Which brings up another point: the use of drugs can change effect of anything used to "bring down" a suspect.

A case in point: very shortly after a State Police department in the Midwestern US were issued 15-round Smith&Wesson 9mm pistols, a veteran and a rookie on patrol around a very major city stopped a vehicle. The driver, who later tests showed was on high doses of PCP, attacked the two cops AND bystanders AND others in his vehicle. Finally, the police felt they had no other choice and emptied their pistols, hitting the man 28 out of 30 times. He kept coming, kept up his drug-induced rage, and was finally killed with a shotgun. (This police department no longer carries 9mm; immediately after this incident all of the pistols were recalled and replaced with the venerable .357s previously used.)

Would a Taser have stopped him? I don't know, but I doubt it.

But my point is still valid: why, in the Vancouver case, was at least one Taser used instead of other methods? Four cops, one guy...I've been there, there was a scuffle, the guy was subdued with bruises only to the cops. (Later I was charged with police brutality in this matter; I and the other three were cleared -- even the guy we arrested was surprised how "mild" we were with him, not using our nightsticks or anything. I may be the only Mudcatter who was ever charged with police brutality....)