|
loki68 -> RE: Tazer Play (5/22/2005 12:34:29 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SenorX
stun guns have been also known to be able to stop a heart.
Yes, I am very familiar with tasers and stun guns.
And if you are using either one of them in play and somebody dies as a result thereof, yes, you and your accomplices can be risking criminal and civil liability... just like playing with a loaded gun.
X
Okay, I'll concede that if you play with someone and they die, you may face liability and criminal issues. People die from simple vanilla sex that brings on a heart attack. I don't agree that the danger posed by a stun gun used by someone who knows how to use one is any greater than the danger posed by a really good blow job.
Stun guns as deadly weapons? Nope, sorry, bullshit. I've used them dozens of times on myself and others. I've spoken with reputable rembers of the RT community (some with MD's) here in the Bay Area who've used them without incident for years. Describe please, your alleged familiarity with these devices. Also explain how given amperage that is miniscule to start with, you can manage to get the necessary amperage (do you even know what the number is?) to the heart to actually stop it? This is nothing like a loaded gun. A loaded water pistol, maybe. As I said before, there are people who should not be on the recieving end, but they're a pretty small portion of the population, and they tend to know who they are.
I have to doubt that at some point, someone with epilepsy was trying to mug someone who used a stun gun in self defense, and they flopped around on the ground after a pretty short blast. Thus began the urban legend about how incapacitating these things are. (Try it some time on a healthy assailant: they will laugh at you and take it away from you.)
I have no doubt that at some point, after a prolonged foot chase, some other criminal with poor cardiovascular conditioning was tackled by a cop and stun gunned. The sheer surprise of the tackle might have set off a heart attack, and maybe in a case or three the added sensory overload (don't get me wrong, the little fuckers hurt) was enough to kick off a heart attack.
In neither of these cases is the stun gun the sole contributing factor, the "smoking gun." If you manage the risk by weeding out the people who are medically unsuited for it, your risk is comparable to driving in to work in the morning. Which also kills people from time to time.
Potential damage solely from a stun gun falls into two categories: electrical burns on the skin (never jolt any one spot for more than about two seconds) that usually are no worse than a sunburn, or, if you are stupid enough to actually AIM for the heart, using two guns at the same time that are placed on the areas of the chest that one would place defibrilator pads on, there is a reasonable, though not certain, chance of stopping the heart permanently and entirely.
As I won't play with people with known heart conditions or multiple risk factors for heart trouble, or folks with neurological troubles, and it's damned difficult to get a focused dipole device to hit the heart to start with, I'm pretty comfortable with the risks I'm taking.
ANY activity carries an associated risk. The assumption that there is a risk free form of S/m is bogus. If you and your "accomplices" are comfortable with a spanking or light flogging, fine. If I'm okay with temp piercing, stun guns, and suspension bondage, and other consenting and risk aware adults want to come along for the ride, that's okay too. The original poster wanted to learn about stun guns (perhaps mistakenly thinking they're the same as tazers, when there are some very important differences), and I'm up for sharing what I know, based on my experience and research. Nobody says you have to play with these if you're not comfortable with them, but to equate these devices with loaded guns is to speak out of your ass.
|
|
|
|
