songfourone

California Considering Unprecedented Law Restricting Police Firearm Use

103 posts in this topic

“We should no longer be the target practice of a ‘shoot first, ask questions later’ police force,” Assemblyman Christopher Holden (D) said, before listing the names of several other unarmed black victims of police shootings. 

 

The legislation is aimed at tackling the reality, as seen in studies, that police kill unarmed black men at disproportionate rates compared to unarmed white men. Supporters of the bill hope raising the standard for when lethal force is permitted will encourage officers to make de-escalation their first line of defense.

The current standard comes from an “over-100-year-old law that too often justifies deadly force incidents,” McCarty said.

In the weeks since Clark’s death, McCarty’s district has been stormed by protestors furious about the emerging details surrounding the shooting. Upward of 300 demonstrators gathered in Sacramento last Friday after an autopsy revealed the young father was shot at least seven times in the back in his own backyard.  

“It’s clear that the current law protects the police, not the people,” ACLU legislative advocate Lizzie Buchen said at Tuesday’s announcement as activists recounted similar shooting incidents involving police.

Weber is confident the state can pave the way on this issue. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About damn time! All you Wyatt Earp, Pat Garrett, Bill Tilghman, William “Dave” Allison, John Hicks Adams, and John Barclay Armstrong types out there, trade in your blue and fill out those Home Depot and Safeway applications!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see how they define “only when necessary” and how they distinguish that from “when reasonable”.

If I’m a cop in California, I’m concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great idea. Can't wait to see how it turns out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just ahead of the curve, as expected from one the most prosperous and progressive states in the nation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lombardi6 said:

Great idea. Can't wait to see how it turns out.

Another case for "The Big One;" the price of beachfront property in  western Nevada and Arizona just skyrocketed! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I would share this article...it is a bit more indepth.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/california-proposal-would-limit-when-officers-can-open-fire/ar-AAvpHfk?ocid=spartandhp

Some quotes:

The legislation would change the standard from using "reasonable force" to "necessary force."    Man this has law suit written all over it. 

That means officers would be allowed to shoot only if "there were no other reasonable alternatives to the use of deadly force" to prevent imminent serious injury or death, said Lizzie Buchen, legislative advocate for the American Civil Liberties Union, which is among the groups behind the measure.

The tougher proposed standard could require officers to delay confronting a suspect they fear may be armed until backup arrives or force police to give explicit verbal warnings that suspects will be killed unless they drop the weapon," said Buchen of the ACLU.

Officers already use deadly force only when necessary and are taught to try to defuse dangerous situations first when possible, said Ed Obayashi, a Plumas County sheriff's deputy and special prosecutor who trains officers and testifies in court on police use of force.

Tinkering with legal protections for police could make it more difficult to hire officers and be dangerous because they may hesitate when confronting an armed suspect, threatening themselves and bystanders, Obayashi said.

 

While I admit that there have been way too many questionable shootings. This type of legislation will do nothing but reduce the cops to 'bag and tag'. If you have to go through a protocol check list every time you are involved with a potential criminal....frankly I see cops just walking away so to speak. Why dirty you hands and possibly screw up your career.

I am sure  the lawyers for 'shooting victims and their families are already warming up the 'Lawyer Lotto' Machine. 

What I find interesting....is that....hardly anyone here acknowledged that Stephon Clark was by no means a choir boy and had a rather lengthy rap sheet. Including spousal abuse. Did anyone here ever stop to think that this guy was a problem ....then knew about his arrests, his track record, his short fuse and violent temper?

How is it that all gets over-looked.... that the cops may have had every right in the world to be nervous dealing with this guy. 

If this goes through....and being the left coast it will.....I see the state hurting for enforcement officers in no time. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its hard to recruit new officers now, I'm sure this will help and we'll get a fine new crop of officers such as Baltimore's Gun Squad guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Guido2 said:

I thought I would share this article...it is a bit more indepth.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/california-proposal-would-limit-when-officers-can-open-fire/ar-AAvpHfk?ocid=spartandhp

Some quotes:

The legislation would change the standard from using "reasonable force" to "necessary force."    Man this has law suit written all over it. 

That means officers would be allowed to shoot only if "there were no other reasonable alternatives to the use of deadly force" to prevent imminent serious injury or death, said Lizzie Buchen, legislative advocate for the American Civil Liberties Union, which is among the groups behind the measure.

The tougher proposed standard could require officers to delay confronting a suspect they fear may be armed until backup arrives or force police to give explicit verbal warnings that suspects will be killed unless they drop the weapon," said Buchen of the ACLU.

Officers already use deadly force only when necessary and are taught to try to defuse dangerous situations first when possible, said Ed Obayashi, a Plumas County sheriff's deputy and special prosecutor who trains officers and testifies in court on police use of force.

 

What I find interesting....is that....hardly anyone here acknowledged that Stephon Clark was by no means a choir boy and had a rather lengthy rap sheet. Including spousal abuse. Did anyone here ever stop to think that this guy was a problem ....then knew about his arrests, his track record, his short fuse and violent temper?

How is it that all gets over-looked.... that the cops may have had every right in the world to be nervous dealing with this guy. 

 

 

Because that is "smearing" and "blaming" the "victim"   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ericpd said:

About damn time! All you Wyatt Earp, Pat Garrett, Bill Tilghman, William “Dave” Allison, John Hicks Adams, and John Barclay Armstrong types out there, trade in your blue and fill out those Home Depot and Safeway applications!  

Eric.... any cop....even the best of the best....if in the wrong place at the wrong time.....could become an Earp.

You and I as cops know...that criminals do NOT...give you time to 'figure out' things. And I am sure you know the saying " I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6'

IMHO...if this bill goes through....which it likely will. I see a lot of cases....where the cops are chancing a bad guy like this one....he knows they can't do anything...he runs behind a house...and the cops say 'screw it'....and just him go...fill out some paperwork ....and pretend to be cops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Saticon3 said:

its hard to recruit new officers now, I'm sure this will help and we'll get a fine new crop of officers such as Baltimore's Gun Squad guys.

I can't decide if you are  contradicting yourself or you are being sarcastic or both. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Calamari said:

Just ahead of the curve, as expected from one the most prosperous and progressive states in the nation.

 

The land of strange progresess continues its downward spiral. Maybe next they will propose the Barney Fife rule - each cop can only have one bullet and it must be kept in his shirt pocket. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MiddleOfTheRoad said:

It will be interesting to see how they define “only when necessary” and how they distinguish that from “when reasonable”.

If I’m a cop in California, I’m concerned.

If I am a cop in California....I am working on my resume. 

California thinks they have a crime problem now.....wait till the 'policing by driving by'....starts if the bill is passed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

12 minutes ago, Saticon3 said:

Because that is "smearing" and "blaming" the "victim"   

Yes.....do go on believing that.....Dorothy. 

Please explain to me....how telling or posting the truth about this guy is smearing. It is his track record....he is a known problem....don't you think the cops knew that?

How is it OK for some to 'smear' cops by calling them Earp.....even ones that never pulled a trigger....yet.... pointing out what may make a cop not hestate to shoot....that is the thugs background is not OK ...and smearing?

To funny.

But when everything is agenda driven....I can see how you overlook such things. 

Edited by Guido2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should issue them white iPhones instead of guns.

:unsure:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Hollywood can come up with real Star Trek phasers for the cops to use. But then the criminals will get a hold of some and use them to stun would be assailants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure California will soon ban police officers. Good luck with that, by the way. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this reminds me of Roger Hayden when he floated the ideas of putting firefighters line of duty injury into a workers comp. issue just like highways, and rec.Parks dept. Fire and Police get full pay automatically when they are ILD that doesn’t count against their sick time. He quickly changed his mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The proposed legislation would change the guidance in California’s use of force laws so that police may open fire ”‘only when necessary’ rather than ‘when reasonable,’”

I think that police officers are already trained to go by the "when necessary" standard, because it's part of the existing "when reasonable" standard.

Also, it's just two legislators who have proposed this change. There's no indication that it's going anywhere in the legislative process.

Police officers are vulnerable to being shot at in certain encounters with suspected criminals. They need to be able to respond with deadly force when it's necessary and reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

California wants to change their legal standard from the “reasonable force” rule to “necessary force,” according to the Associated Press. They define "necessary force" as force used when “there were no other reasonable alternatives to the use of deadly force.”

Quote

 

This initially seems close to the old standard, as they both require reasonableness. However, it does not allow for the officers to use force based on how circumstances appear to them at the time. Instead, it allows the officer to be judged in hindsight if the force was actually necessary.

For example, if a suspect pulls a pellet gun on an officer, they are not actually presenting a deadly threat. The officer would have no reasonable way to know that the gun isn't a lethal firearm, but under the new law, they could be charged if they shoot that suspect.

This law would also appear to apply if somebody pulled an unloaded gun on an officer, or drew a malfunctioning gun. In these circumstance, unbeknownst to the officer, the suspect is not actually presenting a deadly threat. If the officer reasonably responds by shooting that person, they could be criminally charged.  This is why the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled, "The 'reasonableness' of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight."

 

What a "progressive" state.  Or just another example of why CA is a s-hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2018 at 7:25 AM, Saticon3 said:

its hard to recruit new officers now, I'm sure this will help and we'll get a fine new crop of officers such as Baltimore's Gun Squad guys.

Raise standards, increase pay. Better caliber of cop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

Raise standards, increase pay. Better caliber of cop.

Raise standards?  Full body kevlar uniforms maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/3/2018 at 10:16 PM, ericpd said:

About damn time! All you Wyatt Earp, Pat Garrett, Bill Tilghman, William “Dave” Allison, John Hicks Adams, and John Barclay Armstrong types out there, trade in your blue and fill out those Home Depot and Safeway applications!  

Do you think bad cops will change because of this? Or will it cause them to stick together and back up each other’s story?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

Raise standards, increase pay. Better caliber of cop.

Yes, they should be able to demonstrate at least a rudimentary grasp of civics before being considered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mrdeltoid said:

Do you think bad cops will change because of this? Or will it cause them to stick together and back up each other’s story?

How would that be any different from what happens today?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now