"Around the same time, other Democrats in Congress were also advocating a change in use of force standards on a nationwide basis:..."
How is that something that gets decided at the federal level?? It seems like a classic state general police power thing.
"That was some solid door-opening there, Officer."
Whomever, you're correct. The federal government will likely prohibit federal assistance to jurisdictions that don't fall in line. If the Democrats take the presidency, DOJ will be set upon officers in agencies both in jurisdictions that don't follow the will of Congress and those that do.
Uhm, not correct.Originally Posted by Mark D
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...a.&lawCode=PEN
My old org lost its gang unit a few years back. I was very surprised to a gang cop that passive. As mentioned, fortunately the other officer was present.(a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(1) That the authority to use physical force, conferred on peace officers by this section, is a serious responsibility ...
(2) As set forth below, it is the intent of the Legislature that peace officers use deadly force only when necessary in defense of human life. In determining whether deadly force is necessary, officers shall evaluate each situation in light of the particular circumstances of each case, and shall use other available resources and techniques if reasonably safe and feasible to an objectively reasonable officer.
(3) That the decision by a peace officer to use force shall be evaluated ...
(4) That the decision by a peace officer to use force shall be evaluated from the perspective of a reasonable officer in the same situation, based on the totality of the circumstances known to or perceived by the officer at the time, rather than with the benefit of hindsight, and that the totality of the circumstances shall account for occasions when officers may be forced to make quick judgments about using force.
(5) That individuals with physical, mental health, developmental, or intellectual disabilities are significantly more likely to experience ...
(b) Any peace officer who has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense may use objectively reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape, or to overcome resistance.
(c) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), a peace officer is justified in using deadly force upon another person only when the officer reasonably believes, based on the totality of the circumstances, that such force is necessary for either of the following reasons:
(A) To defend against a....
(B) To apprehend a fleeing person for any felony ... Where feasible, a peace officer shall, prior to the use of force, make reasonable efforts to identify themselves as a peace officer and to warn that deadly force may be used, ...
(2) A peace officer shall not use deadly force against a person based on the danger that person poses to themselves, ...
(d) A peace officer who makes or attempts to make an arrest need not retreat or desist ...
(e) For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) “Deadly force” means any use of force that creates a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily injury, ...
(2) A threat of death or serious bodily injury is “imminent” when, ...
(3) “Totality of the circumstances” means all facts known to the peace officer at the time, including the conduct of the officer and the subject leading up to the use of deadly force.
AMC mentioned it and it's a discussion I've had with a few other use of force instructors - the current state of the new law messed. Unfortunately, the state will need a few events that get charged, in different parts of the state. Those events will need to have charges filedand then go to a trial. Those trials will have to result in convictions that can be appealed - plea deals won't do it. Only then will "we" get rulings that can tell everyone how those laws are to be interpreted.
Chattanooga, TN— OIS after responding to vehicle crash:
He's been working on his cardio. Well done all around from what I could see.
Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.
That was my comment as well, long before the shooting.
My only nitpick would be the sunglasses. They fell off. They're not critical equipment, leave them. You can see him continuously switching them from hand to hand as he runs.
Otherwise, great work and great dedication to the mission!
Las Vegas PD attempted to arrest a suspect. The suspect, while being held at gunpoint by four officers, attempted to turn and draw his handgun carried AIWB.
It did not go well for the suspect.
Guy either watched too many Dirty Harry movies, or too many action-beats-reaction training videos, I guess.
I see this a lot, commands to move paired with commands not to move. "Hands on top of your head...do not move," "turn around, do not move," "stand up straight, do not move," etc. Not of importance here, though.
Guy was using a holster of some sort. Unusual, although apparently not really secured to anything so only half credit.
And.....................from the deceased's family's go-fund-me page: "On Tuesday, October 27, 2020, my brother Maurice Jamaal Parker took his last breathe because of the Las Vegas Police. Maurice is another African American man shot and killed by the police. Please support our family by giving as little or as much as you can."
Personally, I am giving a little as I can.
"That's all I have to say about that" - Forrest Gump
Shooting one guy holding you at gunpoint is possible if you're quick and he's not.
Four? Not so much.
I'll go with "impaired judgment due to substance(s) of choice". For those who have never held someone at gunpoint, it's a great example of how little some people are impressed by guns, even shotguns, being aimed at them.
"Gunfighting is a thinking man's game. So we might want to bring thinking back into it."-MDFA
Beware of my temper, and the dog that I've found...
Reply With Quote