First, they attached the metal probes to my hip, and to my sneaker. Then, two men grabbed my forearms, in case I fell over. After a deep breath and a final look, I gave the thumbs-up. That’s when Taser International chairman and co-founder Tom Smith blasted me with his latest stun gun, the X3.

It was brutal – like sticking your finger in a socket over and over and over again. I screamed in pain as he zapped me. I screamed some more after it was over. Then I cursed, and put my fingers to the bridge of my nose. “Kind of like hitting a funny bone,” Smith said. “Like a good workout.” Uh, not exactly. Five hours later, I was still tingling.

By the company’s estimate, Taser-wielding police and troops have blasted more than 750,000 men, women and children. On average, they received a five-second shock. Which means I got off relatively easy: Mine was just a one-second blast, at 19 pulses per second. The X3 can fire up to three sets of probes into a single target, generating 57 pulses per second. The company’s XREP wireless, shotgun-fired projectile can keep shocking for as long as 20 seconds. I guess there must be someone out there tough enough or crazy enough to take on that much punishment.

What I keep wondering is: Who would inflict that kind of pain? And under what circumstances? We all know that our tools change our behavior. Give us cars, and we’ll go new places; give us iPhones, and we’ll check our e-mail way more often. So when we hear stories about grandmothers and kids and handcuffed prisoners and even runaway sheep getting tased, I asked Smith, what does that say about the stun gun’s impact?

He and his colleagues gently ducked the question, saying it was up to individual police forces and military units to teach their troops how and when to use the electroshock weapons. “All we can do is build in as many features as we can think of,” said Brian Beckwith, vice president of product development.

“Any new tool has to have good policy and good training,” Smith said. His VP of public relations, Peter Holran, added, “You’re not just going to give someone a BlackBerry and expect them to use it.”

My colleague Steven Levy then asked about that 72-year-old Texas woman who was tased during a traffic stop. “I felt it was justified,” Smith replied. “Just because she was 72 doesn’t mean she wasn’t strong,” one his associates answered.

Levy then tried to determine how old a lady has to be before she’s considered ineligible for zapping. Holran took it as an accusation. He said angrily that “we can’t change the U.S. Constitution.” After another minute or two, the question was repeated. Smith said there was no upper age — or a lower one, for that matter. The only guidance the company gives cops and soldiers is not to use the stun guns on pregnant women, or people with heart conditions or epileptics. Which seemed to me a less-than-satisfactory answer.

Used right, Tasers save lives, disabling targets instead of shooting them dead. But the shock weapons aren’t always a firearm substitute. Tasers are also employed in all kinds of situations in which an officer would never even consider pulling out his pistol. When that happens, people often get blasted.

And trust me, it hurts.

[Photo: Shelley DuBois]