A new study from Wake Forest University’s School of Medicine examining the safety of Tasers suggests that the weapons are unlikely to cause severe injury, despite resistance from human rights groups.

The study supports Taser use by law enforcement agencies because they are significantly unlikely to cause severe injury, according to the study.

The study, released Oct. 8, is the first large, independent study using reports of past criminal suspects who received electrical discharge from Tasers at six law enforcement agencies between July 2005 and June 2007, according to research data.

The study was designed to examine the frequency and severity of injuries caused by Tasers, said William P. Bozeman, lead researcher and associate research director of Wake Forest University’s Department of Emergency Medicine. Researchers worked with tactical physicians — doctors who work with SWAT teams — and examined medical reports to decide whether any injuries were present, he said.

Of the nearly 1,000 subjects examined, 99.7 percent received little or no injuries. Only two in-custody deaths occurred, and those were later determined to be unrelated to Taser use, according to research data.

The study was funded by the U.S. Department of Justice but was independently designed, Bozeman said. Researchers did track suspects’ mental conditions, such as those affected by intoxication, drug use and mental illness, but the released preliminary report excluded that information.

In April, the Ohio University Police Department purchased and began training for Tasers, said Lt. Christopher Johnson.

So far, the only case of Taser use occurred May 5, according to the OUPD Use of Force Report.

Despite the study’s findings about Taser safety, some civil rights organizations believe that several police departments resort to Tasers too often in situations where the non-compliant victim is not a serious threat.

“A Taser is a tool, like a hammer or a tank or a Billy club or a pen, and like any tool it has its appropriate uses and its inappropriate uses,” said Jeff Gamso, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio.

Tasers might save officers from using more powerful weapons, like guns, in threatening situations; however, giving police officers more freedom increases the likelihood of abusing the weapons, he said.

Some civil rights activists recommend that Tasers be used only after less powerful methods, such as verbal warnings or physical restraints.

One of the real challenges is that no standards of use exist, allowing individual police departments to decide when Tasers are used, said Dori Dinsmore, Midwest Regional Director for Amnesty International USA.

“If you’re graded on a scale from one to 100, the teacher has a lot more options than if you’re graded on a scale of A to F,” Gamso said, adding that the problem isn’t the Taser itself but police behavior.

However, according to both the OUPD and the Athens County Sheriff’s Office Use of Force Policies, Tasers can be used when refusing verbal commands.

Tasers have dramatically decreased the injury rate of both officers and suspects, said Shannon Sheridan, Athens City Sheriff’s Office Deputy.

“On the standard use of force chart, verbal comes first, Tasers, then mace,” Sheridan said. If it comes to the point where an officer has to put his or her hands on somebody, they are granted the right to use Tasers, he said.

“It looks worse than it is. It hurts, but it doesn’t injure you,” Sheridan said. Enough volts of electricity will kill somebody, but Tasers are very low in the deadly force of electricity — comparable to electric fences, he said.