Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 11:59 am
Time: 11:59 am
Results for pepper spray
4 results foundAuthor: Pinney, Leah Title: Pepper Spray in the Texas Youth Commission: Research Review and Policy Recommendations Summary: This report summarizes the results of research on the physical and psychological impact of pepper spray on youth held in Texas state custody, as well as the potential legal ramifications of its expanded use in Texas Youth Commission facilities. Details: Austin, TX: Texas Criminal Justice Coalition, 2007. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 6, 2011 at: http://www.criminaljusticecoalition.org/files/userfiles/juvenilejustice/tcjc_publications/Pepper_Spray_in_TYC.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.criminaljusticecoalition.org/files/userfiles/juvenilejustice/tcjc_publications/Pepper_Spray_in_TYC.pdf Shelf Number: 121256 Keywords: Juvenile CorrectionsJuvenile Detention (Texas)Pepper Spray |
Author: Broadstock, Marita Title: What is the Safety of "Pepper Spray" Use by Law Enforcement or Mental Health Service Staff? Summary: Oleoresin capsicum (OC) spray, referred to here as “pepper spray”, is a chemical incapacitant causing intense irritation of the mucous membranes and skin. The organic agent oleoresin capsicum contains the active ingredient capsaicin, obtained from cayenne pepper plants. It is usually mixed with a carrier agent for dispersion, such as oil, alcohol or kerosene for application using an aerosol spray (Chambers, 2000). Pepper spray has been employed as a less-than-lethal inflammatory agent in civilian, government and military sectors, and particularly for law enforcement, criminal incapacitation and, in the United States of America (USA), personal self-defense. First used in the USA in 1973 by Federal Bureau of Intelligence (FBI) personnel who approved it for police use1, it became widely adopted by law enforcement agencies from the late 1980’s (Kaminski et al. 1999). Pepper spray has also been used in correctional facilities in the USA (American Civil Liberties Unions of Southern California, 1995). Though banned in Sweden because of its potential to cause eye damage, it has been increasingly used by European security forces in Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, and Switzerland (Chambers, 2000). The Home Office reportedly recommended that pepper spray be not introduced by British police services due to health concerns. In contrast, pepper spray is available for use by police across Australia, albeit in some States on a trial basis (Criminal Justice Commission and Queensland Police Service, 1999). The New Zealand police introduced pepper spray to front line members in 1997 as a less-than-lethal option when dealing with violent incidents where injury is likely to ensue (Doone, 1997). Inhalation of, and skin and eye contact with, pepper spray causes an almost instantaneous onset of responses. Effects on the eyes include severe burning pain, involuntary closure, lacrimation (tearing), conjunctival inflammation, redness, swelling and blepharospasm (eyelid twitching). Skin contamination causes tingling, burning pain, edema, erythema and occasional blistering. Respiratory symptoms include nasal irritation, bronchoconstriction, a burning sensation in the throat, severe coughing and sneezing, and shortness of breath (Olajos and Salem, 2001). More systemic effects include disorientation, panic and loss of body motor control (Smith, 2002). Most symptoms resolve within 30 to 45 minutes. The inflammatory properties of pepper spray have been suggested as being particularly effective in managing violent, intoxicated, drugged and mentally ill people who may be less susceptible to pain. However, some data (Edwards et al. 1997; Granfield et al. 1994; ACLA of Southern California, 1995) suggest that precisely such individuals “may be resistant or immune to OC’s effects or that OC may actually exacerbate the difficulty associated with controlling such persons” (Edwards et al. 1997). Acute effects of capsaicin have been suggested including bronchospasm, respiratory arrest, pulmonary edema, hypertensive crisis and hypothermia as well as serious respiratory and cardiovascular effects and permanent damage to the sensory nervous system (Stopford, 1996; Olajos and Salem, 2001). The safety of pepper spray is the subject of this Tech Brief. It aims to consider evidence for adverse events of pepper spray used in ways comparable to their application by police officers or mental health service personnel to acutely subdue a disturbed person. It also aims to identify situations or populations related with increased risk. Details: Christchurch, NZ: New Zealand Health Technology Assessment (NZHTA), 2002. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: NZHTA Tech Brief Series, vol. 1, No. 2: Accessed November 10, 2011 at: http://nzhta.chmeds.ac.nz/publications/pepper_spray.pdf Year: 2002 Country: New Zealand URL: http://nzhta.chmeds.ac.nz/publications/pepper_spray.pdf Shelf Number: 123300 Keywords: Non-lethal WeaponsOleoresin CapsicumPepper Spray |
Author: University of California at Davis. Reynoso Task Force Title: UC Davis November 18, 2011 "Pepper Spray Incident" Task Force Report Summary: On November 18, 2011, University of California, Davis, police officers used pepper spray on students sitting in a line in the midst of a protest and “occupation” on the campus quad. Viral images of the incident triggered immediate and widespread condemnation of the police action. To assist the Task Force with fact finding and the identification of best practices in policing, the University engaged Kroll, Inc., an internationally known risk management firm. Kroll completed the final draft of its report on Feb. 22, 2012 (the “Kroll Report”). The Kroll Report describes at length the events leading up to this incident. In brief, at approximately 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 17, 2011, tents were erected on the Quad at the Davis campus. The Administration decided to remove the tents, instructing police to do so at 3:00 p.m. on Friday, November 18, 2011. While attempting to remove tents, the police arrested several individuals. Subsequently, in the midst of a growing group of people, the police officers employed pepper spray to remove several students linking arms in a line across a walkway in the Quad. The UC Davis protest focused on and drew strength from widespread discontent among students about the increase in tuition and fees at the University of California. The incident also took place against the backdrop of worldwide student protests, including demonstrations by the Occupy Wall Street movement, which triggered similar events across the nation. These protests presented challenges for all affected universities and municipalities in attempting to balance the goals of respecting freedom of speech, maintaining the safety of both protesters and non-protesters, and protecting the legitimate interests of government and the non-protesting public. In the immediate aftermath of the UC Davis incident, University of California President Mark G. Yudof announced the appointment of former California Supreme Court Justice Cruz Reynoso to chair a Task Force to address the pepper spraying of UC Davis students. The President established the following charge to the Task Force: Receive and review the fact-finding report from Kroll concerning the events that took place on November 18, 2011; Based on that review, and subject to available information, issue findings regarding responsibility for the events of November 18; Provide recommendations to Chancellor Katehi and the President on improvements to police procedures, command protocols, and campus policies and oversight structures that will help ensure the rights and safety of nonviolent protesters and the entire campus community. Our overriding conclusion can be stated briefly and explicitly. The pepper spraying incident that took place on November 18, 2011 should and could have been prevented. Details: Davis, CA: University of California at Davis, 2012. 190. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 12, 2012 at: http://reynosoreport.ucdavis.edu/reynoso-report.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://reynosoreport.ucdavis.edu/reynoso-report.pdf Shelf Number: 124939 Keywords: Pepper SprayPolice Use of ForceStudent DemonstrationsStudent Protests (California) |
Author: Semple, Tori Title: Injuries and Deaths Proximate to Oleoresin Capsicum Spray Deployment: A Literature Review Summary: The primary goal of this literature review was to assess research (both published and unpublished) related to injuries and deaths proximate to Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) spray deployment. A search of several databases and search engines produced 22 documents that were deemed relevant for the review. Existing research makes it clear that OC spray is now commonly used across a variety of settings, including law enforcement and corrections. Research has also demonstrated that the impact of OC spray will vary as a function of numerous factors, including: its concentration, its physiochemical properties, the deployment device used, and a range of subject (e.g., clothing) and environmental (e.g., weather) factors. A number of studies have examined the operational effectiveness of OC spray (i.e., to control resistant subjects). Some of these studies have included injuries (to the subject and to the person deploying the spray) as outcome variables. This research demonstrates that OC spray is often effective and it is typically associated with decreased odds of both subject and "deployer" injury. This finding is relatively consistent across jurisdictions and conditions. Although there are exceptions, when OC-associated injuries do occur, they consistently appear to be relatively minor. Other research focuses more specifically on the nature of injuries that are associated with the use of OC spray. Most of the specific injuries reported in the literature are relatively minor and individuals targeted by OC spray rarely seem to require serious medical attention. It appears to be very uncommon for OC-associated injuries to have a long-term, negative impact on the affected individual. The vast majority of reported injuries involve eye and skin irritation or pain, altered vision, corneal abrasions, and respiratory symptoms. A number of documents also examined deaths that appear to be associated with the deployment of OC spray. Based on the evidence cited, OC spray is rarely associated with serious harm or death. However, when OC spray is used proximate to a subject's death, common themes are present. In the majority of reported deaths associated with OC spray exposure, the subject appears to be: male, combative, intoxicated (by drugs and/or alcohol), placed in a prone maximal restraint position, and have pre-existing health conditions (most commonly asthma, obesity, and/or cardiovascular disease). Very rarely in the studies we cited was OC spray deemed a contributory or sole cause of death; instead, medical practitioners point to various combinations of these pre-existing factors. The literature review identified several factors that appear to be commonly associated with the deployment of OC spray. These include: the presence of Excited Delirium Syndrome (ExDS), positional asphyxia (especially related to hobble or hog-tie restraint positions), pre-existing health conditions such as asthma and obesity, and drug use (most commonly, psychostimulants such as cocaine). Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2018. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: 2018 No. R-405: Accessed March 13, 2018 at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2018/scc-csc/PS83-3-405-eng.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Canada URL: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2018/scc-csc/PS83-3-405-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 149458 Keywords: Deaths in CustodyHealth CareInjuriesOleoresin CapsicumPepper Spray |