Senator Tony Strickland (R-Huntington Beach) is warning Californians about a last-minute effort that will take a non-lethal tool away from use by law enforcement officers.
Assembly Bill 2760, authored by Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins (D-San Diego), would prohibit federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies from using protective shock gloves in California as an alternative to deadly force. The bill, a “gut-and-amend” of an unrelated bill, was first exposed on August 21.
“Public safety is the most essential role of government, and my Democratic colleagues are removing an essential non-lethal tool from law enforcement agencies and forcing them to change their use-of-force policies,” said Sen. Strickland. “Officers risk their lives daily, making split-second decisions in dangerous situations. We should trust them to use the tools they are trained and authorized to use, not take them away. Even Sacramento County Sheriff Jim Cooper called this a bad Democrat policy that was hastily thrown together in the final days of session with little public input.”
As reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, the author of the bill falsely claimed local law enforcement officers do not currently use the technology. She also claimed during committee that the ability for law enforcement to de-escalate in a manner without lethal force makes everyday Californians "less safe."
Sacramento County Sheriff Jim Cooper, a former Democrat Assemblymember, posted a video proving this was bad information. He concluded by saying to Democrat legislators, “You want to see a reduction in the use of lethal force, yet you take away our less-lethal options. What is it that you want? You can’t have it both ways.”
“First, Democrat legislators wanted to defund the police. Then they refused to fully fund Prop. 36 after nearly 70% of Californians demanded tougher action on crime,” said Senate Minority Leader Brian W. Jones (R-San Diego). "Now they’re taking less-lethal tools away from the officers they expect to keep our communities safe. The alternative to less-than-lethal options for our peace officers is quite literally... lethal.”
AB 2760 originally dealt with county inspectors general. On August 21, with only 10 days remaining in the legislative session, its contents were stripped and replaced. Then the amended measure was jammed through the Senate Public Safety Committee on a party-line vote at a brief hearing scheduled without appropriate notice to the public and media.
WHAT THE EXPERTS ARE SAYING:
SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF JIM COOPER: “By banning the use of wearable electroshock devices, the bill eliminates the use of less lethal, lower-level tools by law enforcement. Devices such as the G.L.O.V.E. allow our local officers to overcome resistance while reducing the need for higher level uses of force, like batons, bean bags, and firearms. Removing these tools leaves our local officers with fewer and more dangerous choices. I am strongly opposed to this bill, while aimed at ICE, it is California’s law" enforcement officers and our communities who will pay the price."
Peace Officers Research Association of California: “For rank-and-file officers, less-lethal tools can provide important alternatives during dangerous and rapidly evolving encounters. ... California should not permanently prohibit an entire category of less-lethal technology before fully understanding what is being prohibited, how it could be appropriately used, and the potential impact on existing tools already relied upon. ...”
California Police Chiefs’ Association: “Less-lethal options can protect both officers and the public. Police officers routinely encounter individuals who are actively resisting, assaultive, or engaged in hand-to-hand combat with officers. ... Before California permanently removes a potentially useful less-lethal tool from law enforcement, there should be concrete evidence demonstrating that the technology presents unacceptable risks even when used consistent with appropriate training, policy, duration limits, and existing California use-of-force law. That evidence has not been established.”
California State Sheriffs' Association: "...when force options are removed from the spectrum of permissible responses, the ability to de-escalate a situation becomes more difficult…”