San Francisco Two Bullet Rule

[Glenn E. Meyer]

http://www.courthousenews.com/2016/02/18/sf-police-told-to-shoot-twice-stop.htm


SAN FRANCISCO (CN) - Responding to calls for reform after a fatal police shooting, the San Francisco Police Department on Wednesday unveiled new training methods that require officers to shoot only two rounds at a time.
The changes came more than two months after five officers shot 26-year-old Mario Woods 21 times on Dec. 2 last year. Woods' death led to a federal review of the city's police department.
New pistol training guidelines require police recruits to hear the command "threat" before they fire at targets, to shoot only two rounds at a time, and to stop and reassess threats after every two shots.

There's a Washington Post story behind a pay wall.

[Hambo]

It includes this little gem as well.


Another new policy demands that all sworn officers take an additional eight-hour class on how to handle suspects with blades and other non-firearm weapons.

It's going to get rough when we neuter all the cops.

[pablo]

What happens when someone gets shot twice, the lawsuit gets filed, and the department can't prove that the second shot was necessary?

The ghetto lottery jackpot just got a little bigger.

[LSP552]

Idiots, simply idiots. But we knew that already!

[Tamara]

This is going to end poorly.

[JR1572]

This is so stupid.

JR1572

[Failure2Stop]

I can't believe that any sane person lives in California these days.

[Ntexwheels]

The sheer stupidity of this leaves me speechless!

[voodoo_man]

I can't believe that any sane person lives in California these days.

There aren't any.

[luckyman]

Family is the only reason for me

[Trooper224]

I've got family and in-laws in California. They're on their own, because I'm never going back.

[WobblyPossum]

Some poor officer is going to fire twice, lower his/her weapon prematurely on a suspect not immediately incapacitated by two rounds, and get shot by the suspect while assessing. This article makes my brain hurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hambo]

The way I see it the SF coppers have two options.

1-The rule says you have to evaluate after two rounds but it doesn't say how long that evaluation has to be. BOOMBOOM, very brief pause, BOOMBOOMBOOM.

2-Roll out and ignore all crime that might lead to a shooting.

[Chuck Haggard]

I'd be going straight to the Jeff Cooper two shots, evaluate, head shot paradigm.................

[JM Campbell]

I'd be going straight to the Jeff Cooper two shots, evaluate, head shot paradigm.................
Hmmmm, sounds like a class we were in.

HiTS First Responder, good times.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[GJM]

Next iteration is two round magazines.

[PD Sgt.]

I would predict a massive decline in proactive policing in 3-2-1.... This is probably one of the worst decisions by a police administration regarding force and officer safety I can recall. Ever.

Additionally, while I am not familiar at all with the CA state mandated pistol qual for LE, I imagine it has strings longer than two shots. I wonder if these clowns will now require officers to execute this evaluative pause on the course in order to "train like they fight."

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Same vein:

http://www.policeone.com/use-of-force/articles/76233006-Why-the-LAPDs-Preservation-of-Life-medal-is-dangerous-for-cops?nlid=&utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Exclusives1RightTitle&utm_campaign=P1Member&cub_id=usr_JCXKTWSfd2lLdh8V

Seems a California thing. Anyway - Bond Arms in TX might compete for derringer contracts in CA?

There is a real issue here but are the discussions more driven by politics?

[Dagga Boy]

There is a ton of "wrong" to go around. First and foremost....every single shot fired by not only by a police officer, but every single law abiding person in America when using justifiable lethal force should be evaluated and assessed.....every single one. People have been on the "burn the witch" philosophy with how we run our program because we have tried to address issues with how people are trained. This includes, a heavy emphasis on shooting far faster than you can assess and react, running muzzles over non shoots with no penalty or care, shooting every time a gun is out of the holster, shooting till empty, lack of an emphasis on emotional control, teaching programs based on panic and fear, no emphasis on post shooting conduct and habit building, etc. Well, this is the result, and it is predictable. On the other side, we have a total failure of leadership of most police departments and government politicians and mangers to properly train police officers for proper application of force, and especially lethal force. The idea that some manger or lawyer can write down a response in a policy that flies totally in the face of what is reasonable from a use of force standpoint, and either impossible or train, or typically a total refusal to train is despicable.

Most know we train with limited round shooting, immediate movement to the head with a failure to stop (no lowering of the firearm as originally taught), heavy emphasis on hits to vital areas and a heavy emphasis on accountability and responsibility for every single round fired. We know for a fact this works to keep officers not only accountable, but highly successful when lethal force is used. Unfortunately...it requires a good degree of dedication and work from all parties involved....leadership, training staff, and line officers. The failure to dedicate to that work really lies at the feet of supervision, both political and administrative. These are usually the first to abdicate their responsibility.

This SF policy will be a total failure. This is a result of decades of failure. This stuff places all the responsibility in the wrong place. By the way, SFPD has a very good firearms staff, both line and their supervisor. Unfortunately, they have a total fricking disaster for leadership and management at the highest levels, and their politicians are essentially criminal in their conduct.

I volunteer at a rural department to run a firearms program for a group or their officers. I had an incident yesterday with an officer that puts a spotlight on all that is wrong with LE training. It was his first day with us. He could not do a tactical reload, something we mandate prior to holstering post shooting. His gear was set up wrong (Pincus would have been proud), he was a disaster with all reloads, and had some serious issues with other fundamentals. This is a very experienced solid cop. He came from a very large department to this small agency as sort of a last job before retirement. Great guy who has been a victim of crap training. We talked about various issues, and I am always interested in where they come from as this guy was a gigantic training scar. The issue with how to do reloads...every place he has worked (both huge and small) do annual qualification with no real training after the academy. His prior place always shot till empty before reloading. Essentially, he has been forced to shoot till empty everytime he has been at the range since the academy. What sort of scar do you think that leaves? Once they go empty, reloads are done almost administratively. Emphasis was only on "passing". Guy has never been taught about things like "grip" or "follow through". He shot well enough to hit a gigantic silhouette most of the time. He was considered "a good shooter" because he could simply qualify with a passing score once a year on a course where you shot till empty every time the gun came out of the holster and 70% of the rounds hit the gigantic silhouette. This is why we have horrific issues with how police apply lethal force.

[Erick Gelhaus]

Nyeti & I were typing at the same time if there is any overlap.


Additionally, while I am not familiar at all with the CA state mandated pistol qual for LE, I imagine it has strings longer than two shots. I wonder if these clowns will now require officers to execute this evaluative pause on the course in order to "train like they fight."

Outside of the academy setting, there is no single state mandated qual in California L/E. Reading the local articles on this it doesn't appear to just be in qualification, it looks to be any string of fire. So, not three rounds to the body or a Bill Drill or ... you can create your own drill that would not meet this standard.

Chuck, my recollection of the story is when Jeff Cooper started teaching the Mozambique it was two shots to the chest, lower the pistol & assess, then come back up for the head shot. A short time later, some active & experienced guys from L.A. came back with the modification of two rounds to the chest, assess by seeing what was or wasn't behind the front sight at that point, and go to the head if necessary.

From the bad days of shoot two & holster ... Had a co-worker who was dealing with a scissor weilding mentally ill subject. It deteriorated to deadly force. He fired two rounds and holstered then she stabbed him. He had to draw & fire another two rounds to end it.

There are other himan factor issues that I'm not sure were even considered wit this ... hit rates under stress, amygdala hi-jack, inability to count rounds, etc.

Legally, the idea of any set number of rounds being unreasonable on its face should have been buried and forgotten after Plumhoff v. Rickard (570_US, 2013). Now, when an officer fires a third round for any number of reasons there may well be legal issues for the officer (first & foremost) and the agency over this.

[SLG]

We all know this is silly, pushed by people who need help crossing the street safely.

However, it really isn't a problem, as there are plenty of reasonable ways to avoid the problems this idea creates.

[Gadfly]

Legally, the idea of any set number of rounds being unreasonable on its face should have been buried and forgotten after Plumhoff v. Rickard (570_US, 2013). Now, when an officer fires a third round for any number of reasons there may well be legal issues for the officer (first & foremost) and the agency over this.

I had to look up the case... But you are right, the SCOTUS decision was unanimous and clear.
-----------------
The justices also concluded that the officers did not fire more shots than necessary to end the public safety risk. As explained by the Court, it “stands to reason that, if police officers are justified in firing at a suspect in order to end a severe threat to public safety, the officers need not stop shooting until the threat has ended.”

[The Apprentice]

I feel bad for all you guys in law enforcement. This is what happens when bureaucrats sit around and ask how can we stop this from ever happening again. They are to arrogant to addmit that all the rules in the world cant because people are human and some make bad decisions.

[Hauptmann]

Who wants to bet that we will have some departments going back to revolvers in the near future?

[JV_]

There is a huge/growing number of people that think our LE should be taking hints from (unarmed) UK cops. I've lost count on the number of people who've said that we shouldn't be shooting aggressive people with knives, bats, etc. They want more of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cznNf2LUk74

[AMC]

Hello, all. I discovered this Forum doing some research on the publicly available news/responses to this disaster. I'm interested because I'm affected. As in I work there....for the department in question. I've never been a member of an internet forum before, but it seems like there are some knowledgeable folks here, so.....It's actually much worse than that article makes it seem. Our new draft General Orders on Use-of-force and Firearms were submitted last week to our Police Commission. They are not approved yet, but they are already being taught at the Academy and the Range as if they were official policy. They are essentially cut-and-paste versions of the recommendations from the recent PERF report on Use-of-Force reforms. Our Chief has literally taken over and is dictating firearms training policy to the Range staff. Most strings of fire are actually ONE round at a time, then assess (usually 10-15 seconds). He is trying to ELIMINATE any use of the Failure Drill ("assassination"). There are NO TIME LIMITS past 7 yards on his new qual. In the last 2 years we've gone from a twice a year 50 round qual (absolutely no other firearms training), to a twice a year 37 round qual, to now Once a year 40 rounds. That qualification (70% passing, no time limits) is now followed by 8 hours of deescalation training and less-lethal training). Our union leadership is making angry sounds, and I've volunteered for our own Use-of-Force Committee, but our Union leadership are High School buddies of the chief, so....Anyway. I'm going to try to solicit outside expert opinions and responses to these policies for the Association to have on hand, which hopefully they will use.

[SLG]

AMC,

Welcome!

Move. :-)

Seriously, there are plenty of other departments out there, some of which actually want you to do well and retire healthy. Why stay with people who obviously don't care about you at all? I've lived and worked all over the country pretty much. Lots of nice places in America.

[Dagga Boy]

AMC...your union needs to quit doing whatever they are doing and focus on these issues. If they are so politicized that they won't do the hard work of votes of no confidence, lawsuits, etc. Then the board needs a vote of no confidence and replacement. If nobody gives a crap about fixing it, and just want to wait for some poor street copper to get fanged, then I would be looking hard to lateral to anywhere else. Heck, lateral to the sanitation department if you can't get out. The only way things will change is when they cannot get anyone to work as a cop there..the current ones don't work, and the citizens get the policing they deserve....which is none at this point.

[LtDave]

I would predict a massive decline in proactive policing in 3-2-1.... This is probably one of the worst decisions by a police administration regarding force and officer safety I can recall. Ever.

Additionally, while I am not familiar at all with the CA state mandated pistol qual for LE, I imagine it has strings longer than two shots. I wonder if these clowns will now require officers to execute this evaluative pause on the course in order to "train like they fight."

California has no standard or mandated qualification courses. Each agency sets their own. Causes some issues with Leosa quals for retired folks.

[Kyle Reese]

There is a huge/growing number of people that think our LE should be taking hints from (unarmed) UK cops. I've lost count on the number of people who've said that we shouldn't be shooting aggressive people with knives, bats, etc. They want more of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cznNf2LUk74

Plenty of armed police in the UK, and they shoot perps armed with knives and other weapons.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JV_]

Plenty of armed police in the UK, and they shoot perps armed with knives and other weapons. Yes, there are plenty of unarmed ones too, they want to focus on the unarmed ones. Their argument generally revolves around people not being a lethal threat if their 20-30' away and "only have a knife". I don't even know where to start with sometimes.

[AMC]

To SLG and Nyeti.....don't think I don't think of leaving. Every single day. But I've got 24 years in, our retirement system is not transferable, and I have immediate family members with health issues. Idaho looks better and better by the second. One of the problems in our department is the culture is very insular...think inbred. The command staff and training staff are all part of the same poor training we've had for decades. They don't know what they don't know. When I came in 24 years ago I was issued a Model 28 Highway Patrolman (damn I wish I'd bought it when we converted to semiautos!), and qualified 4 times a year on a PPC based course. When we transitioned to autos (Beretta 96G) that became twice a year. As of last month it's now once a year, 40 rounds, because that's the minimum Ca POST requires. They literally called POST and asked what the minimum they could get away with was. Our chief is anti-training (he once told me "Hey, you wanna learn to do this job you need to get out there and make some arrests. This training stuff is just BS you're never gonna use!"), and unfortunately our POA leadership is of the same mentality. They know the new policies are crazy, but don't know what to do about it. We've got the Academy teaching Memphis Model CIT to the recruits now, but teaching them "Ya know, people waving knives and baseball bats are probably only dangerous to themselves!" Quoted by the Lt. in charge to a local TV reporter.

[Talionis]

Idaho looks better and better by the second.

You'd fit right in up here. I know quite a few retired California cops that made their escape to the free world.

[Hauptmann]

You'd fit right in up here. I know quite a few retired California cops that made their escape to the free world.

Lets hope that cross state freedom lasts. Plan B for me is retirement in an alternative country. Already scouting some out.

[Gadfly]

AMC, welcome!

We (fed) qual every quarter. We fire our primary course of fire twice (50x2), our back up pistol once (50), and long gun once (50). That is the minimum. Then we throw in other shooting drills that are not scored. Shooting downed and disabled, shooting in the dark, shooting from inside the vehicle, etc. That's just half the day. Second half we do cuffing, baton, OC, room clearing, vehicle extractions, felony stops, or some other training. Every quarter, you are mandated an 8 hour shooting/training day. And if you are struggling, we have two "practice days" per quarter that you can come out and shoot issued ammo all day to help bring up your scores.

I realize we have a better budget than most locals. BUT, all this training has come about because we have lost tens of million in lawsuits. A couple million in ammo and training per year is far cheaper than one $10-$20 million dollar judgment. Training is always cheaper than payouts. And it's safer for your officers.

When you talk to your Union guys, bring up Popow Vs City of Margate.

http://www.patc.com/weeklyarticles/uof_training-liability.shtml

It states that training must be Recent, Relevant, and Realistic. (The three Rs). If you are just standing still, shooting paper that is not a humanoid target, that is NOT realistic training...

I hope it works out for you guys in SF. But I am afraid an officer or two will have to pay for this mess with blood before it's resolved.

[Wendell]

It sounds like the Villaneuva report.


Weapons and ammunition used by Montreal police officers should be reviewed and the ability to shoot three to eight bullets in succession within seconds after the first shot is fired should be not be allowed. (http://globalnews.ca/news/1035117/quebec-coroner-releases-long-awaited-report-into-death-of-fredy-villaneuva/)

<http://globalnews.ca/news/1035117/quebec-coroner-releases-long-awaited-report-into-death-of-fredy-villaneuva/>

[Drang]

BOHICA in WA: HB 2908 - 2015-16 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=2908&year=2015)
Originally

Establishing the joint legislative task force on community policing standards for a safer Washington.
Revised to read

Revised for 1st Substitute: Establishing the joint legislative task force on the use of deadly force in community policing.
FWIW, this is opposed by our gun lobbying organization, but the lemmings in this state can't emulate Commiefornia enough...

[AMC]

Gadfly, I wish to God we had an actual training program like that. As it is, we have a once a year qualification calendar. I'm aware of Popow V. Margate, Graham, Etc. It's hard to explain to outsiders the lack of training and professional education we have here. San Francisco is not a peninsula, it's a pocket universe where they don't think the laws of physics apply. We have a culture of celebrated incompetence. Guys actually kiddingly compete in the "I'm a WAAAY worse shot than you!" area. Our union leadership is unfortunately a product of this environment, so they think it's the norm.. I've been trying to get people to listen to reason for 20 years, unsuccessfully. As for liability for the department/city in a Sec. 1983 Civil Rights action for Failure to Train....they avoid that by settling everything. It's not their money! And no Administrator or politician is going to be held accountable for the easily predicted consequences of the policies they put in place. The public will be told, and will see, that "the cop screwed it up!" Fixing that requires the moral courage to put management on notice beforehand of an existing problem that has inevitable bad consequences, and to do it IN WRITING (preferably email...they can't "misplace" that). So far, that courage has evaded those in a position to do it. Cushy gigs off the street to protect and all. Don't wanna rock that boat!

[L-2]

I intentionally stay away from San Francisco, if I can help it.
AMC, how does the 10-round mag capacity limit apply to off-duty LEOs? I couldn't find San Francisco's actual written law/ordnance regarding such.
It's a shame this "sanctuary city" doesn't apply to those wishing to carry firearms, too.

Getting back to the 2 round rule. I suppose, it can work for you if you were only going to need 1 shot, then you get a free one. It would seem if an even number of rounds is fired, then it could be more easily justified/explained on an after action use of force report. The 2nd or 3rd or 4th set of double-taps could be explained as an evaluation was taken and another double-tap was justified; and again; and again. Whereas if there was an odd number of rounds shot, then whichever odd or 3rd round was shot was against policy, which can be just as bad as against-the-law if it results in discipline, getting fired, or a civil suit due to merely being against a policy which nobody else in the world has.

[AMC]

L-2, as far as the mag capacity limit goes, you're good as an active service LEO. Especially if it's you're department issued weapon. Retired guys are SOL, even if it's a legally possessed pre-ban magazine. They are verbotten except for current LEO's. The one way an active guy might get jammed up is if they are carrying off-duty while working a second job. That would not be in the "course and scope of their duties" under the Municipal Police Code. And believe me, Gascon is looking to jam up a cop. Our Sheriff's Department was actually telling their guys for awhile that they couldn't carry standard mags off duty in the city limits, but they were mistaken. I contacted the Deputy City Attorney who wrote the law, and she said that was neither the wording or the intent of the law. One of our Range Armorers actually worked with her on crafting the law. He told her that it was pointless, counter productive, would not be enforced, and was opposed by the whole police department. He said she looked at him like he was speaking Urdu or something, as in "How is that relevant?"

[AMC]

As for the 2 rounds thing....let's face it, it's gonna get someone killed. It is part and parcel to the psychological conditioning that they are doing with our officers to make them believe that if they use deadly force, they're in big trouble. Plain and simple, they have decided that the political optics of dead and injured cops are preferable to cops shooting criminals. Because dead cops' families, and the families of murdered innocents, don't riot or show up at the chief's house at 6am with a bullhorn. We're hardly unique in this dynamic.....they're just being more open about it here. A few days ago I was discussing this with a Lt. who was involved in a shooting while he was a patrol Sergeant 2 years ago. He's a former SWAT guy, and engaged the suspect at 32 yards.....hitting him multiple times without effect. Transitioned to the head....hit cheek, mouth....no effect. Last shot was to the left eye, which dropped the suspect. But he tried to get up. His thought was "Holy shit, this guy is the Terminator!" Handgun bullets just don't work that well. And to top it off.....Chief directed the range guys to have a new target made which emphasizes "non-lethal" areas to shoot....like the legs and pelvis (???!!!???). He's demanding "Shooting to wound first" be written into policy and training.

[Cookie Monster]

I am not LE.

Seems like the way to game the crazy system would be to shoot everyone in the face and claim you missed the body. Accordingly, you would shoot qualifications so you barely passed and have a spread on the target like buckshot at 50 yards while on your 1000 days of dry practice regime you work on only 1 inch diamonds.

Thanks to you LE folks for all you do, know us smart, rational folks on PF support you.

[Kyle Reese]

As for the 2 rounds thing....let's face it, it's gonna get someone killed. It is part and parcel to the psychological conditioning that they are doing with our officers to make them believe that if they use deadly force, they're in big trouble. Plain and simple, they have decided that the political optics of dead and injured cops are preferable to cops shooting criminals. Because dead cops' families, and the families of murdered innocents, don't riot or show up at the chief's house at 6am with a bullhorn. We're hardly unique in this dynamic.....they're just being more open about it here. A few days ago I was discussing this with a Lt. who was involved in a shooting while he was a patrol Sergeant 2 years ago. He's a former SWAT guy, and engaged the suspect at 32 yards.....hitting him multiple times without effect. Transitioned to the head....hit cheek, mouth....no effect. Last shot was to the left eye, which dropped the suspect. But he tried to get up. His thought was "Holy shit, this guy is the Terminator!" Handgun bullets just don't work that well. And to top it off.....Chief directed the range guys to have a new target made which emphasizes "non-lethal" areas to shoot....like the legs and pelvis (???!!!???). He's demanding "Shooting to wound first" be written into policy and training.

You guys have my sympathy. Shots to the legs and pelvic girdle region are far from "non-lethal", as you know, and incorporating such tripe into agency policy will get good cops hurt & killed.

[Dagga Boy]

As for the 2 rounds thing....let's face it, it's gonna get someone killed. It is part and parcel to the psychological conditioning that they are doing with our officers to make them believe that if they use deadly force, they're in big trouble. Plain and simple, they have decided that the political optics of dead and injured cops are preferable to cops shooting criminals. Because dead cops' families, and the families of murdered innocents, don't riot or show up at the chief's house at 6am with a bullhorn. We're hardly unique in this dynamic.....they're just being more open about it here. A few days ago I was discussing this with a Lt. who was involved in a shooting while he was a patrol Sergeant 2 years ago. He's a former SWAT guy, and engaged the suspect at 32 yards.....hitting him multiple times without effect. Transitioned to the head....hit cheek, mouth....no effect. Last shot was to the left eye, which dropped the suspect. But he tried to get up. His thought was "Holy shit, this guy is the Terminator!" Handgun bullets just don't work that well. And to top it off.....Chief directed the range guys to have a new target made which emphasizes "non-lethal" areas to shoot....like the legs and pelvis (???!!!???). He's demanding "Shooting to wound first" be written into policy and training.

Shoot to wound....you guys need to be on the Chiefs lawn at 0600. Also, a very well written "deliberate Indiffernce" memo needs to be directed to the Chief and the entire upper administration to put them personally on the hook for injuries or death of an officer.

[Erick Gelhaus]

A few days ago I was discussing this with a Lt. who was involved in a shooting while he was a patrol Sergeant 2 years ago. He's a former SWAT guy, and engaged the suspect at 32 yards.....hitting him multiple times without effect. Transitioned to the head....hit cheek, mouth....no effect. Last shot was to the left eye, which dropped the suspect. But he tried to get up. His thought was "Holy shit, this guy is the Terminator!" Handgun bullets just don't work that well.
When your chief promoted that sergeant in spite of the stupidity from mob I was pretty freaking impressed, especially given the actions & behavior of other Bay Area chiefs in similar circumstances. It was obviously misplaced.
... and handgun bullets have never worked that well.


And to top it off.....Chief directed the range guys to have a new target made which emphasizes "non-lethal" areas to shoot....like the legs and pelvis (???!!!???). He's demanding "Shooting to wound first" be written into policy and training.
This is bit rhetorical, but ... can you point me to the statutory or case law that the Chief or the mayor says allows us to routinely use lethal force in an intentionally less than lethal manner? What do your association and city attorneys have to say about that in terms of individual liability?

Your POA had a pretty good showing at that recent office of citizen complaints meeting. Someone from the association may want to call up to Seattle and get some insight on the lawsuit the officers tried to file against the PD, the city, and DOJ over the post-decree changes to their use of force policy.

[AMC]

I have pointed out to the Range Guys that someone should be bringing up the planned inappropriate use of deadly force, and should be notifying the City Attorney. I asked, "Hey, if I'm shooting to wound, not to stop....and I know that It will not likely stop an aggressor....and I'm attempting to use a firearm as a less-lethal, pain-compliance tool.....aren't I kinda committing an aggravated assault with a firearm?" They agreed.....but their bosses don't care. Because they don't believe it will come back on them. As for the City Attorney's fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers and their money....I'm not so sure Dennis Herrera sees the world that way. And to be fair, they're right that the public won't blame them. They'll blame the guy in the blue suit with the gun in his hand. No matter how much money the city loses in lawsuits. And Nyeti.....I agree. But it should come from the training staff or the union, not some Patrol Sergeant who clearly doesn't know anything 'cause he lacks the Magic Red Hat.

[Dagga Boy]

The union should invest I a very well documented deliberate indifference statement. If some Chief wants to be the good idea fairy....may as well make them own financially, and ensure they understand that these things are meant to make them own it personally.

[pablo]

The union should invest I a very well documented deliberate indifference statement. If some Chief wants to be the good idea fairy....may as well make them own financially, and ensure they understand that these things are meant to make them own it personally.

Also emphasize that when the DOJ sues and places a department under consent decree proving a "deliberate indifference" to civil rights violations is a corner stone of the DOJ's case. The city may not care about lawsuit money until it exceeds the budgeted amount, but they should be scared of losing control of the department and the $20+ million a year they have to fork over for oversight.

[L-2]

AMC, thanks for the response. It seems similar to Sunnyvale, CA's law/ordnance. Sunnyvale's City Attorney apparently drafted a letter stating the ordinance didn't apply to an off-duty LEO in its city limits even though the ordinance stated wording, something like, "in the scope and course of the LEO's duties". Well, I'm always carrying outside the house and I seldom carry the issued Glock 17Gen4, but rather one or two of my favorite off-duty guns.

I'll keep this in mind should I need to enter the city/county limits of San Francisco and plan ahead by carrying my 10-rounds-or-less weaponry, which would probably be a G30, G26, or 1911. I don't want to be the one guy who needs to take this issue to court. BTW, I sent an email to the NRA regarding San Francisco, Sunnyvale, and Los Angeles' ordinances with no response from them. I'm sending NRA another email request for info.

If anyone has an internet link to these three cities' mag cap ordinances, as finalized, please post them. Thanks.

[LSP552]

The union should invest I a very well documented deliberate indifference statement. If some Chief wants to be the good idea fairy....may as well make them own financially, and ensure they understand that these things are meant to make them own it personally.

Yes! This!

[Hauptmann]

We inherited a system built by some very smart, common sense thinking people.......now we have some very dumb, borderline mentally unstable people trying to rebuild it their image.

[JV_]

.......now we have some very dumb, borderline mentally unstable people trying to rebuild it their image.

Just for some rough numbers. In 1955 we had about 885,000 (out of 165M ... it's about .54%) people in mental institutions. Today we have about 70K (out of 320M ... it's about .02%) people institutionalized. Where are they now? In the general public or in jail. I'm sure the mental health system is better today, is it that much better? I think many of the societal issues we have today are a direct result of this dangerous game to deinstitutionalize the mentally ill.

[Hambo]

I have pointed out to the Range Guys that someone should be bringing up the planned inappropriate use of deadly force, and should be notifying the City Attorney. I asked, "Hey, if I'm shooting to wound, not to stop....and I know that It will not likely stop an aggressor....and I'm attempting to use a firearm as a less-lethal, pain-compliance tool.....aren't I kinda committing an aggravated assault with a firearm?" They agreed.....but their bosses don't care. Because they don't believe it will come back on them. As for the City Attorney's fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers and their money....I'm not so sure Dennis Herrera sees the world that way. And to be fair, they're right that the public won't blame them. They'll blame the guy in the blue suit with the gun in his hand. No matter how much money the city loses in lawsuits. And Nyeti.....I agree. But it should come from the training staff or the union, not some Patrol Sergeant who clearly doesn't know anything 'cause he lacks the Magic Red Hat.

This would depend on how bad they can fuck you, and how much you can stand to be fucked, but here's an option. Write that question in letter form to everybody. Union, chiefs, range staff, city attorney, safety director, whoever. It the equivalent of throwing a grenade and seeing what you hit, but sometimes having it in writing scares the admin types.

[Tabasco]

L-2, as far as the mag capacity limit goes, you're good as an active service LEO. Especially if it's you're department issued weapon. Retired guys are SOL, even if it's a legally possessed pre-ban magazine. They are verbotten except for current LEO's. The one way an active guy might get jammed up is if they are carrying off-duty while working a second job. That would not be in the "course and scope of their duties" under the Municipal Police Code. And believe me, Gascon is looking to jam up a cop. Our Sheriff's Department was actually telling their guys for awhile that they couldn't carry standard mags off duty in the city limits, but they were mistaken. I contacted the Deputy City Attorney who wrote the law, and she said that was neither the wording or the intent of the law. One of our Range Armorers actually worked with her on crafting the law. He told her that it was pointless, counter productive, would not be enforced, and was opposed by the whole police department. He said she looked at him like he was speaking Urdu or something, as in "How is that relevant?"

On another specific SF question, what about the supposed "hollow point" ban? I read the City Ordnance and it requires SFPD to create a list of banned ammunition. Last time I looked it listed:

Winchester Black Talon; Not produced since 2000.
Hornady TAP; Wouldn't carry it anyway.
Federal "Tactical" vague description which I assume refers to HST or any Federal LE Only labeled ammo.

[L-2]

...
Federal "Tactical" vague description which I assume refers to HST or any Federal LE Only labeled ammo.
Assuming can work in different ways. To protect oneself from any criminal risk of prosecution, one could merely not carry any Federal ammo in that city (or Winchester or Hornady).

If a law is too vague, to the point a reasonable person can't determine what it means, the law is unenforcible and not able to be prosecuted. If HST is one's preferred ammo, then go ahead and carry that ammo in San Francisco unless specifically identified, as "Black Talon" was specific. As "Black Talon" is specific, Winchester's "Ranger" RA9B or any other version or caliber is not specifically listed. I suppose I'd then carry my Winchester Ranger ammo, which is usually what I have been carrying.

We could also do our future defense lawyers a favor should we be in San Francisco off-duty; get into a shooting; and have the foresight to have only brought in 10-round or less mags, loaded with some other brand of ammo, such as Speer. It might be one (or two) less things for our defense attorney from which to defend us.

[AMC]

For L-2 and Tabasco.....you're okay with ammunition and standard capacity mags if you're a currently serving LEO....."Scope and Course of duties" includes off-duty carry according to the city attorney, since you wouldn't be carrying if you weren't a cop here. If you're retired, or a non-sworn citizen...SOL. No standard capacity mags, and no "intended for LE" ammunition. Which currently means no Hornady TAP, no HST, no Ranger...etc. The utterly hypocritical thing about this is as far as we can tell....no crook has ever been prosecuted for these "offenses". Arrested, yes.....but not prosecuted. As it stands, the day I retire will be the last day I visit the city of my birth.

[AMC]

Hambo, that is exactly what I have been trying to convince the Rangemaster and the union to do. If it just came from me, a lowly Patrol Supervisor, it would be ignored in our town. I don't wear the Magic Red Hat, and that's all that counts in Magical Fairy Land. Very "status" conscious, and very impressed with titles. It would literally not even be considered that I have significantly more relevant training and experience than the current Rangemaster....the title is everything in this Giant Outpatient Clinic.

[L-2]

Thanks for clarifying AMC. If I should fully retire, and carry in San Francisco, I'll have to remember to load up with fmj or perhaps some Speer Gold Dot I have laying around as the box doesn't say "For LE Only" on it. With Winchester's PDX1 Defender ammo, I can't tell the difference between that and Ranger just looking at the ammo without the box from which it came.

[L-2]

Oops. My Speer Gold Dot also says for LE/Law Enforcement. That's OK for now. I'm still LE.

[HCM]

I spent 7 years in my Agency's San Francisco Field Office. This sums up my feeling on SF nicely:


http://youtu.be/GoRPVsN2SVM

[Mitchell, Esq.]

Nyeti & I were typing at the same time if there is any overlap.



Outside of the academy setting, there is no single state mandated qual in California L/E. Reading the local articles on this it doesn't appear to just be in qualification, it looks to be any string of fire. So, not three rounds to the body or a Bill Drill or ... you can create your own drill that would not meet this standard.

Chuck, my recollection of the story is when Jeff Cooper started teaching the Mozambique it was two shots to the chest, lower the pistol & assess, then come back up for the head shot. A short time later, some active & experienced guys from L.A. came back with the modification of two rounds to the chest, assess by seeing what was or wasn't behind the front sight at that point, and go to the head if necessary.

From the bad days of shoot two & holster ... Had a co-worker who was dealing with a scissor weilding mentally ill subject. It deteriorated to deadly force. He fired two rounds and holstered then she stabbed him. He had to draw & fire another two rounds to end it.

There are other himan factor issues that I'm not sure were even considered wit this ... hit rates under stress, amygdala hi-jack, inability to count rounds, etc.

Legally, the idea of any set number of rounds being unreasonable on its face should have been buried and forgotten after Plumhoff v. Rickard (570_US, 2013). Now, when an officer fires a third round for any number of reasons there may well be legal issues for the officer (first & foremost) and the agency over this.


ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C.J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined, in which GINSBURG, J., joined as to the judgment and Parts I, II, and III–C, and in which BREYER, J., joined except as to Part III–B–2.

Plumhoff v. Rickard, 134 S. Ct. 2012, 2016, 188 L. Ed. 2d 1056 (2014)


We now consider respondent's contention that, even if the use of deadly force was permissible, petitioners acted unreasonably in firing a total of 15 shots. We reject that argument. It stands to reason that, if police officers are justified in firing at a suspect in order to end a severe threat to public safety, the officers need not stop shooting until the threat has ended. As petitioners noted below, “if lethal force is justified, officers are taught to keep shooting until the threat is over.” 509 Fed.Appx., at 392.Here, during the 10–second span when all the shots were fired, Rickard never abandoned his attempt to flee. Indeed, even after all the shots had been fired, he managed to drive away and to continue driving until he crashed. This would be a different case if petitioners had initiated a second round of shots after an initial round had clearly incapacitated Rickard and had ended any threat of continued flight, or if Rickard had clearly given himself up. But that is not what happened.12 In arguing that too many shots were fired, respondent relies in part on the presence of Kelly Allen in the front seat of the car, but we do not think that this factor changes the calculus. Our cases make it clear that “Fourth Amendment rights are personal rights which ... may not be vicariously asserted.” Alderman v. United States, 394 U.S. 165, 174, 89 S.Ct. 961, 22 L.Ed.2d 176 (1969); see also Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 138–143, 99 S.Ct. 421, 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978). Thus, the question before us is whether petitioners violated Rickard's Fourth Amendment rights, not Allen's. If a suit were brought on behalf of Allen under either § 1983 or state tort law, the risk to Allen would be of central concern.4 But Allen's presence in the car cannot enhance Rickard's Fourth Amendment rights. After all, it was Rickard who put Allen in danger by fleeing and refusing to end the chase, and it would be perverse if his disregard for Allen's safety worked to his benefit.

Plumhoff v. Rickard, 134 S. Ct. 2012, 2022, 188 L. Ed. 2d 1056 (2014)



This '2/assess' policy is giving me a chubby for all the possibilities and I think I need to get admitted to the CA Federal Bar...

[Tabasco]

Oops. My Speer Gold Dot also says for LE/Law Enforcement. That's OK for now. I'm still LE.

If you buy it in 20 round boxes, it says "Personal Protection". Same bullet and loading, how would they tell the difference. Nyeti mentioned on another post that Federal loadings were a big no-no in SF for him on a recent trip. Maybe one of the Barnes copper bullet loads would be the safest. None of them have a Federal, Winchester, or Hornady headstamp and they are safe for the environment too. That's got to count for something. Dicks Sporting Goods usually has them on sale.

[HCM]

If you buy it in 20 round boxes, it says "Personal Protection". Same bullet and loading, how would they tell the difference. Nyeti mentioned on another post that Federal loadings were a big no-no in SF for him on a recent trip. Maybe one of the Barnes copper bullet loads would be the safest. None of them have a Federal, Winchester, or Hornady headstamp and they are safe for the environment too. That's got to count for something. Dicks Sporting Goods usually has them on sale.

You're applying logic to illogical people.

SF is literally through the looking glass. Down is up, black is white. Then add a level of political corruption which would make Huey Long blush.

[paherne]

mispost

[paherne]

AMC, nothing is stopping you from producing a memo to command staff with appropriate citations to show how the PERF stuff is bullshit. Except your career indicator light. There's a reason I am a patrol sergeant after 23 years, when I beat the piss out of folks on tests who now have bars and stars. You don't need a red range hat to start a shitstorm, but you WILL sleep better without the stain of sucking down Admin BS. As to your allusion to high-school stuff, next time I see Greg Suhr at an alumni event, I will give him a piece of my mind about why he is as wrong as can be on this issue (Go 'Cats). I think Marty Halloran is doing a decent job fighting this. This is a cancer, that must be excised. It is supported by neither law, nor good training practices. Yes, I am related to that other Aherne in your department and he does not agree with me or hold my beliefs, that's why he outranks me.

[AMC]

paherne.....sorry, I'm a Rabbit til I die! Crusaders!. I'm a Sergeant after 24 'cause I haven't wanted to go higher. You know how things work here.....title is all that matters. The joke goes..."What's the difference between the Circus and the SFPD? (hint: it's not the animals or the clowns...we have both). Answer: in the Circus, the Trapeze artist doesn't think he can be a Lion Tamer tomorrow because his name finally came up for the Lion Tamer Unit list.....but in the SFPD, that makes sense." I have no problem going Samson in the Philistine Temple on them, but I want it to work. They really do not know what they don't know, and don't like having it pointed out. Marty is trying to do the right thing.....but even he just doesn't know how bad things are.....are close friends are hard to fight with.

[AMC]

Press conference today with the Mayor, Chief, President of The Police Commission and the NAACP announcing the "re-engineering of the use of force". The fix is in. Union President is making noises....but it's pretty clear that's all that will be done. Feel bad for the naive young recruits coming in who are going to try this stuff...and are going to die. Sad. Lots of complaints from older folks.....but no one will put their name on anything. Apparently, some folks "like" the new qualification. They only have to shoot once a year, only 40 rounds, and it's waaaaaaaay easier now! No time limits, no stress! Hey, what's not to like, right? The people of SF are about to be utterly without police protection unlike any American city in 100 years.

[Dagga Boy]

You get the policing you deserve. Having just been there.....San Francisco was unrecognizable to me. My parents lived in the east bay for several,years and pop worked downtown, so I spent a ton of time there. Even with the homeless the city was no worse than the other democratic run Utopias......now.....what a crap hole. I predict once the tourists are regarded as pure food for the zombies, someone will panic. By then it will be too late and it is hard to get the pendulum to swing back with any speed when uber progressives are running the pendulum.
Good luck brother, keep yourself safe and your head down. Remember....just write lots of tickets to white folks and you will be off the radar.

[TheNewbie]

I wonder how Inspector Sledgehammer would fare in the modern SFPD?

[AMC]

Nyeti....it's because there are unfortunately very few San Franciscans living there anymore. We live in Marin, Contra Costa or San Mateo Counties. We were priced out and driven out, and the city is over run by people kicked out of decent society elsewhere. As far as the pendulum goes....some guys are comforting (deluding) themselves with the belief that "it's gone too far! The pendulum has to swing back to us now!" That will not happen in any of our lifetimes. These people are literally immune to feedback from reality. Even death doesn't cure this kind of stupid. I am a 5th generation native, and my town is overrun by 3 year residents writing e-books about "San Francisco's Unique Dining Experiences"! Like they would even know. But you're right, San Francisco is about to undergo the most radical de-policing in American history. And it will never recover.

[Trooper224]

Years ago, while living in Cali, I always enjoyed San Francisco. I've always loved places with their own unique character and San Fran had plenty of that. Some of the peeps may not have been my kind of folk, but they were dong their own thing and I appreciated that. It greatly saddens me to see what urban hippsterism and the tech industry have done to the place.

[AMC]

While I find the hipsters annoying, and some of them are part of the problem, the techie folks are largely bewildered by the insanity, and would like it to change. The problem there is that the city is a very transient place.....people are passing through while they make their fortunes or start their careers. It is not a family friendly town anymore, so no one is putting down roots. People move out when they start a family. Politics here is driven by narcissism and the lowest common denominator. If you riot or protest, your voice is heard. If not, you're ignored. And the politicians are right.....the people complaining are still gonna vote for them.

[Mitchell, Esq.]

I wonder how Inspector Sledgehammer would fare in the modern SFPD?

He was indicted, but never made it to trial. The Justice Department thought it would be too dangerous to actually try to arrest him so once they had the grand jury indictment in hand they mounted a raid but...

It went bad. They all had body cameras, but it was a new model recording on a SD card, but someone forgot the SD cards and...well. You know.

He fired first. 19 rounds of 7.62x54mm (The FBI found a BAR in the armory...) & a grenade later it was all over.

The Team was given commendations & the team leader promoted.

[Hambo]

19 rounds of 7.62x54mm (The FBI found a BAR in the armory...)

I smell a conspiracy.

[HCM]

Speaking of conspiracy and SF politics:

CA anti gun crusader Leland Yee sentenced to 5 years for weapons trafficking conspiracy

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/02/daniel-zimmerman/san-francisco-anti-gun-crusader-leland-yee-sentence-to-5-years-for-gun-running/

Wasn't there a Steven Seagal movie like this?

[Drang]

BOHICA in WA: HB 2908 - 2015-16 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=2908&year=2015)
Originally


Establishing the joint legislative task force on community policing standards for a safer Washington.

Revised to read


Revised for 1st Substitute: Establishing the joint legislative task force on the use of deadly force in community policing.

FWIW, this is opposed by our gun lobbying organization, but the lemmings in this state can't emulate Commiefornia enough...

Per Joe Waldron, our lobbyist in Olympia,

HB 2908 was amended in the Senate Law & Justice Committee today. Our position has changed from “oppose” to “neutral” now that rank-and-file law enforcement officers will be given a voice in the working group. The recommendations of this working group could ultimately lead the legislature to change the rules regarding the use of lethal force by all citizens of Washington.
Timely, because the #BLM crowd is stirring up trouble in Seattle over an OIS.

[rojocorsa]

My [step]grandpa is probably rolling in his grave right now. (He used to be a horse cop around Golden Gate park among other things).

I myself am sad after reading this thread.

[RevolverRob]

Why not just convert back to the old .41 Magnums, load 'em with Silvertips, and call it a damn day? At least if you're going to shoot two then assess...you can hit them with a .41 maggie.

Anyways, I was in San Francisco/East Bay last week for business. It's always such a beautiful place, but it's a beautiful place you have to exercise a lot of caution in. For instance, you have to know the limits of where you can go without issue. I'll probably be working in SF 3-4 months a year for the next 3 years for research reasons and violent crime is always a concern, especially in the East Bay. By contrast to Chicago, police presence in SF/Bay Area is pretty small and limited. Proactive policing? I don't think it has existed there for decades.

-Rob

[rojocorsa]

I wanted to add that I for one don't understand the 'martyrdom' of Mario Woods, considering he stabbed someone else (who was also a person of color and who has now been forgotten or looked over by the media as the real victim). I remember when the incident happened, and then I was out of the country for the holidays, but when I came back I learned that there was a "Day of Remembrance" for this guy.

Maybe I am not the only one that is confused.

[HCM]

Why not just convert back to the old .41 Magnums, load 'em with Silvertips, and call it a damn day? At least if you're going to shoot two then assess...you can hit them with a .41 maggie.

Anyways, I was in San Francisco/East Bay last week for business. It's always such a beautiful place, but it's a beautiful place you have to exercise a lot of caution in. For instance, you have to know the limits of where you can go without issue. I'll probably be working in SF 3-4 months a year for the next 3 years for research reasons and violent crime is always a concern, especially in the East Bay. By contrast to Chicago, police presence in SF/Bay Area is pretty small and limited. Proactive policing? I don't think it has existed there for decades.

-Rob

The liberal wailing and the predecessors of the #BLM killed proactive policing in the Bay area along time ago.

FYI many parts of SF are as bad or worse than the worst parts of East bay. Plus the scum in SF are more mobile and pop up all over the city. There are no actual "safe" or good' area's in SF IME.

[AMC]

Just an update in case anyone is interested.....our POA held a general membership meeting about this. They also filed a "Class 3" grievance with the department over implementation of some of this stuff before it was adopted as policy by the Commission. That's Civil Service Speak for a timeout. Though I think our president is sincerely upset over this crap, he made it clear there are some roads he won't go down...no votes of "No Confidence" in the chief (premature at this point anyway), no "Deliberate Indifference" statements, etc. They made clear to the chief and the commission that they would not accept the policies as written, and will demand arbitration. A question was asked of our General Counsel at the membership meeting along the lines of "If we're at impasse with the city....can they implement the policy pending arbitration?" The answer was "......some of it." The fact is they can implement anything that doesn't impact work hours, compensation rates, or work location/assignment. Which means everything in the proposed policies gets implemented. I thought this was a disingenuous answer at best.

They have transferred a newly promoted Sgt. back to the range to examine policy and training issues. He's a former SWAT/Range Guy/Team Springfield Pro Shooter who was just promoted out of the Range. He was able to convince the chief that guys were gonna get killed...and the chief would be responsible. So, back to twice a year qualifications....no "2 rounds only" crap for now...and the qual is now preceded by a 50 round "warmup shoot". And followed by 4 hours of "de-escalation" training....by someone...somewhere. They haven't figured that part out yet...because there isn't anyone qualified to teach what they're asking for. The chief was adamantly against a full day of firearms training...he is afraid guys with skill will be inclined to use that skill....instead of competent and calm in use of force situations. I asked the new Sgt. if he was willing to fire off flaming memos and emails to burn down the edifice of lies if it comes down to that.....nope. Not gonna do it. Pretty much no one is willing to put their name on anything. At least we have some temporary breathing space now. That's not nothing!

In the mean time.....they have stopped the "2 rounds and assess" qualification for now. They have brought in a former SWAT guy/former Range Officer/former Team Springfield Professional Shooter to re-examine firearms policy. He was just promoted out of the Range a few months before....now he's back. This has created some confusion (meaning total confusion) over who is actually in charge of what at the range....'cause both he and the actual Rangemaster are saying, "Nope...that's his job." He was able to convince the chief, though, that what they were doing would get cops killed....and that unless he was gonna move somewhere after retirement where n

[AMC]

Sorry for the redundant second paragraph....it disappeared on my screen and didn't appear with auto-save. My Windows-Fu is weak.

[rojocorsa]

Well, some good news out of that.


As an aside, I was reading some bullshit article about "smart" guns yesterday, and it mentioned something about Chief Suhr being willing to become a smart gun early adopter if development ever got to that point. Know anything about that AMC?

[AMC]

Yeah, one of these "smart gun" manufacturers (can't remember which one) came out with some prototypes, and supposedly the chief was very enthusiastic about the idea. He pitched it to the range guys, and they pointed out the developer had no track record of manufacturing even conventional firearms, much less "smart guns". Was likely to become a huge financial boondoggle and embarassmant. But, yes....he would like very much to go there. Rumor was a few weeks ago that he floated the idea around the Public Safety Building of a pilot program of officers not carrying firearms....only batons and OC spray. Only some officers, mind you, not everyone. Not yet. They all adamantly deny it now, but I've talked to several people who heard that around HQ. And the sad thing is....there were apparently a few folks willing to try it out. Precious types for whom guns are icky and heavy.....and qualifying two times a year is SO HARD! And think of the promotional opportunities for participating in a paradigm shift for American Law Enforcement!

[L-2]

UPDATE! SFPD's Chief just resigned by Mayor's request (aka, fired).
This, subsequent to another officer-involved fatal shooting of a suspect car thief.

One ref. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/woman-shot-killed-police-san-francisco-39236055

[AMC]

It's been a bad day in SF. There are some "bad facts" around this shooting that haven't come out yet that are gonna make people lose their minds. Had a talk with a few guys interviewed by the DOJ folks for the "collaborative review"......all agree we're gonna be under federal control within a year, if not six months.

[Hauptmann]

It's been a bad day in SF. There are some "bad facts" around this shooting that haven't come out yet that are gonna make people lose their minds. Had a talk with a few guys interviewed by the DOJ folks for the "collaborative review"......all agree we're gonna be under federal control within a year, if not six months.

What ever the "facts" are, the argument that a Federal LEO would have handled the situation more "gently" than a large metropolitan PD LEO is likely bullshit. As a Fed, we operate just as any large state/city agency would. Federal control over state and local agencies would be a disaster for the public in my opinion. The overwhelming centralized bureaucracy that we deal with would cripple the justice system if our methods were used at the city level.

[DacoRoman]

A motivated man with a knife, especially a large knife, is a terrifying thing. Maybe some of these political hacks in LE leadership should watch the video below.

https://youtu.be/75RTkGbiJpk

The action starts at 4:04.

[HCM]

What ever the "facts" are, the argument that a Federal LEO would have handled the situation more "gently" than a large metropolitan PD LEO is likely bullshit. As a Fed, we operate just as any large state/city agency would. Federal control over state and local agencies would be a disaster for the public in my opinion. The overwhelming centralized bureaucracy that we deal with would cripple the justice system if our methods were used at the city level.

DOJ = Attorneys not Fed LEO. AMC is talking about his department coming under control of a federal consent decree via the federal courts and DOJ like the one the Oakland PD operates under - in other words more lawyers.

Nothing good comes of consent decrees. For example https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?20530-CHP-Oakland-CA-for-discussion

[AMC]

HCM is exactly right. I'd be shocked at this point if we escape that. Nothing good will come of it, and it will paralyze the Police Department for decades, but there it is. Meanwhile, as the calls continue for de-escalation and sensitivity training, we continue to fail to train our cops in the actual job skills needed to truly improve performance. No improved firearms or defensive tactics training....no better report writing....no actual tactics training.....no better hiring practices, etc. And crime will continue to rise, and the people will be screaming for the PD to "do something" about it....and we will be totally unable to do so. It's been said before, and it's true....you get the policing you ask for and deserve.

[rojocorsa]

Any updates to this? What the hell will happen with that city?

What does it mean for the rest of us in the region who work and spend time there?

[SansSouci]

This two-shot policy is brilliant...to morons. Cops know that deadly suspects who are shot twice will immediately surrender and stop shooting at cops, right? Platt and Matix in Miami played by politicians' rules, right? Both of those murderers stopped shooting at cops after they were shot twice, didn't they? As long as politicians continue to pander to a dangerous subgroup of our society, cops' lives will be at needless risk. I want a politician with balls. "Yep, that's right. Our cops shot that dirtbag 21 times. That dirtbag shouldn't have tried to murder our cops. In our city, cops go home to their families, and suspects who want to murder cops become property of the corner. Get the hell over it. That's the way it works in our city."

Politicizing of law enforcement is dangerous. Politicians, lawyers (prosecutors and defense), and judges have no clue of law enforcement practices. They sententiously think that they do. But they don't. They weren't on scene of predominant pandemonium, a very real threat of death to a cop, a suspect who has already decided that he's willing to kill a cop, people yelling and screaming, visibility but a prayer, a suspect's homeboys trying to distract a cop whose life's at risk, and a nanosecond decision will determine whether a cop goes home to his family or to a coroner's office, yet months removed, politicians, lawyers, and judges think that they have mystical ability to determine what a cop should have done. B effing S!

I was taught to shoot and keep shooting until a guy wanting to kill me is no longer a threat to my life. I was taught to not die with rounds in my magazine.

Actions have consequences. If politicians expect cops to place their lives needlessly at risk, they can expect cops to react accordingly. Why would a cop confront a suspect who's willing to kill him if he is prevented from neutralizing that threat? After all, it is a suspect who's willing to kill a cop who has forced a cop to use deadly force.

[AMC]

Just to clarify.....the "two bullet" thing has ended. Qualifications are back to twice a year......but down to 37 rounds. You also get a 37 round "warmup shoot" before the qual. Sometimes 12 rounds to work immediate action drills...sometimes not. So, less than 200 rounds a year. They were big on less-lethal deployment.....but supersocks are expensive too....so now only 6 year get fired. They wanna give us net guns....not kidding. The proposed Use-of-Force order contains the terms "sanctity of life" and "preservation of life" more than anything about force. We are also almost out of our qualification targets......they won't let the range order more because they want someone to design a new target with aiming points in the hips, arms and legs instead of the center mass. They want us to actually use firearms as a sort of less-lethal pain compliance tool in this regard. "Shoot 'em in the leg! They'll get the point and give up quick!" This is coming from our administrators, who you would hope would know better. But you'd be wrong.

[Jim Watson]

they want someone to design a new target with aiming points in the hips, arms and legs instead of the center mass. .

Jan Stevenson, a good Alabamian putting out a gunzine in Essex back when a free Englishman might own a pistol, once posted a picture of an Austrian qual target.
It depicted a armed man running across the line of sight/fire, caught in midstride with one foot up.
The scoring area was centered on his bent knee.
John Reese type shooting.

[Totem Polar]

....they won't let the range order more because they want someone to design a new target with aiming points in the hips, arms and legs instead of the center mass. They want us to actually use firearms as a sort of less-lethal pain compliance tool in this regard. "Shoot 'em in the leg! They'll get the point and give up quick!" This is coming from our administrators, who you would hope would know better. But you'd be wrong.

Holy shit

[Randy Harris]

Someone might should tell them that ALL use of a firearm is potentially lethal and you can't less lethally "shoot them just a little bit".....

[DocGKR]

I would like to see the anatomic and physiologic justification used by administrators to suggest firing at the hips, arms, and legs during an encounter where lethal force is justified and required to end a threat to the public.

[Gadfly]

Just to clarify.....the "two bullet" thing has ended.

At least it went away with loss of a blue life...


They wanna give us net guns....not kidding.

Here is the training video.

https://youtu.be/r1JXhSYfLNE

Note how the bad guys patiently poses and awaits net deployment. Note also that the bed guy does not simply stick his arms through the 6" wide gaps in the netting. How compliant of him.

Now, where will SFPD carry the pool skimmer/bad guy holder on their belts?


http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160607/f2b9e23c98e42ad339c9300bcadcc990.jpg

[Dagga Boy]

Good to see that the "Good Idea Fairy" has a direct cleared landing pad and given priority for all things in the Chief's office at the city by the bay.

[HCM]

Just to clarify.....the "two bullet" thing has ended. Qualifications are back to twice a year......but down to 37 rounds. You also get a 37 round "warmup shoot" before the qual. Sometimes 12 rounds to work immediate action drills...sometimes not. So, less than 200 rounds a year. They were big on less-lethal deployment.....but supersocks are expensive too....so now only 6 year get fired. They wanna give us net guns....not kidding. The proposed Use-of-Force order contains the terms "sanctity of life" and "preservation of life" more than anything about force. We are also almost out of our qualification targets......they won't let the range order more because they want someone to design a new target with aiming points in the hips, arms and legs instead of the center mass. They want us to actually use firearms as a sort of less-lethal pain compliance tool in this regard. "Shoot 'em in the leg! They'll get the point and give up quick!" This is coming from our administrators, who you would hope would know better. But you'd be wrong.

Wouldn't a target like that and training to " shoot to wound" be in violation of state POST standards ?

[Lester Polfus]

I predict that agencies within commuting distance of the bay area will see recruiting and initial training costs go down as they hire lots and lots of laterals.

I predict SFPD's training and initial training costs will bleed red as they continue to hire people only to watch them make their bones, and then go off to another agency within a few years. The people who stay will not take the agency in a positive direction.

The job of actually protecting the people of San Francisco will fall to an ever diminishing pool of people who are willing to stay and put up with the bullshit.

Seen it before.

[DocGKR]

Just look at San Jose PD...

[BaiHu]

At least it went away with loss of a blue life...



Here is the training video.

https://youtu.be/r1JXhSYfLNE

Note how the bad guys patiently poses and awaits net deployment. Note also that the bed guy does not simply stick his arms through the 6" wide gaps in the netting. How compliant of him.

Now, where will SFPD carry the pool skimmer/bad guy holder on their belts?


http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160607/f2b9e23c98e42ad339c9300bcadcc990.jpg
Only the Japanese could give us Nanking, tentacle rape (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tentacle_erotica) and then fishnet stockings for criminals. Only California would consider the above...I hope.

ETA: Wow, this really stops them in their tracks: http://www.mlive.com/news/saginaw/index.ssf/2014/04/net_gun_will_tangle_saginaw_co.html No one could ever shoot from the 'net'. Nyuk, nyuk.

Pat Morita claims: No can defend!

Yeesh, I could tool on this all day, but back to work.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Erick Gelhaus]

Wouldn't a target like that and training to " shoot to wound" be in violation of state POST standards ?

Cal POST is an uniique animal unto itself. When trying to get classes certified by them one has to develop the lesson plan to the point that it can be handed to any other copper to teach off of. Never mind that you might be teaching it because you know something about the material and others don't, they believe anybody should be able to teach off of your work.

Anyway, Cal POST isn't the issue with Shoot to Wound as much as the courts and legislative bodies will be.

There is a whole problem with intentionally using deadly force in a way intended to be non-deadly force. And then there is the outcome vs. intent concern.

As for laterals, it will be interesting but may not be all that many. AMC has pointed some of the issues that may limit cops there leaving.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

About the Japanese video - I read a series of novels about a Japanese police detective during the Shogunate area. Those semi-circle tipped poles were used by their patrol officers to corral drunken samurai in their red light district (the floating world). So they are not some new gadget. This was 1600 to 1860's. You could wave your sword around but still be taken down.

The net gun is neat - Spiderman!

[jnc36rcpd]

I knew that guns are uncommon in Japan. Little did I know that pretty much everyone has a net gun and/or a long pole to pin miscreants to the deck.

My now-retired chief was interested in net guns back in the day and I ended up researching the concept. As I recall, Baltimore City PD had a less-lethal car in each district. The officers were armed with a Taser, a less-lethal shotgun, fire extinguisher size OC, and a net gun. While the net gun looks great in theory, but couldn't be used effectively with a low overhead or a vertical obstruction that might fowl the net's deployment. The net cartridges were fairly spendy and I don't believe you could repackage them yourself. You also had to be fairly close to the threat which made usage somewhat sporty. You certainly didn't have control over the suspect even if he or she was netted. I don't know if Baltimore ever used the net guns nor what their success rate was, but I had the impression it was not the go-to less-lethal.

Net guns may have a niche role, but there was a lot of squeeze for the juice.

More recently, I saw some of our animal services officers and executives testing net guns in the parking lot. They were not having much success netting stationary trashcans. I'm not sure I'd want to count on one with a vicious animal.

[AMC]

Angus nailed it, as usual. POST addresses guidelines and standards for training, not policy or what the specifics of training must be.

As for the lateral thing, I also agree. I'm trapped like a miner in a Chinese coal mine. Our salary/benefits package is pretty good, but our pension is city-based, and not transferable. We are, however, having a very hard time recruiting right now. Last class was only 25 (usually 50), and they're having trouble getting enough for the next class.

To be fair, they are talking about replacing our Supersock loaded 870's with FN303's. Of course, I talk about making GM in USPSA a lot......neither is likely anytime soon.

[rojocorsa]

Just look at San Jose PD...

What about them, exactly?

Not gonna lie, I barely find myself in that part of the Bay Area.

[Backspin]

Hey Angus,

Hope you are doing well. I sent ya a PM.

[Dagga Boy]

Well, I guess the good idea fairy lives in San Fransisco.....
http://worldwarwings.com/blue-angels-crash-leads-san-francisco-to-attempt-ban?a=mk&var=a10-blue-ban



Thinking about it....maybe strafing SF wouldn't be such a bad idea.

[Coyotesfan97]

Well, I guess the good idea fairy lives in San Fransisco.....
http://worldwarwings.com/blue-angels-crash-leads-san-francisco-to-attempt-ban?a=mk&var=a10-blue-ban



Thinking about it....maybe strafing SF wouldn't be such a bad idea.

Snake and Nape....

[rojocorsa]

Well, I guess the good idea fairy lives in San Fransisco.....
http://worldwarwings.com/blue-angels-crash-leads-san-francisco-to-attempt-ban?a=mk&var=a10-blue-ban



Thinking about it....maybe strafing SF wouldn't be such a bad idea.

I'm ready and willing to bail at this point.

[Drang]

Well, I guess the good idea fairy lives in San Fransisco.....
http://worldwarwings.com/blue-angels-crash-leads-san-francisco-to-attempt-ban?a=mk&var=a10-blue-ban



Thinking about it....maybe strafing SF wouldn't be such a bad idea.8546

[Lost River]

Just to clarify.....the "two bullet" thing has ended. Qualifications are back to twice a year......but down to 37 rounds. You also get a 37 round "warmup shoot" before the qual. Sometimes 12 rounds to work immediate action drills...sometimes not. So, less than 200 rounds a year. They were big on less-lethal deployment.....but supersocks are expensive too....so now only 6 year get fired. They wanna give us net guns....not kidding. The proposed Use-of-Force order contains the terms "sanctity of life" and "preservation of life" more than anything about force. We are also almost out of our qualification targets......they won't let the range order more because they want someone to design a new target with aiming points in the hips, arms and legs instead of the center mass. They want us to actually use firearms as a sort of less-lethal pain compliance tool in this regard. "Shoot 'em in the leg! They'll get the point and give up quick!" This is coming from our administrators, who you would hope would know better. But you'd be wrong.

That right there is EXACTLY why I would never recommend the LE line of work to anyone. 15 years ago, that would be part of a satire skit about dipstick administrators who were never street cops. Now it is actually more the norm for thinking by those same people. I would say it is unbelievable, but it is sadly completely believable.

If you are shooting to wound, you are probably not justified to use deadly force in the first place, and are going to get eaten alive civilly later on. Chances are your same administrators will pull a Freddy Gray and throw you to the wolves to save the department.

Disgusting.

[Lex Luthier]

Sad to say, this is nothing new. Ambrose Bierce, who lived there for a time and knew the place intimately, said about SF in 1907:

"I'd never set foot in San Francisco. Of all the Sodoms and Gomorrahs in our modern world, it is the worst. There are not 10 righteous (and courageous) men there. It needs another quake, another whiff of fire—and—more than all else—a steady trade wind of grapeshot.... That moral penal colony of the world."

(Disclosure: I am a fourth-generation San Franciscan, and deeply saddened by how far through the looking glass my beloved hometown has traveled. I don't expect to ever desire to live there again.)

[VW.45]

Wow, 200 rounds a year!? I'm just an average CCW citizen and I shoot more than that every weekend! You guys are out there to keep order, and are constantly being castrated/leashed by retarded officials who have no clue of what is needed to end a threat!

[Josh Runkle]

Deleted. Realized this is in the LE sub forum. Sorry.

[AMC]

Wow, 200 rounds a year!? I'm just an average CCW citizen and I shoot more than that every weekend! You guys are out there to keep order, and are constantly being castrated/leashed by retarded officials who have no clue of what is needed to end a threat!
What's funny is that when I mention this to non-gun type citizens, they always assume cops shoot at least every week. They are astounded and dumbfounded when I tell them the truth.

As an update, our Police Commission voted last week to adopt the new General Order on Use-of-Force that includes "minimal force" and "proportional force" in it's language, in explicit rejection of the Graham "reasonable force" standard. Our union is opposing some of the language, but gave in on some parts as well. It will now go through the "meet and confer" process with the city as a change in working conditions. Most of it will probably be in effect by the end of the year.

Most of the people here are still in denial about what a catastrophic change this is for officer and public safety. There is no accepted definition of 'minimal force' anywhere.....not in the law, case law, POST training, etc. There will be no basis for officers to judge their actions....other than 20/20 hindsight. I fully expect some cops to get badly jammed up and lose their jobs for using what anywhere else would be 'reasonable force'. Shortly after that, most uses of force will cease in San Francisco as the majority of cops recognize that enforcing the law can get you fired. Public safety will suffer, and the public will blame the cops for 'not doing their jobs', never realizing that they voted for this.

[VW.45]

I had read a few articles about how little most police officers are offered in the way of training, so all of your info is not a surprise. It just blows me away to know that I do more training than many of the officers are offered. Not y'alls fault, so please don't think that I am ragging on the police, just the administration who keeps tightening the noose around your neck.

[John Hearne]

There is no accepted definition of 'minimal force' anywhere.....not in the law, case law, POST training, etc. There will be no basis for officers to judge their actions....other than 20/20 hindsight. I fully expect some cops to get badly jammed up and lose their jobs for using what anywhere else would be 'reasonable force'. Shortly after that, most uses of force will cease in San Francisco as the majority of cops recognize that enforcing the law can get you fired. Public safety will suffer, and the public will blame the cops for 'not doing their jobs', never realizing that they voted for this.

Exactly. I suspect the "minimal force" is the camel's nose under the tent for lawyers. Agencies generally write checks even if the force was constitutionally valid but their own policies weren't followed. Since there is no standard definition of minimal force, it is a lawyer's wet dream to argue in front of a jury.

[TGS]

Man, this makes me so thankful for our UoF policy, which is basically Graham with a tidbit added about warning shots.

[AMC]

Exactly. I suspect the "minimal force" is the camel's nose under the tent for lawyers. Agencies generally write checks even if the force was constitutionally valid but their own policies weren't followed. Since there is no standard definition of minimal force, it is a lawyer's wet dream to argue in front of a jury.

Even the Fed DOJ attorneys conducting their 'collaborative review' said that the proposed policies contain troubling language that should be reviewed, but they were ignored because 'San Francisco Values'. Anywhere else the City Attorney would be screaming......but here, they feel no fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayer, and give only lip service to the law.

[Coyotesfan97]

To all the San Francisco cops here the Phoenix Metro area is hiring like mad. Phoenix is projected to hire 400 in the next four years. They're running 5 academy classes now. Mesa and Gilbert are hiring. Glendale is hiring laterals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[iWander]

Plain and simple, they have decided that the political optics of dead and injured cops are preferable to cops shooting criminals. Because dead cops' families, and the families of murdered innocents, don't riot or show up at the chief's house at 6am with a bullhorn. We're hardly unique in this dynamic...


...Chief directed the range guys to have a new target made which emphasizes "non-lethal" areas to shoot....like the legs and pelvis (???!!!???). He's demanding "Shooting to wound first" be written into policy and training.

The first part is our fault as cops and families are generally not very vocal after shootings and try to make changes quietly. Unfortunately, our current culture and politicians only listen to the listen to loud and obnoxious a-holes instead of intelligent points and arguments.

As to your chief, he's a complete tool.

[iWander]

What ever the "facts" are, the argument that a Federal LEO would have handled the situation more "gently" than a large metropolitan PD LEO is likely bullshit. As a Fed, we operate just as any large state/city agency would. Federal control over state and local agencies would be a disaster for the public in my opinion. The overwhelming centralized bureaucracy that we deal with would cripple the justice system if our methods were used at the city level.
That's what I tell folks when they support a federal police system or even only having state police instead of local, directly invested cops. I believe there's a plan in my state for the state patrol to eventually take over most areas not patrolled by the sheriff depts within a decade. State funding for local agencies has steadily decreased, minimum training hours on state mandated subjects have increased every year without any funding assistance, and a slow creep of state troopers in areas they've never patrolled before are going to force most small agencies (read: rural PDs of less than 10 full time officers) and more "cooperative" patrolling with large agencies.

None of this is good for crime suppression, effective dialogue and communication with the populace or police accountability and support.

[DacoRoman]

All they need to do next is teach LEOs to shoot warning shots into a portable backstop.

I was goimg to say teach them to shoot the weapons out of the offender's hands with bean bag rounds, but that would be ridiculous.

[AMC]

So just by way of an update, I got to attend our new Qualification two weeks ago. Actually slightly better than what we were doing a year ago, in that we shot a 37 round 'warm up', which includes short Dot Drills, before the 36 round Qualification. Also six rounds for Immediate Action Drills for malfunctions. Yes, Six. We then fired 5 rounds of slug from the shotgun. We don't have slugs for patrol....but they ran out of buck for training. We then did a bit more shooting than before with the ERIW (Extended Range Impact Weapon)(870 loaded with Supersocks), including as teams with a lethal cover officer. Extremely basic, but still better than before. I did notice our "new" targets, though. Same as the old ones but with scoring rings at the hips as well. Nothing was said about this, and no shots were directed there, so we'll see.

The Force Options (simulator) portion of the training was Monday. Total, absolute waste of time, literally. You're there for 4 hrs.....but only 30 minutes in the simulator room. The rest is next door in an empty class....literally doing nothing. But the department gets to claim "Four Hours of Force Options Training" to POST. What a scam. All of the scenarios were "no shoots" involving subjects either armed with knives or unarmed. One involved a guy who pulled a gun, and the instructor asked the officers why they didn't request an ERIW. Seriously....bean bags for a gun. That guy immediately dropped the gun, by the way.

Yesterday they issued a new bulletin on Use Of Force considerations, and it includes language right from the proposed General Order on Force that our union is fighting, namely "proportionality" of force. They don't want us to use 'too much' force if it's just a minor violation......and they don't want us resorting to firearms if the suspect doesn't have a gun. The union is fighting the General Order, but in the meantime that Bulletin just created the policy anyway. Based on how our response to the 'ahead of schedule' rollout of body cams went yesterday, I'm expecting a "roll over, play dead" act on this as well.