Ok, just for general information most police tasers operate at 50,000 volts. Relatively safe, yet the commercial market has seen increasing greater voltages available.
http://www.beststungun.com/blast-knuckles.html
This small device fits on your hand & has 950,000 volts! There are others that are small enough to fit in a pack of cigarettes that have 1,000,000 or even more volts. The highest i have seen to date is another hand-held unit at 1,200,000 volts.
I'm just wondering at what point does this go from non-lethal to pretty much guaranteed electrocution.

I have been tasered, it hurts, A LOT. Granted it is a temporary pain & passes pretty quickly but i just hate to think what a jolt 24 times stronger would do?

It just seems like overkill to me, i mean if i go squirrel hunting i use a .22 not a .50 BMG.
so what are you thoughts?

It is my understanding that voltage plays no role whatsoever in how likely you are to be electrocuted. It is possible to survive millions of volts of electricity. It is the current that kills you, and you only need a tiny amount of current to go through you to make it lethal. A single amp could kill you, while a million volts will not. The better question is if 50,000 volts are adequate to incapacitate someone, what is the purpose of delivering a million (or even more) volts? Does it incapacitate them longer?

Why the hell would you want one of those monstrous things? They should be illegal everywhere as far as I'm concerned.

The better question is if 50,000 volts are adequate to incapacitate someone, what is the purpose of delivering a million (or even more) volts? Does it incapacitate them longer?

From the web page:


Frequently asked questions about Cell Phone Stun Gun
950,000 volts seems a little strong, is it necessary?
Yes. Theoretically, higher voltage means shorter time to immobilize an attacker. In other words, less confrontation time. You would want to have the highest power available if possible.

Would 950,000 volt stun gun cause more damage than other smaller voltage stun guns?
No, even though the voltage is higher, the current is still very low (about 3-milliamp amperage, just like other models) which makes this stun gun just as less lethal as other lower voltage models.

Would you recommend this item?
Yes, I would strongly recommend this item to anyone who is always on the go. It has the highest voltage any stun gun can offer. It is prefect for jogger.


Why the hell would you want one of those monstrous things? They should be illegal everywhere as far as I'm concerned.

For the same reasons some people feel the need to carry guns, I suppose.

I don't really see the point in carrying one of those, to be honest. It isn't something that you'd walk about wearing and if you were truly under threat, you probably would not have enough time to fish that out of a pocket and put it on. It isn't as if an attacker is likely to wait around until you are ready to be assaulted. I wish I could remember the link, but I do remember reading that the average person gains no self-defence benefit from carrying a weapon as they simply would not have enough time to recognise the danger, remember the weapon, get said weapon out and then use it properly. These seem to benefit peace of mind more than adding any real, physical advantage.

i just wonder if with the higher voltage( even at a small amperage) if someone with a genetic problem(say an undiagnosed heart problem) would it be more likely to effect them than a lower voltage?

decados, haven't you ever went jogging with the little hand weights? those blast knuckles look enough like those that a mugger/whatever probably wouldn't give it a second glance. now in that particular instance, place against genitals & push button:toofar:

Can't say I have. Or even know anyone who does. On the occasions that I run with weights, the weights are always attached to my ankles. Why would you only go running with a weight on one hand? Surely that would look decidedly odd? 'Sides, that would only work when exercising- it would still look out-of-place in the rest of everyday life. Who wears weights to buy shopping?

i just wonder if with the higher voltage( even at a small amperage) if someone with a genetic problem(say an undiagnosed heart problem) would it be more likely to effect them than a lower voltage?

decados, haven't you ever went jogging with the little hand weights? those blast knuckles look enough like those that a mugger/whatever probably wouldn't give it a second glance. now in that particular instance, place against genitals & push button:toofar:

It's a sad world when you reckon to need one of those to go running with in case you get mugged. Who's gonna rob a runner? He's obviously got nothing of value on him - the man's running! I don't often go running with my phone in my pocket of a load of 20 quid notes.

Many people go running with an iPod or a Diskman. There are those who would mug you for less. Here in Denmark a young man was knifed to death back in January because he wouldn't give his cap to a bunch of bullies. :(

So you carry a tazer with you just in case?

The world is going nuts.

The world may be nuts, but the perception amongst people like me (and I don't think I'm too far deviated from the norm*) is that if the society is not going to protect me by properly punishing criminals, then I will have to protect myself. I am not a fighter except when playing D&D, so some other method for self defense would not be seen as a bad thing by yours truly.

The idea that a person is somehow a bad person for wanting to defend himself and his hard won property baffles me.

*at least in regards to this matter!

That mindset is why firearms are still not banned in the US and shootings happen regular. There are too many nutters out there to let people carry stuff like this. It should be illegal. I've never felt threatened to the point where I'd feel I needed to carry a weapon (and I don't exactly live in an idyllic place). I find it bizarre that anyone would. Where do you live for Gods sake, in the middle of Lebanon? Just because nasty things sometimes happen doesn't make me feel the need to carry a stun gun around with me everywhere I go.

Your government need to make it very difficult for ANYONE to carry a weapon* and strongly punish those who manage to get thgeir hands on one. These things are weapons. Can you imagine some 16 year old little chav getting his hands on one of these and running round town with it? Hitting random people with it for a laugh? Incapaciting some old women whilst he rifles her stuff? Since these are perfectly legal to own in most US states, I'd say that not just plausible but quite likely. Besides, if someone wants to rob you I doubt one of these things will stop them, people usually go blagging people with mates, not on their own. In all likelihood, you'll never get the chance to use it.

The whole US mindset around guns and weapon ownership is completely alien to me, and seems so backwards. Either that or your police force needs SERIOUS investment if nobody trusts them at all.

* To clarify that word, by weapon I mean something specifically designed to hurt/incapacitate a fellow human, and has few, if any, other uses (certainly no innocent ones).

I'd think the mindset of a Canadian would bear more on firearms and shootings in Canada :)

@Barms: Don't worry, I don't carry anything more dangerous than a Swiss Army knife. :) But I stay out of risky areas at night.

I myself don't own a taser, Barmy. I have a gun, a single action .22 rifle that I haven't shot in over 10 years. That said, . . .

The problem with the system here in Canada is that if a person (I'll name him Andy) commits a crime with a gun here in Canada, this is what happens (there's some exaggeration here but less than you might think):

Andy is arrested (with any luck) and he goes to court, where some slick lawyer (apologies to the lawyers here) tells the court a sad story of how Andy's parents didn't love him enough and he never even had an Oreo cookie before he was 15 years old, so of course he should get away with the rape, murder and mutilation of a woman he's never met before.

The court buys this story and gives Andy 2 months of house arrest.

When the police arrive to check and make sure Andy doesn't have a gun in the house, the aforementioned slick lawyer screams harassment and a charge is filed against the police that they are violating poor little Andy's civil rights.

In the mean time, some other do-gooder is attempting to take away BOB's gun, despite the fact that Bob has never met Andy, has few if any characteristics in common with Andy, and most importantly has never even had a ticket for littering, let alone any sort of violent offense.

Andy successfully gets his house arrest nullified because the police dared to follow the terms of the house arrest agreement. He's back on the street, smug and well armed.

Is it any wonder people want tasers or guns or ANYTHING AT ALL to protect themselves from Andy? How the hell does taking away BOB's gun do a bloody frigging thing to protect the population from ANDY?

The feeling I have is that the criminals are out there ready to brutalize decent people, and the government, in a stupid, misguided, pathetic effort to stop crime, is holding the arms of said decent people and making it EASIER for the criminals to engage in their crimes.

How can these "Andys" afford fancy slick lawyers? Don't these "Bobs" ever go berserk with their guns? Exactly how much is this example based on reality?

How can these "Andys" afford fancy slick lawyers? Don't these "Bobs" even go berserk with their guns? Exactly how much is this example based on reality?
People don't just get 2 months house arrest for murder - they go to jail. So there rest of LKD's example is pretty much moot.

If the idea is to incapacitate someone quicker and easier, and it is Amperage, then I don't see a problem. There are many more lethal objects that someone being mugged could just as easily have on their person. Someone already mentioned the hand weights that Joggers sometimes carry. They could do more damage if used to strike...

What I do have a problem with is people looking at the minority and using that to take the guns away from the law abiding citizens. My father is a farmer, and has needed to use the gun to kill a predator or put down a suffering animal. I have no problem with that. He also hunts. Since I like Moose meat and Venison, I really wouldn't like to see his gun taken away because some dickhead uses an illegally acquired handgune to kill a store clerk in a robbery. Honestly, if the governemtn would put half the effort into law enforcement as it does into harrassing honest, law abiding citizens, we'd be a lot safer...

To put it simply, people who want to carry weapons have small penises. ;)

Jokes aside, well it wasn't much of a joke but carrying weapons have less to do with real security than inspiring a sense of self confidence. Be it pepper spray, taser, knife or a gun. Every person I have known that have carried a gun have been incredibly insecure people jumping at their own shadow. This is a very very dead horse though and it is even off-topic here. As for the topic at hand; I have no idea at what voltage a taser turns dangerous if ever but it sure seems to hurt.

no drew it is because the department of justice correlates all of the stats from the various police depts & agencies that they get their stats from not my butt. please reinforce your argument dont insult your opponent, it just show you have no case:D


geez, how did i get so far off topic when i started the topic:confused:
yea part of my problem with these is the new ones are so small that they don't look like anything dangerous more like a toy http://www.stungunsecurity.com/detail.asp?id=440
3 & a half by 2 & a quarter inches & a simple push button control. so a nono for anyone with kids(as anyone with kids knows they can/will get into anything) can you imagine a little munchkin teething on this & pushing the button OUCH!

firstly a bit off-topic

a taser in a glove would be SO F'in badass i can't stop thinking about it SMACK 1 Million volts in your face!

on a different view of things

can't they be used for muggin people as well? i would give all my money to a guy with a FASER(Fist lASER) or even an ordinary one, just like i would if he was weilding a knife or something, or a gun for that matter

on the leagality of guns i think denmark has a fairly good overall view on it:
(this is my faitly accurate assumption of how it works)
Only hunting rifles are legal
this also include 2 barelled shotguns(the ones that spread 50-100 smaller pellets or somehing)
to own one you have to get a hunting permit(take some courses pass a test and such), and may only use for hunting(in designated areas and seasons) or skeet shooting

Well, I may not have the pink dragon breath of doom (I wonder if Listerine can fix that . . . ?) but, last I checked, we had no limits on these boards as to number of topics allowed or number of posts a member can make, so why don't we debate the relative merits of home security systems and gun control in another thread or two?

OK, back to the original topic then. A quote from the original threadmaker:

It just seems like overkill to me, i mean if i go squirrel hunting i use a .22 not a .50 BMG. So what are you thoughts?
My thought is this -- if some piece of filth strung out on a long list of illiegal pharmaceuticals comes at me to take my money or my property, I want to be able to defend myself, and there IS no overkill for bastards like this. The more punch they can put into one of these things the better. If a criminal in the midst of an illegal act dies, I feel very little pity for him. I voluntarily give plenty of money to legitimate charities to help the truly less fortunate, I'll be d***ed if I'm gonna give any more involuntarily.

Sadly, I don't know if these gadgets are even legal in Canada. They're probably not because the government cares more about criminal rights than victim rights.

@LKD: In Denmark even maze is illegal - after all it could be used as an assault weapon! I can only assume the same goes for hand-held tazers.

@joacqin: Denmark has seen quite a few "home robberies" over the last six months or so - cases where a gang of robbers break into a house at night, wake up the inhabitants (none too kindly) and (brow-)beat them into revealing where they keep their money and other valuables before tying them up. The robbers that have been caught were not the drug addict version of criminal.

Guys - I've asked, nicely I might add, to take the off-topic gun issues to a place where they will be on-topic. This thread is about the taser issue.

I trust that the gun back and forth will find an appropriate home . . . .

si senor dmc! :)

Good lord Gnarff, are you incapable of reading two posts up?

Guys - I've asked, nicely I might add, to take the off-topic gun issues to a place where they will be on-topic. This thread is about the taser issue.

I trust that the gun back and forth will find an appropriate home . . . .

For the last time, take the gun comments and issues to a new thread.

How can these "Andys" afford fancy slick lawyers?

Because there are plenty of lawyers out there who will waive their fee in favor of the publicity they know a high-profile case will get.

Back on topic: I have no interest in owning such a weapon, and I'm not terribly thrilled about the idea of them being made readily available to the public. Can you imagine what sort of other havoc might be caused if one of those things was used to give a jolt to any sort of centralized computer system? Sounds like something out of an action-adventure movie, and not in a good way.

On top of that Rally, I know so many little arsehole kids who I'd much rather not be able to go and buy one of these willy nilly! Maybe it's just this country, but there's plenty of bored lads who'd buy one of these and run around zapping people with it for a laugh.

i'm just waiting on some A@@#### to go to a dance club & start zapping people during a light show. you would never know until the lights came back up. especially since that littler bugger will fit in a pack of cigarettes. who checks your cigs when you go in the club?

@ barmy, at least here most of these i have seen are at gun stores for sell only to adults over 18, but kids have always found ways around those rules(heh, i know i did, when i wanted liquor at 16:))

Please take all further gun control discussions here: http://www.sorcerers.net/forums/showthread.php?p=641390#post641390

Should these tasers be banned? Some in Canada seem to think so. Too many criminals are being killed when the police Taser them. That's a real pity.

My question is, by the time the bleeding hearts are done, what the bloody **** are the police supposed to use to deal with a 240 pound man who is on a rampage? Polite words? Gentle persuasion? Offer more drugs? I mean, guns are not the answer, billy clubs are not the answer, pepper spray is not the answer, flash bang grenades are not the answer, and now Tasers are not the answer. What tools are we willing to give our police officers to deal with the scum of the earth?

My answer is give them all the tools humanly possible and be **** grateful that the cops are out there keeping slime off the streets. If a few people, in flagrant, blatant and unqualified violation of the law, end up dead, too bad. It's their fault for making stupid choices. If they had just obeyed the law, they'd be alive and kicking. Cruel? Vicious? You bet. I'm tired of mollycoddling criminals around here and tiptoeing around their rights. The police around here always give people the opportunity to smarten up and be cooperative. If they blow that chance, then I say Taser them as often as it takes to settle them down. If the crook is high on meth and dies, gee, whose fault is that? I can tell you right now it's not the cops and it's not the fault of the decent, non-addict citizen whose life the cop just saved by blasting the crook.

As some of you may have guessed, crime in my city has spiked and I, like a lot of people around here, am tired of hearing about the deaths and injuries inflicted on innocents by criminals.

LKD, I think the problem has more to do with suspects (who may or may not be criminals) being killed by a taser. Canada's had a pretty nasty case not too long ago, when some random foreign guy at the airport got tasered, then tasered again several times because he seemed "suspicious". It then turned out there was nothing criminal about him. Now the argument people generally have is that if the police had used guns the guy would have died anyway. Here's my problem with this argument: people (generally speaking; includes the police) are being much more trigger happy with tasers because they perceive them as being non-lethal. They're not. They're less likely to kill. However, shooting a taser at someone a dozen times in succession is pretty likely to kill (never mind heart conditions and other complications).

Barmy's also raised another potential problem. The neds wouldn't go around shooting a gun at people (well, most of them wouldn't), because they know they will be in trouble if they do. Using a taser though? no problem, it won't kill anyone, so they can have their "fun" and get away with something minor like breach of the peace. And if someone ends up actually dying because of the taser... what are they going to say? "Oops, we didn't mean to"?

@LKD

The people of Canada are arguing that the police force shouldn't be armed? IMO that is a completely separate issue to civilian gun ownership.

Gun ownership is another thread. Some people in Canada are saying the cops shouldn't have Tasers. I'll elaborate later.

The part i don't understand is if canada trains their police like the u.s. does, to get taser certified, you get ZAPPED.Now let me tell you, it hurts a LOT(you know how your calf hurts when it cramps up? well imagine that all over your body. not fun) Granted the pain goes away when the current is stopped but boy does it leave you with a respect for those 2 little wires:)

My point being, since they know how it feels, they should be less inclined to inflict it prematurely on others.