Frequently Asked Questions
Question: Why is this invention needed if the issue of police shootings could be solved with better training, better judgement, and better people?
Answer: Better training, better judgement, and better people will NOT prevent unarmed suspects that are mentally ill, violent, or high on drugs from attacking a cop. Excessive use of force happens when an unarmed person attacks and the cop has to shoot to defend himself because that's the only weapon he had in his hand at the time. But, with this invention, he now has the option to use a TASER instead while remaining able to use his gun if an armed threat suddenly appears or the TASER fails. The key word is "option." The individual officer decides if and when this tool is useful for him.
Question: Why would an unarmed person ever attack a cop who has a gun in his hand?
Answer: Some suspects hate police, are high on drugs, mentally ill, or have prior criminal records and don’t want to go back to prison. And still others continue to exercise the same poor judgement that made them criminals in the first place. The internet is full of videos of bad guys attacking cops against all logic and reason. The issue for police is what to do when an UNARMED person attacks them. If the only tool a cop has in his hand at the time is a gun, the likelihood is that the unarmed attacker will be shot, and such scenarios are no longer acceptable to the public.
Question: What is the incentive to use Humane Tactical's Less Lethal Adapter?
Answer: Attaching a less lethal device to your gun lets you choose the CORRECT level of force to use against the suspect in front of you. If that person is unarmed, you can use the TASER to stop an attack. If the bad guy pulls out a gun you can instantly open fire with yours to save your life. The benefits to using less lethal devices on unarmed people are many: The suspect gets his day in court, the cop saves his career, the community avoids a riot, the city avoids a wrongful death lawsuit, and the police department avoids getting defunded. Just one use of this invention can save $50 million in riot property damage and $10 million in a wrongful death lawsuit! For civilians, using the pepper spray version can avoid the time and cost of a shooting. A justifiable homicide costs, on average, four years of your life in court and $250,000 of your money on lawyers and legal fees. Plus, you get to lose your job, your savings, your house, your spouse, many of your friends and family, and lots of other things you care about. The suspect will never give you the time to change your weapon. If you make the mistake of using your gun when the suspect is unarmed, you might end up in prison. If you make the mistake of pulling out your TASER or pepper spray when the bad guy is armed, you may end up dead. But, with this invention, you can stay free and alive!
Question: What makes this invention different from other attempts to mount TASERs to guns?
Answer: What makes this invention an improvement over prior art is its quick attach and detach capability for both the TASER and the gun's accessory rail. With this invention, you can mount a TASER to a gun in seconds with no tools. Then, when that setup is no longer needed, you can take it apart in seconds (with no tools) to holster each item. This is useful because it keeps the gun's accessory rail free to properly holster the gun or mount other useful devices (such as a weapon light) and it keeps the TASER safely holstered until needed. This arrangement gives the officer maximum flexibility in choosing the correct tool for the job. Maybe the gun and the weapon light are needed to deal with an active shooter at night. Maybe only the TASER is needed to deal with a homeless drug addict. Or maybe, the officer needs to attach his TASER to his gun to deal with a wanted fugitive who may or may not be armed. No competitive product gives the officer this many choices while keeping each item safely holstered until needed.
Question: This invention will require the user to operate two triggers. Won’t that double the liability and lawsuits for him?
Answer: No. The legal liability for using a TASER is less than the legal liability for using a gun. Odds are, you won’t go to jail for accidentally using a TASER when you should have used a gun. But, if you use a gun when you should have used a TASER, you could end up in prison for manslaughter or even murder. An officer who only has a gun in his hand has a 100% chance of shooting someone if he decides to pull the trigger. But even an untrained officer who uses this invention has a 50% chance of squeezing the correct trigger, assuming random chance. In other words, using this invention reduces your chances of shooting an unarmed person by half. As for lawsuits, in this country, you can be sued for anything at any time. This invention will not solve the issue of frivolous lawsuits.
Question: This invention will require the user to operate two triggers. Won’t the Sympathetic Squeeze Reflex make this problematic to use?
Answer: No. Correct procedure and training will prevent squeezing both triggers accidently. Specifically, the gun trigger finger should be resting alongside the frame outside the trigger guard as is normally taught in any firearm class. The same thing should be done with the TASER trigger finger. This should prevent negligent discharges. Training will enable the officer to choose the correct trigger depending on the suspect's actions. Suspect pulls out a gun = cop opens fire as is taught in any self-defense firearm class. Unarmed suspect attacks officer = cop operates TASER. The U.S. military has successfully attached grenade launchers to rifles since the Vietnam War. Today, the military also attaches the M-26 shotgun to rifles in the same manner as this invention! In fact, the M-26 was the inspiration for Humane Tactical. If the U.S. military can successfully mount a shotgun to a rifle, then why not mount a TASER to a gun?
Question: Isn’t it illegal for a cop to attach a TASER to a gun in a forward pistol grip fashion?
Answer: Not if the cop or police department get permission from the ATF first. The National Firearms Act of 1934 made it illegal to attach a forward grip to a handgun without federal permission because, at the time, it was a common accessory among prohibition era gangsters. However, anyone who passes a criminal background check, has a letter of recommendation from a police chief, pays the stamp tax, submits the correct form, and waits for BATFE approval can attach a forward pistol grip to his handgun. For a police department, it’s free and easy to submit ATF Form 1 online. In the future, Humane Tactical hopes to change the law so this permission is no longer needed for attaching less lethal devices (like TASERs) to firearms.
Question: Won’t attaching a TASER to a gun make it more likely to use the wrong weapon at the wrong time?
Answer: No. Assuming the suspect is unarmed, and the officer has one hand on his gun and the other on the TASER, there is a 50% chance an untrained officer will pull the correct trigger in a panic situation. However, if the officer only has a gun, there is a 100% chance he will shoot in a panic situation and may end up killing the unarmed person. If the suspect is armed, using the TASER may stop the attack. If it doesn’t, the officer can open fire with his gun at any time to defend his life. The whole purpose of this invention is to give the cop an OPTION to use Less-Lethal force while keeping his gun ready to use whenever necessary.
Question: How is a cop supposed to use this invention while he’s under the stress of an encounter with an armed and dangerous criminal?
Answer: He isn’t. This invention is designed for use only when the situation merits it and allows the officer the time and presence of mind to use it. If a cop arrives at the scene of a crime and the bad guy is shooting, the officer’s only obligation is to defend himself and the general public by whatever means necessary. If that means returning fire to stop an active shooter then the officer should not waste any time with TASERs, adapters, or other less lethal options. This invention is a tool to be used at the officer’s discretion. His training, judgement, and experience will dictate what tools and tactics to use for a given situation. It is the individual responding officer who makes the final call.
Question: How is an officer supposed to walk around with a TASER attached to his gun?
Answer: He isn’t. A cop’s gun, TASER, and Less Lethal Adapter each remain in their respective holsters until the officer decides to take them out and use them. (Please accept HT’s apologies for adding yet another item to heavy, crowded police belts.) In some situations, such as a nude vagrant high on drugs, the cop may choose to use just his TASER. In other situations, like an active shooter, the cop may draw his gun and nothing else. But in cases where the threat is unknown, the cop may decide to attach his TASER to his gun to be ready for a best- or worst-case scenario. An example might be confronting a drug dealer standing on a street corner. Maybe he’s armed and dangerous or maybe he’s not. The point here is that a gun is not a one-size-fits-all solution, and this invention gives the officer new flexibility in dealing with unarmed people.
Question: How is an officer supposed to holster a TASER attached to his gun?
Answer: He isn’t. The adapter is designed for rapid disassembly. Open the rear lever to release the gun to holster it. Open the forward lever to separate the TASER from the adapter and holster each one. If the TASER has been used to successfully stop an attack, open the rear lever to release the gun to holster it. Let the TASER and adapter fall to the ground. Pull out the handcuffs to get the suspect under control for transport. Collect the used TASER and adapter when able to do so. If the gun has been fired to successfully stop an armed attack, open the rear lever to release the gun to holster it. Open the forward lever to separate the TASER from the adapter and holster each one. Contact dispatch for an ambulance or coroner and/or evidence collection, etc.
Question: Won’t attaching a TASER or other less lethal device to a gun negatively affect gun handling and aiming?
Answer: No. Humane Tactical’s adapters were specifically designed by a combination of engineers and gun instructors to not interfere with safe gun handling and accurate shooting. Your standard sight picture includes the gun’s iron sights and the TASER’s LASER sight clearly visible at the same time. When police eventually switch to red dot optics, they should change the color of the dot to green to avoid confusion. The military has successfully attached grenade launchers to rifles since the Vietnam War. Today, the military even attaches the M-26 shotgun to rifles. In addition, people attach bayonets, forward grips, LASERs, weapon lights, cameras, bipods, tripods, brass deflectors, brass catchers, optics, iron sights, and other accessories to guns without degrading safety, functionality, or accuracy. The extra mass of a TASER mounted to a gun reduces muzzle flip. Holding on to the TASER’s grip reduces muzzle flip even more. This facilitates rapid and accurate follow-up shots if needed. All adapters are designed to keep the less lethal device far away enough from the gun to not impede gun operation, malfunction clearance procedures, or even weapon disassembly.
Question: Why should I care about Humane Tactical’s Less Lethal adapters?
Answer: More than one person has been stopped by police as a case of mistaken identity. If your name appears on a terrorist watch list, if you happen to be wearing clothes similar to an armed and dangerous suspect, or someone calls the police on you because of a personal dispute, you will be glad if the responding officers have attached their TASERs to their guns. If you scare them, for example, by pulling up your shirt to prove that you are unarmed, one may correctly decide to TASER you. On the other hand, if no cop attaches a TASER to his gun, you may get shot since pulling up a shirt is often a prelude to reaching for a gun. Remember that cops are people too and no one is a mind reader. Humane Tactical is not about burdening cops but about giving them options they never had before. It’s the 21st century. It’s time our self-defense tools advanced beyond using the wrong weapon because one made the wrong choice up front.