"
. With In The New York Times Magzine: The Taser C2
SHOCK VALUE:
The Kleenex of stun guns brands balances sleek gadgetry with “take-down power.”
This week in Consumed, a look at the newest and most consumer-friendly version of … the Taser.
That would be “the Taser C2 Personal Protector, a model that is, if not exactly kinder and gentler, then at least more innocent-looking. Also: it’s available in pink and in a leopard print.”
Why the new form factor for the device?
“We finally listened to the customer,” Taser’s Steve Tuttle says. The customer was not comfortable carrying something that would cause people to dive under tables yelling, “Gun!” if you took it out in a restaurant. The customer liked sleek gizmos, and vibrant, fashionable colors. The customer wanted something light and small enough to put in a handbag. Of course, the customer still wanted to propel tiny electrodes up to 15 feet, affecting “the sensory and motor functions” (as the company Web site puts it) of whomever they strike, with “incredible takedown power.”
Read the column in the May 18, 2008 issue of The New York Times Magazine, or here.
Consumed archive is here, and FAQ is here. Consumed Facebook page is here.
.
.
Kim Fellner's book 
.
A
Reader Comments
Thanks for making me aware of this- I’m actually purchasing one as I type this.
I don’t know, Lymon. I’m thinking you’d be happier with the kind that looks like something out of Star Wars.
Gun!
I was very disturbed to see this article. It’s one thing to profile consumer objects, and another to aid in the whitewashing of a lethal product.
How could you write an aritcle like this and not even mention the number of people killed after being shocked with Tasers? Not to mention the fact that Taser is apparently funding researchers to study a supposed medical condition called “excited delirium” that the company claims is the actual cause of death.
Journalist Radley Balko is doing terrific work documenting these issues. A few seconds of Google searching would have turned up information that there is tremendous public controversy over the lethality of this weapon.
I realize you’re writing a pop column, but taking this kind of lighthearted tone about a weapon that can kill someone is just plain irresponsible.