USA- KARBON ARM’s Electrical Immobilization Device Market Primer (undated, downloaded 2013-01-09)

Published on January 9 2013 by admin

[[SUMMARY / COMMENTS: A long self-serving post (copied from a pdf file) by an upstart taser competitor, Karbon Arms – that has actually taken over from Stringer, which TASER International successfully put out of business. The text accuses TASER International of cynically misleading the police on the X26’s safety, overcharging for its parts, attempting to stifle all competition and cites the “770 deaths” following taser use to incite police to switch from tasers to ‘IMBDs’]]

from: Karbon Arms, LLC 5505 Johns Rd, Suite 702, Tampa, FL 33634 (813) 281 -1061

To:  Law Enforcement Community:

I would like to invite you to read our recent EID market primer. We have been compelled to present a complete picture as a response to the continuous sham marketing distributed by Taser International. Our revolutionary Electronic Immobilization Device, the Karbon MPID, is taking market share from Taser and they are obviously feeling threatened.

The article includes background information on the marketplace, specifically our competitor Taser International, and information on the Karbon MPID. We could have responded to their deceptive statements in a point counter-point format, however, we know that features alone do not sell weapons. I do not believe the law enforcement community should be pushed around by its suppliers, but that they should be supported by them.

I hope this information is useful to you as you make your purchasing decision. If you would like to talk to agencies that have transitioned from Taser to Karbon, we have plenty of them for you to talk with, both big and small. We’d be happy to let the truth be told by fellow officers.


Robert Gruder

CEO, Karbon Arms


Electrical Immobilization Device Market Primer

Karbon Arms Addresses Competitive Landscape

Karbon Arms is the fastest growing manufacturer of Electronic Immobilization Devices (EIDs). We created a much needed and superior product for a market where we aim to compete fairly. Our goal is to prove that our Karbon MPID is the best in class and our customer loyalty is second to none. Disappointingly, Taser International® has not allowed this head to head competition to occur. Instead they are resorting to desperate and misleading tactics, such as slandering the competition and filing frivolous lawsuits. Taser has abused any trust it may have had with the law enforcement community through excessive price increases, considerable service issues and poor judgment resulting in legal action.

Taser® is fighting to keep monopolistic control by circulating deceptive marketing information to disparage Karbon Arms and instill fear in departments who are making the change to our innovative Karbon MPID. Taser customers are our best prospects, over 90% of our sales are to departments that have previously purchased from Taser.

Karbon Arms is already suing Taser in Delaware court for false marketing, however, we feel obligated to respond publicly and add some background context.

An Alarming Look at Taser’s Motivation

The Karbon MPID is designed to fit the needs of law enforcement officers, not to manufacture an upgrade cycle forcing agencies to spend their already sparse fundsi. Taser released the “Five Year Letter,” a document detailing aging Taser devices, pushing agencies to upgrade to the Taser X2®, selling the package for $1,467.69. Requiring departments to purchase new holsters, more expensive cartridges and completely different training. It would appear they did this to meet the lofty projections given to Wall Street: On a quarterly call with investors on February 23, 2012, Rick Smith, CEO of Taser stated “The upgrade opportunity alone will represent around 327,000 units by the end of 2012… This represents roughly $315 million potential market.” Putting investors before customers. Karbon Arms would never put corporate profits ahead of officer safety.

We frequently ask departments, why does Taser require two cartridges to be fired off for annual certification? The answer is clearly represented in the data…In the three months ending on September 30, 2012 they sold 428,911 cartridges, but according to Taser only about 6% of cartridge sales would be replacing cartridges used in the field.ii

Taser Management Grasps for Expansion

They have haphazardly tried many ways to expand the company and increase revenue, but with little success. The management team frequently missed the mark, below highlights the track record of failures:

● They created the X3® culmination of over four years of intense research and development, only to receive negative reaction from the law enforcement community. They created the Taser Axon®, again missing the mark, which due to its poor design had to be replaced by a camera made out of house, Axon Flex®, developed by Looxcie. These missteps cost the company $5.7 million.

● Poor planning and entering into unrelated markets with® and The Protector® cost the company millions.

● Discontinued the XREP® in 2012 after weak market response.

● In an effort to increase the bottom line, Rick Smith, CEO of Taser International, shifted his attention from law enforcement products and targeted the civilian market thereby, abandoning the needs of their clients. The consumer version has not yielded material sales. Why make a gun that can be used against your number one client? Answer, they only care about the balance sheet for the investors. Disregarding the law enforcement community, their life-blood, only focusing on the civilian models is believed to be the reason for the extreme failure of the X3.

They cannot afford to lose the Law Enforcement EID market too. It would appear that Taser is forcing new products on the market to pay for their missteps. However, the law enforcement community has grown tired of Taser’s abuses and dishonesty and is seeking a better option.

To what length will they go?

Taser International has a history of misleading the public. In 2006 Taser settled a class action lawsuit accusing them of violating the “federal securities laws by making material misrepresentations and/or material omissions about, inter alia, the safety of TASER’s weapons, the findings of studies concerning them, and the independence of such studies.” They agreed to pay $20 million.

In marketing materials sent out by Taser, they presented their own medical data, comparing the MPID and the X2. However, the data on the x26 was conspicuously absent. As you will see below (in the Medical information section), they couldn’t show the data, because if they did it would show they were misleading or selling what they believe to be, very dangerous Taser X26s. Taser selectively presents misleading information to create panic around the Karbon MPID. If they omitted Taser X26 data to try to keep competition from the market, then what other times did they decide not to disclose information?

Departments need to consider how Taser’s reckless comments will affect their ability to defend and survive through future litigation.

Comparative Analysis

As a result of Taser’s character and ethics being questionable, Karbon Arms has chosen to address this misrepresentation to ensure there is complete transparency available to departments upgrading to the Karbon Arms MPID.

Taser has continually interchanged Stinger Systems and Karbon Arms to create confusion. Taser compares their product to the Stinger S-200, a product that was made by a company that no longer exists. They deliberately ignore a U.S. District Court ruling stating that the Karbon MPID and S-200 are more than “colorably different.” Karbon purchased the assets of Stinger in order to purchase the successful Band-It and Shield products. Those products are sold nationwide to customers like the U.S. Marshals and the U.S. Federal Bureau of Prisons. The Karbon MPID is completely independent from the Stinger product.

Taser resorts to these dishonest and misleading tactics to fill holes in their marketing where the MPID outperforms Taser products. It should be noted that they unsuccessfully attempted to purchase the assets of Stinger Systems in 2010 but lost because the Karbon Arms investor group outbid them.

● Ruggedness and durability. Karbon Arms has a unibody construction made out of an incredibly strong polymer called Xenoy. The density and strength is due to the shrinkage of the polymer by 17% while in the mold, opposed to a weaker typical polycarbonate or ABS plastics that are used in the two piece design on the Tasers.


Click Here – Gun Housing Strength Test

Click Here – Gun Housing Integrity Test – MPID VS Taser X26

In a cartridge durability test, we significantly outperformed the new Taser X2 cartridges.

Click Here – Side by Side Durability Test – MPID vs Taser X2

● Field Reparability: One of the most highly anticipated features of the Karbon MPID is that it is designed to be field repairable by a certified Armorer. The MPID is a precision electronic instrument using patented technology divided into three main components. These components are pre-programed and are not able to be altered by the armorer. In the event an agency chooses to have Karbon Arms replace the faulty component we will do so with an expedient turn around time.

Taser’s negative comments on a True Armorers Course is yet another signal that management does not understand their market and will say anything to keep control over their customers.

● Effectiveness: We recommend comparing our units side by side. Which unit feels like a solid tool for use day in and day out? Which unit has greater lockup? It will quickly become apparent that Taser has lied about many aspects of the Karbon MPID. If it didn’t work so well, then Taser wouldn’t feel the need to take the time to create their attack propaganda.

● Quality Control: Throughout the assembly process of the MPID every unit and component is tested several times to ensure company policy related to safety, quality and functionality. Because of our strict quality measures we are able to offer a three-year warranty included with every MPID purchase.

Batteries: Karbon Arms uses off the shelf batteries as a cost effective way to limit the strain on a department’s ECD maintenance budget. This also provides flexibility in sourcing batteries, reducing downtime. Taser’s X26 uses battery packs consisting of two standard 123 batteries which they sell for approximately $35 (cost data received from agency feedback).

● On / Off Switch: Karbon Arms has completed extensive market research while developing their rugged non slip on / off switch. The location and ease of use was a deliberate action derived from direct feedback of the law enforcement community. Existing users and departments upgrading to the MPID prefer the location and durability of the ambidextrous on off switch. Karbon heard feedback from the community about the poor durability of a toggle safety. Additionally, Karbon wanted to place a safety not where common muscle memory of a firearm is located

● Spark Test: Karbon’s innovative technology does not require spark testing. The on-board microcomputer maintains the required charge in specific capacitors to keep the integrity of the unit and internal clock accurate. This is to save departments time and money. However, it is encouraged for an agency to comply with their protocol as they see fit.

Other ECD’s on the market have outdated technology and need to perform spark testing to ensure the reliability of the unit on a daily basis. Another concern departments have is the liability they may face by not spark testing, this will result in an out of spec unit. An out of spec deployment may violate the manufacturer’s policy causing concerns of legally support if needed.

● Medical Safety: Medical safety is always a concern with the use of all ECD technology. The Karbon MPID was developed using all publicly available research on safety and efficacy. “There are many indexed and peer-reviewed papers that conclude that for medical safety the device’s delivered charge per pulse is what really matters.” (Source: Taser International)

○ The output of the Karbon MPID was independently verified by Dr. John G. Webster Dept. of Biomedical Engineering Dept. University of Wisconsin. His study concluded that the MPID delivers 20-30 microcoulombs (μC) per pulse, at a pulse rate of approximately 100 pulses per second for an average rectified current of 1.5-2 milliamperes (mA). This is less than half of Taser’s stated output for the x2 and about 25% of the x26. For an in depth analysis detailing the electrical charge delivered by the Karbon Arms MPID, Taser® X2 and X26’s please see the related document.

○ St. Josephs Medical study, Assessment of the Physiological and Cardiac Rhythm Effects Following Deployment of a Karbon MPID Electronic Immobilization Device in a Swine Model was performed with the oversight by a board certified cardiologist. The results of the study show no evidence of heart block, ventricular arrhythmia, no significant changes in vital signs or enzymes that would indicate physiological changes related to the Karbon event.[2]

○ To our knowledge, Taser has not released any peer reviewed medical studies for the X2.

○ While the St. Josephs medical study did not show effects of pacing the heart, Taser claims the MPID does. However, there are many medical studies performed on the x26 that show pacing caused by the Taser device. In 2008, Andrew Dennis et al completed a similar study titled “Taser X26 discharges in swine: ventricular rhythm capture is dependent on discharge vector” showing “for most transcardiac vectors, Taser X26 caused immediate ventricular rhythm capture.” If they believe their marketing representations then Taser should recall the x26.

○ Many of Tasers studies are completed by parties who are less than independent. Dr. Kroll and has benefitted significantly from Taser stock sales.


● Financial strength: The financial strength of Karbon Arms comes from its rapid growth and continued success of sales alongside committed investing institutions including a substantial equity firm.

● Litigation Support & Liability Coverage: Karbon Arms understands the importance of having an experienced litigation team and experts for support. Karbon can provide an extensive legal support team along with access to necessary experts if the need arises. Due to Karbon’s numerous resources and multiple medical studies related to ECD technology, we know that in the event of litigation our ability to provide support exceeds the industry expectations.

○ Many departments looking to Rick Smith CEO of Taser International for legal support may be disappointed to find out they have been misled. Our understanding is that if Taser is not named in the lawsuit, you may be left out in the cold.

○ Taser has been the defendant in numerous lawsuits resulting in multimillion dollar verdicts in the favor of the plaintiff. Taser gets sued so often that it has they actually pitch it as a core competency. This legal track record is a liability in which all departments, agencies and individuals should be mindful of when partnering with Taser® and their devices. The facts are that 755 individuals have died after the use of a Taser® and the court jury verdicts are split at 50%. These courtroom decisions and private party settlements have become a pattern with Taser International and it is cause for concern among the law enforcement community.

○ North Carolina Jury Verdict determines Taser’s poor training to be responsible for death.

Bottom line: Try our Karbon MPID, compare its features and come to your own conclusions.

Disclosure: All of the information provided is based on research completed by Karbon Arms, LLC. We welcome any feedback to contradict any points made on this page.



i “My personal view is I think we’ve got a stronger shot at the upgrade cycle with this transition that we did with the last one.” Rick Smith, CEO Taser International when discussing the launch of the X3.

ii &

(Taser International, Taser, x26, x2, x3,, xrep, the protector are trademarks owned by Taser International)

Comments are closed.