Kate McCormack's article (\Less lethal weapons can still be killers,"" Opinion Column, Oct. 25) is just as flawed as she claims ""less lethal"" weapons to be. McCormack negligently uses statistics without providing sources to back them up.
For example, she claims that these weapons led to ""substantial numbers of civilian deaths."" Where did this claim originate? She also claims that these weapons are ""riddled with problems."" What are these problems? I am sure that if McCormack has some secret knowledge regarding these problems, the manufacturers may want to know about them before they lead to ""substantial numbers of civilian deaths.""
McCormack also claims that officers undergo ""minimal training"" on the use of these weapons. Did McCormack speak with any police departments to see what their training policies are? What would she define as sufficient training? McCormack's article also states that 50 people were killed by pepper spray ""in recent years"" and 70 were killed by tasers. Once again, McCormack fails to cite a reference for these statistics. Are these deaths a result from the use of a less-lethal weapon or were these deaths a result of a preexisting medical condition?
McCormack also goes on to say that ""protesters in crowd-control cases are the first ones to experience abuse."" So in other words, protesters are affected by crowd-control measures more than Citizen Joe? This would seem true because one would have to be in a crowd (as protesters tend to be) to be affected by a crowd-control weapon. She also states that the pepper spray gun is being ""marketed to the general public for home protection"" as if that is a bad thing. If a home intruder was given a choice as to being shot by a .357 magnum or a pepper spray gun, which would he or she most likely select?
