Is a TASER a Dangerous Weapon per se?

On 4/4/2022 a traffic stop by officer Christopher Schurr involving Patrick Lyoya resulted in the killing of Patrick Lyoya. The death of Patrick Lyoya is tragic. Officer Christopher Schurr was arrested and charged with second-degree murder. The defendant’s case (Schurr) hinges on the issue of whether officer Christopher Schurr’s use of deadly force was justified.

A recent appeal by Christopher Schurr was denied and returned to the lower court for trial. One issue that was mention in the Court Order was “whether the decedent was in possession of a per se dangerous weapon” (see the Court Order HERE).

My speculation is that officer Schurr’s use of deadly force rests on the argument that Patrick Lyoya possessed officer Schurr’s TASER – a “dangerous weapon”. It is difficult to find a single definition of a dangerous weapon in the Michigan Penal Code (MCL). Below are 3 definitions of a dangerous weapon from the MCL:

  • MCL 750.226(1) “a pistol or other firearm, or a pneumatic gun, dagger, dirk, razor, stiletto, or knife having a blade over 3 inches in length, or any other dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument”
  • MCL 750.82(1) “a gun, revolver, pistol, knife, iron bar, club, brass knuckles, or other dangerous weapon”
  • MCL 750.235b(4-a) “Dangerous weapon” means a knife, stabbing instrument, brass knuckles, blackjack, club, or other object specifically designed or customarily carried or possessed for use as a weapon.

The key to defining a TASER as a dangerous weapon is that it allows officer Christopher Schurr to use deadly force against Patrick Lyoya when Lyoya was in possession of the TASER. By the “letter of the law”, TASER may not be considered as a dangerous weapon (TASER is not specifically listed in the definition). However, according to the definitions of dangerous weapon, and in the “spirit of the law” a TASER used by Patrick Lyoya against police officer Christopher Schurr could certainly have had deadly consequences for officer Christopher Schurr. Thus TASER can easily be considered a dangerous weapon.

Patrick Lyoya, who was not trained with TASER’s proper use, could have easily used the TASER against officer Christopher Schurr in order to incapacitate the Schurr. As officer Schurr is being incapacitated, Patrick Lyoya could have stolen Schurr’s gun and used it to murder Schurr. If Patrick Lyoya had deployed the TASER against officer Christopher Schurr, theoretically, Patrick Lyoya could deploy the TASER into officer Christopher Schurr for the initial 5 second electrical cycle and then keep re-energizing the TASER for subsequent 5 second electrical cycles until the TASER battery is depleted of energy. A TASER can deploy about 150 total 5 second cycles (for a continuous 12.5 minutes of being tased).

Police officers are trained in the proper use of a TASER. The use of a TASER by police is guided by police training, police department policy, Michigan State law and prior court cases. Police use TASER for legitimate purposes like to gain control of an offender, protect other persons, or minimize injury to violent offenders. On the contrary a person never has a legitimate purpose to use a TASER against a police officer.

Because the possession of the TASER by Patrick Lyoya, officer Christopher Schurr was in jeopardy of being tased by Patrick Lyoya resulting in a felonious assault or death of officer Christopher Schurr. In the above mentioned example where officer Christopher Schurr was in danger of being tased, Patrick Lyoya was in possession of a dangerous weapon (TASER) and officer Christopher Schurr was justified in using deadly force.

Leave a comment