Los Angeles Police
Department
M26 ADVANCED TASER Product
Evaluation and Field Test
Officer Michael D. Hall
Tactics Training Unit
818/832-3769

Tactics Training Unit
16 Full Time Sworn Officers
„ 2 Full Time Sworn Supervisors
„ Responsible for training in-service and
recruit officers in tactics including
ambush attacks, vehicle pullovers,
crimes in progress, patrol techniques,
the use of deadly force, TASER and
shooting on the move.
„

Los Angeles Police Department

Approximately 8,400 sworn personnel
„ 3.8 million citizens living in Los Angeles
„ 18 Geographical Patrol Divisions
„

L.A.P.D. and TASER History
First began deploying TASERs in 1980
„ First major department nationwide to
deploy the original TASER with the line
officer as opposed to the supervisor.
„ Approximately 322 TASERs department
wide prior to product evaluation.
„ Last recent major purchase of TASERs
was in 1994
„

Reason for Product Evaluation
„ Cost

of repairs
„ Effectiveness of current TASER

Effectiveness of original LAPD
TASER prior to Product Evaluation
„

January 1997 through March 2000
– 44 deployments with 29 effective incidents
(66% effective)
– 0 injuries to suspects (other than puncture
wounds) when original TASER was effective
– 0 injuries to officers when TASER was effective
– Secondary injuries: 1 suspect; 1 officer
– 27% of officers and 40% of suspects injured
when TASER was ineffective and officers
resorted to other types of force

January 1997 through
December 2001
72 deployments with 41 effective
incidents (59% effective)
„ 0 injuries to officers or suspects (other
than puncture wounds) when the TASER
was effective
„ 39% of officers and 58% of suspects
injured when the original TASER was
ineffective and officers resorted to other
U.O.F. options
„

Narcotics and Mental Illness
90% effective on suspect’s under the
influence of alcohol
„ 67% effective on suspect’s under the
influence of PCP
„ 40% effective on suspect’s under the
influence of other narcotics
„ 71% effective on 5150 suspects
„ 67% effective on suspects under the
influence of any combination of the above
„

TASER Ineffectiveness prior to
M26 ADVANCED TASER
10 incidents one or both probes missed the
suspect or did not stick to suspect
„ 9 incidents due to narcotics
„ 6 incidents the suspect removed the probes.
„ 2 incidents due to suspect’s clothing
„ 1 incident, the officer stopped the flow of
energy to the suspect prematurely
„ 3 incidents the ineffectiveness was unknown
„

Noteworthy Original TASER
Deployments
Central Patrol Incident
„ Harbor Patrol Incident
„ S.W.A.T. Incident
„

Goal of Product Evaluation
„

Increase standoff distance between
officer and suspect while maintaining
accuracy

„

Reduce injuries to officers and suspects
involved in use of force incidents
therefore reducing city liability
– 2000 1746 U.O.F incidents resulted 33%
officers and 57% of suspects being injured

L.A.P.D. Policy
„

TASERs can be deployed on aggressive/
combative suspects when the following
condition exists;
– Deadly force does not appear to be justifiable
and/or necessary; and
– Attempts to subdue the suspect with other less
lethal tactics have been or will likely be
ineffective in the situation; and
– There is a reasonable expectation that it will be
unsafe for officers to approach within contact
range of the suspect

Testing
„

In-House Testing
– Accuracy
– Strength
– Laser sight/Ease of use

„

Outside Testing
– Scientific Investigation Division
– Los Angeles County Coroners Office
– Outside Departments

„

Field Test

M26 Accuracy
10’

15’

20’

16”

24 ½”

31”

Drop

1 ½”

3 ½”

9”

Effectiveness

100% 100% 95%

Spread

Competitor Results
Concerns Noted
Overall effectiveness beyond 15’
„ 5 neck shots, 3 head shots, and several
near misses to head
„ Numerous cartridges ejected from firing
bay during deployment
„ Numerous probes bouncing off the target
„ Several cartridges remained jammed in
firing bay after deployment
„

Strength Testing
Method
„ Test Participants
„ Results
„

– Competitor was 1/2 the strength of M26
– Several participants able to walk through
effects of competitor but were
immediately controlled with the M26

Laser Sight/Ease of Use
Method
„ Test Participants
„ Test
„

– 12’ deployment inside
– 12’ deployment outside with laser sights
– 12’ deployment outside without laser sights
„

Results

M26 Results
„

12’ deployment inside

–100% deployments
–All completed within 3 seconds

„

12’ deployment outside with laser sight
–100% deployments
–All completed within 3 seconds
–All found laser dot

„

12’ deployment outside w/o laser sight
–100% deployments
–All completed within 3 seconds
–Better accuracy without laser sights

Outside Testing
Scientific Investigation Division
„ Coroner
„ Outside Departments
„

– Mailed surveys
– Phone surveys

M26 Field Test
Training
„ Units/Divisions Assigned
„ Deployment
„ Results
„

M26 Results
19 reported uses with 15 effective
deployments (79%). Overall effectiveness
was 94% when officer error is removed
„ Breakdown
„

– 11 deployment of probes with 8 incidents
effective (73%)
– 7 of 7 incidents laser sight gained compliance
(100%)
– 1 “Touch Stun” incident reported with an
unsuccessful use

Ineffective Incidents
„

Probes Deployed
– 2 due to misses
– 1 incident suspect pulled probes out
– Without including missed probes, the
effectiveness improves to 89% compared
to Department’s original TASER which was
66%. (Not including missed probes)

„

“Touch Stun” Deployment
– Location of application and duration

Narcotics and Mental Illness
In 6 deployments, the suspect was 5150.
Their were 5 successful deployments
(83%). Original TASER was 71%
effective with 5150 suspects.
„ 2 deployments involved suspects under
the influence of narcotics and 5150. The
M26 was successful in both incidents
compared to the original TASER which
was 67% effective.
„

Deployments of Interest
Hollywood Incident
„ S.W.A.T. Incidents
„ 77th Incident
„ Metro Jail Incident
„

M26 vs. Original TASER
„

2001 Statistics (Probes deployed only)
– Original TASER
„ 16 deployments with 7 effective
incidents (44%)
– M26 ADVANCED TASER
„ 11 deployments with 8 effective
incidents (73%)

Lessons Learned
Rechargeable vs. alkaline batteries
„ Holsters
„ Training issues
„

– Touch stun
– Close quarter deployments
– “Going hands-on”
– Effectiveness vs. ineffectiveness

L.A.P.D. Deployment
Equipment Purchased
„ Recruit Training
„ Location deployed
„ Current Statistics
„

„

Written documents such as lesson plans,
training bulletins, etc. or the training video
produced by the L.A.P.D. can be obtained by
writing your request on department
letterhead to:

Captain Sergio Diaz
Los Angeles Police Department
5651 W. Manchester Blvd.
Los Angeles, Ca. 90045
(310) 342-3010