, and the available types of officer 
responses. 

[5] Pub. L. No. 107-71, 115 Stat. 597 (codified as amended in scattered 
sections of 49 U.S.C.)

[6] FLETC, with headquarters in Glynco, Georgia, is an interagency law 
enforcement training organization for federal law enforcement 
personnel. It also provides training services to state, local, and 
international law enforcement agencies. FLETC's mission is to prepare 
law enforcement professionals to fulfill their responsibilities safely 
and proficiently, while ensuring that training is accomplished in the 
most cost-effective manner. 

[7] Tasers can be also used in "touch stun" mode by pressing the 
electrical barbs directly onto a person's skin. 

[8] According to Taser International, production of the Air Taser has 
been discontinued. 

[9] In commenting on a draft of this report, an official from Taser 
International told us that his company is developing a new cartridge 
that will fire up to 35 feet and will be sold only to law enforcement 
agencies. 

[10] In their comments on a draft of this report, FLETC officials 
stated that they believe that to avoid the inconsistency among law 
enforcement agencies as to where Taser use is placed in the use-of- 
force continuum, a standardized training program on the use of Tasers 
is needed. Also, they stated that greater research into safety and 
deployment guidelines should be conducted by entities not associated 
with the manufacturer. 

[11] In commenting on a draft of this report, an official from the 
Austin Police Department explained that according to departmental 
policy, the Taser may be used to control a dangerous or violent subject 
when (1) deadly force does not appear to be justified or necessary, (2) 
attempts to subdue the subject by other conventional tactics have been 
or are likely to be ineffective in the situation at hand, or (3) there 
is a reasonable expectation that it will be unsafe for officers to 
approach within contact range of the subject. 

[12] Typically, chemical sprays are divided into two groups: 
chlorobrnzylidene malononitrile (tear gas) and oleoresin capsicum 
(pepper spray). 

[13] For example, of the seven agencies we contacted, two--the Orange 
County Sheriff's Department and the Sacramento County Sheriff's 
Department--reported post-Taser use deaths. From 2001 to 2004, Orange 
County reported that, of the 1,655 individuals on which Tasers were 
used, four later died. However, toxicology tests conducted by the 
county coroner revealed that all four subjects had lethal levels of 
drugs in their systems. Similarly, although Sacramento reported a post- 
Taser use death, the deceased was later found to have died of a cocaine 
overdose. 

[14] Sharps containers are used for the disposal of needles, syringes, 
or other sharp objects to guard against exposure to bloodborne 
pathogens, such as HIV and hepatitis. 

[15] In our review of federal, state, and local laws, we found that 
typically, law enforcement personnel are exempt from requirements that 
prohibit or restrict the use of Tasers. Thus, under these laws, 
requirements related to Tasers generally apply to non-law enforcement 
persons who seek to possess, use, purchase, or sell these devices. 

[16] In general, a device is classified as a firearm when it "expel[s] 
a projectile by the action of an explosive." 18 U.S.C.§ 921 (a)(3)(A). 
Because the original Taser used gunpowder to fire electrical barbs, the 
ATF in 1976 ruled that Taser was a firearm, " [s]ince the projectiles 
are expelled by the action of an explosive.." ATF Rul. 76-6. However, 
in 1994, ATF examined a different model Taser--Taser Model 34000--and 
determined it not to be a firearm "..based on the fact that the 
device..does not expel a projectile by the action of an explosive.." 
Also, neither the M-26 nor the X-26 Model Taser is classified as a 
firearm because they do not expel projectiles by means of an explosive. 
Instead of gunpowder, they use a combination of a battery and nitrogen 
cartridges to fire the barbs. 

[17] The United States regulates Taser export sales. Licenses must be 
obtained for all export shipments (excluding those to Canada) from the 
United States Department of Commerce. 15 C.F.R. pt. 774, Supp. 1 
(2004). 

[18] 32 C.F.R. §§ 552.127 and 552.101 (2003). 

[19] 49 C.F.R. § 1540.111 (2004). Some individuals, such as police 
officers, U.S. marshals, and federal agents may be authorized to carry 
weapons, explosives, and incendiaries beyond airport security 
checkpoints when they are performing law enforcement duties. For 
example, a U.S. marshal may carry a weapon when transporting a prisoner 
by air. 

[20] See 49 U.S.C. § 44903(i) (2001). In 2001, the Aviation and 
Transportation Security Act directed the National Institute of Justice 
(NIJ) within the Department of Justice to assess the range of less- 
than-lethal weaponry available for use by flight deck crew members to 
incapacitate an individual who represents a clear and present danger to 
the safety of the aircraft, its passengers, or individuals on the 
ground and to make this report available to TSA for review. NIJ 
conducted its review and determined that stun devices, specifically 
Tasers, were the most viable less-than-lethal option for aviation 
security. As part of its review, NIJ stated that any weapon chosen 
should be in current use by law enforcement agencies to ensure that it 
has been tested and proven. 

[21] Ind. Code Ann. § 35-47-8-4 (Michie 2004). 

[22] Ind. Code Ann. §§ 35-7-2-1 and 35-7-2.5-3 (Michie 2004). 

[23] Ind. Code Ann. § 35-47-2.5-4 (Michie 2004). 

[24] Chicago, Il. Municipal Code, § 4-144-010 (2005). 

[25] 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 908(a) (2004); Wilmington, De. City 
Code, § 36-161 (2004). 

[26] Cal. Penal Code §§ 171.5 and 171b; 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/31A-
1.2 (2004); and Va. Code Ann. §§ 18.2-287.01 and 18.2.308-1 (2004). 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of 
Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability 
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use 
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides 
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make 
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to 
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, 
integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains 
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an 
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search 
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You 
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other 
graphics. 

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its 
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document 
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to 
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order 
GAO Products" heading. 

Order by Mail or Phone: 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548: 

To order by Phone: 

Voice: (202) 512-6000: 

TDD: (202) 512-2537: 

Fax: (202) 512-6061: 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Public Affairs: 

Jeff Nelligan, managing director,

NelliganJ@gao.gov

(202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office,

441 G Street NW, Room 7149

Washington, D.C. 20548: