San Francisco Two Bullet Rule

[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.