From Rory Hill.
I WRITE with reference to the news of the Home Affairs Department seeking to arm the States police with Taser stun guns (JEP, 4 April). I assert that such weapons are entirely unnecessary in Jersey and, moreover, are a danger to public safety.

I am sure that some readers will remember the terrible news story from last year when a Polish man who had just arrived at a Canadian airport was repeatedly electrocuted by police officers until he died.

The man, who had very little English and who had never been in the country before, was expecting to meet his elderly mother in the arrivals hall. Anxious because she had not appeared, he attempted to communicate with airport staff to try to locate her, but as nobody could speak Polish, he became frustrated and started shouting.

The police were called, and instead of simply restraining him and trying to find a Polish interpreter in order to get to the bottom of the problem, they opened fire with their Tasers, killing him as he retched and writhed on the floor.

Here in Jersey, the Home Affairs Minister claims that the police have ‘a tactical shortfall’ by not possessing Tasers. I find it hard to imagine how the police are in any way hampered by the lack of them.

If a situation occurs in which somebody has a gun, an armed unit should deal with it. This is widely known, anticipated and accepted. If the criminal is not armed, the police already have a range of weapons, techniques and training at their disposal to deal with the situation.

What, then, is this middle ground where electric guns are, we are asked to believe, of critical importance? Because of the lack of comment on the issue by the States police, I have asked, and repeat here, the following questions of the Minister and the deputy chief police officer:
• How many times in the last year were armed officers called to deal with a situation?
• How many shots were fired by those officers in those situations?
• Based on these numbers, how does the Minister and deputy chief police officer justify the need for a Taser capability as a useful alternative?

In a jurisdiction in which armed officers are shooting suspects every day, I imagine that there would be a more solid case to be made for using Tasers instead of guns on occasion. In a jurisdiction like Jersey, however, where armed crime is, mercifully, relatively uncommon, the temptation to use a Taser may do more harm than good.

Jersey’s community boasts a perennially low crime rate. It positively exudes democratic legitimacy by being perhaps the only place in the world that allows police officers to be elected to their position through the honorary system.

Our Island is not a jurisdiction in need of the dangerous, unpredictable, cruel and unusual punishment of the Taser. Indeed, the prospect of summary electrocution greatly alters and disturbs the relationship between citizen and police officer – a relationship that is built on trust and reasoned judgment.

To bring the potentially lethal Taser into the equation can only lead to a greater separation between the public and the police – something that would impede any movement towards a safer community for all.
Garryowen House,
Rue du Hocq,
St Clement