94158 - San Francisco · I am writing to share my support of the approval of Conducted Energy...

Peter Fortune

September 29, 2017

San Francisco Police Commission 1245 -Third Street San Francisco, CA 94158

Re: Tasers

Dear Commissioners:

I have been a San Francisco resident since 1970 and homeowner since 1984. I serve on, among other organizations, the Northern Police District's Community Police Advisory Board and the Board of the Marina Community Association (MCA). Both of these organizations have sent you letters strongly urging you to approve the use of Conducted Energy Devices (Tasers) for the San Francisco Police Department. I helped author each letter.

I and so many other San Francisco residents are greatly disturbed by the vocal, vehement opposition to Tasers at the recent City meetings about Tasers and at some of the Police Commission meetings. We are convinced that these vocal opponents are in the vast minority of all San Francisco residents, and some, we understand, are not even residents of our City.

The Commission probably already knows that in a poll of registered voters conducted by the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce in early 2017, 78% of the San Francisco registered voters responding supported giving "stun guns" to the SVPD, while only 17% opposed.'

1 San Francisco Examiner, March 6, 2017, reporting about the results of a poll commissioned by the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce. The poll reportedly had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4%.

At a well-attended (over 70 participants) MCA Crime & Safety meeting in April this year, over 95% of the attendants raised their hands in favor of the SFPD having Tasers.

The MCA recently polled over 1000 recipients on its email list about various issues. On the question whether the SFPD should have the use of Tasers, 91% of the respondents voted in favor of Tasers for the SFPD.

I am confident that if more Sari Francisco residents were polled, a high percentage of the respondents would likewise favor the Commission approving the use of Tasers for the SFPD.

Certainly, then, the Commissioners recognize that the well-organized, highly vocal opponents of Tasers do not represent the viewsof what is likely the vast majority of San Francisco residents.

Proposed Ballot Measure

In addition to these examples of residents' overwhelming approval of Tasers, the Commission should be aware of an almost certain consequence of its not approving the use of Tasers for the SFPD: out of frustration with the Commission, that issue will be put to the voters in a ballot measure that would amend the City's Charter (and not merely establish an unenforceable City "policy" approving Tasers).

Though there might be other aspects of a proposed ballot measure, I understand the voters would be asked to:

(1) allow the SFPD to have the use of "Conducted Energy Devices";

(2) amend the Charter to require the Chief of Police to establish a committee of San Francisco police officers to

(a) chose the CED(s) for SFPD officers (b) determine how many and which officers will have the use of CEDs, and (c) establish both the training program and use-of-force policy for-these CEDs; and

(3) provide the funding required to purchase sufficient Tasers. N

2

I have heard also that the movement to put this measure on the ballot already has substantial, promised financial backing. So many residents are firmly committed to preventing a vocal, tiny minority from depriving the SFPD of one more valuable tool so they can do their job.

I expect many San Francisco residents would probably prefer that the Commission continue to exert its full, Charter-given authority "to prescribe and enforce any reasonable rules and regulations that it deems necessary to provide for the efficiency of the Department... ."

But if the Commission declines to approve the use of Tasers for the SFPD, then the San Francisco electorate will have the opportunity to -- and likely by a high percentage would -- give the SFPD Tasers and take away the Commission's authority relating to the training and use of this device.

Thank you for your consideration.

Very truly yours,-

Peter Fortune

3

Tom, Risa (POL)

( From: Alexandra Jansen Sent: . Sunday, October 1, 2017 10:36 AM

To: SFPD, Commission (POL) Subject: CEDs

Dear Honorable Commissioners,

I am writing to share my support of the approval of Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs) for our SFPD Force.

As a co-chair of Richmond Station's Community Police Advisory Board (CPAB) and 13 year resident of San Francisco, I have followed the history of our force and the effect officers have on the community. We simply must do what is best for San Francisco. It makes sense to assure our officers and members of the public are as safe as they can be. That means using CEDs. CEDs save lives, reduce injuries to subjects and officers, and drastically reduce the possibility that confrontations will escalate to lethal-force situations. The police force has few tools they can use when being assaulted and I believe CEDs are one of the safest.

There are issues with CEDs that must be dealt with head on. Adopting their use requires a strong, sound use-of-force policy that assures robust reporting of all force, use of the accountability features built into these devices, and leadership that will not tolerate excessive force.

In the long run, it.hàs been proven that CEDs would reduce the number of police injuries, save some suspect's lives and save the city money. Chief Scott has obviously done a significant amount of research and knows what he is talking about. In his statement, he says, "The U.S. Department of Justice (11)03), undertaking its own independent research, has found that the use of CEDs correlates with a decrease of 60 percent nationally in citizens' injuries. The DOJ also determined that risks associated with CEDs are lower than most other use of force options." Chief Scott has promised thorough oversight and accountability, and I have every confidence this will happen. The fact that current technology has the capability to pair with the, Department's body worn cameras is also reassuring. This assures a thorough review process. I urge you to give our SFPD officers the advantage of using CEDs so that they have a better option than using deadly guns. The cost (which many use as an argument against CEDs) is justified when lives are saved.

Thank you for your consideration.

Regards,

Alexandra Jansen

1

Torn, Risa (P01)

From: Rodney Yee Sent: Sunday, October 1, 2017 12:30 AM To: SFPD, Commission (POL) Subject: Support for CED - Tasers to be issued to the San Francisco Police

Hello SFPD Commission;

I recently attended the SF Police Commission at the Bill Graham Civic Auditorium and I wish to let you folks know that I support the issuing of CED - Taser to the SFPD personnel.

The recent shooting of a suicidal student highlights that the police needs a non-lethal option to deal to threats.

Thank you.

- Rodney Yee

Tom, Risa (POL)

From: Jason D Reid JLJUNJ1JI Sent Friday, September 29, 2017 11:54 PM To: SFPD, Commission (POL) Subject: CED

Dear Commissioner:

My family and I support Commander David Lazar's CED program.

Jason and Jaime Reid

UJLIIIIU1Lfl _P. 1*..

FD E©ll

September 29, 2017

San Francisco Police Commission

San Francisco Police Headquarters

1245 3rd Street

San Francisco, CA 94158

RE: GLIDE Response to proposed implementation CEDs (also known as Electronic Control Devices, or Tasers)

San Francisco Police Commission:

GLIDE extensively reviewed available research materials and engaged in multiple in-depth

discussions regarding the implementation of Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs) with SFPD

representatives, advocates, and community members of the Tenderloin.

It is our conclusion that CEDs present multiple dangers to both community members and police,

officers, and that their implementation would be especially dangerous to marginalized

communities such as ours in the Tenderloin. While CEDs are sometimes framed as a less lethal

alternative to firearms, their adoption has not been consistently shown to reduce the lethality

of law enforcement intervention, and the devices have not been shown to be safe for

individuals suffering from chronic and episodic physical, mental, or substance-related health

issues.

This makes CEDs poorly suited to marginalized communities, such as the diverse, low-income

neighborhood of the Tenderloin, where individuals with such conditions are often the

recipients of law enforcement intervention. This also places a dangerous burden on officers

who cannot accurately assess an individual's state of health and mind, especially in a moment

of crisis. The unintended deaths and disability that have led to community outrage and legal

GLIDE 330 Ellis Street 1 415 674 6000 San Francisco GA 94102 F: 415 771 8420 wwwglide.org

battles in in other cities are tragic for the victims and for the trust between I

their police departments.

GLIDE has had a relationship with the SFPD spanning decades. Officers from the Tenderloin

Substation are important members of our community, and we strongly support their safety.

Our reading of the Stanford University's Electronic Control Weapons study informs us that

major injuries to police officers were not reduced by CED implementation. Also, failure-to-

subdue rates for the weapon approach 47%, and reports of such failures escalating police

intervention are numerous. Officers are required to be at close distances to deploy the weapon,

which can also put them at additional risk.

We believe that focusing on nonviolent intervention strategies would keep our officers safer,

especially at this time when the SFPD is making substantial efforts to build its positive

community engagement strategies. Community policing, de-escalation, crisis intervention, anti-

bias training, and accountability are the top priorities which the Department of Justice and

other stakeholders have identified. We are therefore especially concerned that an

implementation of CEDs at this time would detract from other areas of departmental

development, potentially erode trust with the community, and run against the important

changes which the SFPD is striving to achieve.

GLIDE supports the SFPD's focus on the pressing needs of the community. We strongly hope

that each of you, as members of the Police Commission, will vote against the implementation of

CEDs at this time. We need the ongoing work of SFPD reform to keep its focus on building a

community that feels both heard and protected.

Sincerely,

Rita Shimmin, Executive Director of the GLIDE Foundation

GUIDE-- 330 Ellis Street 415 674 6000 San Francisco CA 94102 F: 415 771 8420 wwwgUdeorg

To: The San Francisco Police Commission

From: Members of the Northern District's Community Police Advisory Board

Dated: September 29, 2017

(DELIVERED BY HAND AND EMAIL)

Dear Commissioners:

We live and work in San Francisco and are members of the Northern Police District's Community Police Advisory Board (NDCPAB). We strongly urge the San Francisco Police Commission (the Commission) to approve the San Francisco Police Department's use of CED's (Tasers).

Background

• In reaching our recommendation we NDCPAB members have conducted considerable investigation, research, and deliberations regarding the use of Tasers. Appendix A to this letter describes most of the steps and materials comprising our investigation and research.

Disclosure: Captain John Jaimerena chairs our NDCPAB meetings. There must be, however, no suggestion of any undue influence -- by Captain Jaimerena or any other SFPDrelated person -- on the NDCPAB members in reaching our recommendation. We did hear a presentation in favor of Tasers by Commander Walsh of the SFPD; and we heard both negative and positive comments by members of Commissioner Melara's working group on Electronic Controlled Weapons. But the Commission should know that all of our deliberations and communications were conducted entirely without any input by, and outside the presence of, Captain Jaimerena or any other SFPD-related person.

We make our recommendation for the following reasons.

Chief Scott's Request For a Tool That Allows SFPD Officers to Prevent Escalation and in the Process De-escalate Force.

• We understand that the Commission recommended LAPD Deputy Chief William Scott as one of its three final choices to become the City's Chief of Police. Presumably, the Commission is well aware of his background that made him an excellent choice: He graduated from the. University of Alabama with a degree in accounting; he was with the Los Angeles Police Department for more than 27 years; he did assignments in patrol, the detective bureau, internal affairs, and gang operations; he reportedly stood out for his work in the department's professional standards bureau dealing with police reform; for the two years before coming here, he was Deputy Chief of a part of that department that is comparable to the entire SFPD department -- the 1700-member South Bureau in a nearly 58-square mile territory (which included USC, the Port of Los Angeles, and South Los Angeles, an area rife with homicides and gang violence).

• Significant here is that Chief Scott has had considerable experience with the LAPD's use of Tasers. Officers in that department have used Tasers since the mid-1980's, pre-dating Chef Scott's entire tenure in that department.

Chief Scott wants to train every sworn SFPD officer to use a Taser because "In our vision and our quest to have a tool or piece of equipment that allows us to prevent escalation and in the process de-escalate force, we feel that this option [Tasers] accomplishes that." He has stated he well understands the risks associated with Tasers, but believes the benefits (even though they don't always work) outweigh the potential harm. .

In terms of benefits versus potential harm, no direct physical means of apprehending a suspect or piece of an officer's equipment (pepper spray, baton, bean bag gun, or sidearm) is entirely free from potential harm or misuse. But the Commission has approved direct physical force and these pieces of equipment for every officer's use in accordance with policy. A Taser -- likewise used in accordance with policy -- gives an officer just one more piece of equipment to help perform his or her duties.

2

A Taser is rarely lethal, and compared to an officer's sidearm, is certainly far less lethal and poses much less potential harm. Using a Taser is therefore far, far preferable to, and much more likely to result in far less serious injuries to both suspect and officer than, use of a sidearm.1 As such, a Taser is a valuable piece of equipment to enable an officer to subdue a noncompliant or aggressive suspect with a better outcome for both the suspect and the officer.

We believe Chief Scott's opinion and judgment about Tasers are solidly based on considerable experience. With all due respect to the Commissioners, his many years of firsthand experience with the use of Tasers likely exceeds, in both quantity and content, that of any Commissioner: e.g., his untold number of discussions with LAPD officers about their use, experience with, and opinions of Tasers; LAPD communications. about the use of Tasers; and the likely scores of Taser incident reports he has read or learned about.

Presumably, in recommending William Scott to become our Chief of Police, the Commission believed it could trust his judgment. We firmly believes the Commission should, in this instance, defer to his judgment and grant his request. Give him and his officers what he believes his officers need to properly serve and protect the public: one more "tool or piece of equipment that allows [SFPD officers] to prevent escalation and in the process de-escalate force." He understands that Tasers do not always work, but they can still be a convincing deterrent (see below). Giving these officers one more option -- certainly far less lethal than a sidearm -- is especially important after the Commission passed a more restrictive use-of-force policy in December 2016 emphasizing the sanctity of life.

We believe also that the Commission, having a year ago recommended Chief Scott (as one of three) to lead the SFPD, should NOT now reject his experienced and reasoned judgment or his request that all of his police officers be equipped with and trained in the use of Tasers.

Injury to an officer from the discharge of his or her firearm is, in most instances, the 1 seriously debilitating psychological effects from having shot another human, which

frequently leads to remedial treatment and time off from service.

3

Tasers Reduce Injuries to Suspects and Officers.

A number of studies or reports address the injuries suffered by suspects and/or officers in incidents when a Taser has been displayed to a suspect or activated. The NDCPAB concluded that the likely most relevant and statistically valid study was performed by thewell-respected Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) for the National Institute of Justice in 2009.2 PERF collected data for comparable periods from seven Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) that had deployed CED's and six LEAs that had not deployed CED's, and analyzed the data for nine safety measures.3

The results of this detailed study demonstrate that Tasers significantly reduce injuries to both suspects and officers. PERF found that "CED sites" (i.e., LEAs that use Tasers), when compared with a group of matched "non-CED sites," were associated with improved safety outcomes on six of its nine safety measures: officer injuries; suspect injuries; suspect severe injuries; officers receiving injuries requiring medical attention; suspects receiving injuries requiring medical attention; and suspects receiving an injury that resulted in their being sent to a hospital or other medical facility.

PERF found, in addition, there to be no difference between the CED and non-CED sites on the outcomes of three other safety measures: number of suspect deaths, officer severe injuries, and officer injuries requiring hospitalization. As to the measure of suspect deaths, PERF reported:

Another concern raised by critics of CEDs is that they may lead to higher death rates for [LEAs] that deploy CEDs. We found no support for that concern. CEDs seem to have a neutral effect on the number of suspect deaths related to officer use-of-force cases.

2 "Comparing the safety outcomes in police use-of-force cases for law enforcement agencies that have deployed Conducted Energy Devices and a matched comparison that have not: A quasi-experimental evaluation." September 2009.

(1) Officer injuries; (2) officer severe injuries; (3) suspect injuries; (4) suspect severe injuries; (5) officers receiving injuries requiring medical attention; (6) officer injuries requiring hospitalization; (7) suspects receiving injuries requiring medical attention; (8) suspects receiving an injury that resulted in their being sent to a hospital or other medical facility; and (9) number of suspect deaths.

M

PERF concluded: "For six of nine significant outcomes, our data suggest that the magnitude of the effects of the improved safety outcomes for the CED sites (relative to the non-CED sites) was impressive."

Indeed, it was very impressive. For example, for the LEAs that deployed CEDs, PERF concluded that its data "suggest that the odds of a suspectbeing injured are reduced by more than 40%" and "the odds of a suspect being severely injured are reduced by over 40%." For CED-only LEAs, "when* officers actually use CEDs [the] data suggest that there is a 76% reduction in officer injuries" and "there is a 63% reduction in the probability of an officer receiving an injury requiring medical attention" When a CED site deploys CEDs, "the odds of an officer receiving an injury requiring medical attention is reduced by at least 80%."

Tasers Can Help De-escalate and Can Create More Time and Distance.

As noted above, one of the reasons Chief Scott has asked the Commission to approve lasers for his officers is that a Taser is "a tool or piece of equipment that allows us to prevent escalation and in the process dc-escalate force. . ." We fully agree.

Common sense dictates that the prospect of being stunned by a Taser will, in most instances, deter a rational suspect from any, or further, noncompliance with an officer's instructions or any further aggression toward the officer. Just the prospect of being "tased" should therefore help convince an initially noncompliant suspect to comply with an officer's oral instructions if the initial part of the officer's time and distance tactic is not fully successful.

In this regard, then, the deterrent effect of a Taser, by potential or actual display, holds the prospect of increasing the officer's chances of successfully executing his or her "time and distance" tactic for a suspect who might otherwise consider initiating or continuing an aggressive or noncompliant response or action toward the officer.

Therefore, a Taser, with its deterrent effect, should be viewed as an integral, valuable option for use in the required "time and distance" tactic that an officer must take in appropriate circumstances -- another tool, as Chief Scott recognizes, for an officer to "prevent escalation and in the process to de-escalate force,"

5

For this reason, we take issue with the assertion by the Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF) that "the use of Taser/CEDs run [sic] counter to de-escalation and time and distance." This assertion was stated to be based entirely on proximity and actually firing the device: the "optimal effects of Taser/CED are realized only if used within 15 feet of the individual tased. Effective Taser use requires close proximity between officers and suspects, the opposite effect achieved through time and distance." (Emphasis original; see BASF's June 20, 2016 Memorandum to the Commission, p. 13.)

We do not know why the BASF neglected, or refused, to recognize the potentially strong deterrent effect that a Taser would likely have on a noncompliant suspect, and thus, the significant value of this tool to help implement a successful time and distance tactic. In any event, the potential use of a Taser is NOT "counter to de-escalation and time and distance." Rather, a Taser, as a significant deterrent, can clearly be an effective part of an officer's successful time and distance tactic and, thereby, a valuable tool to try to de-escalate and to prevent escalation.

We recognize, however, that a noncompliant suspect might not always respond rationally to the prospect of being stunned by a Taser -- or, for that matter, even by an officer's displaying or pointing his or her sidearm. But one step in the process of attempting to subdue a noncompliant suspect, if the officer's time and distance techniques initially do not fully succeed, should be the prospect, or actual threat, of using a Taser. In any event, without doubt, an officer's threat of using a Taser is far, far preferable to even displaying, much less using, his or her sidearm. That is one of the most compelling reasons to approve Tasers for SFPD officers.

A Comprehensive, Restrictive Policy Will Govern SFPD's Taser Use.

The Commission must know that the SFPD officers' use of Tasers will be governed by a strict use-of-force policy. Indeed, when speaking to the Commission on June 21 this year, retired Oakland police officer Michael Leonesio, a recognized Taser expert, characterized the SFPD's Draft policy as "restrictive."

/ We commend to the Commission the SFPD's chart comparing its Draft Taser policy with the existing policies of 10 other cities plus the

6

proposed policies of PERF and the IACP. In addition to reviewing the important aspects, of these 12 other policies in this chart, we reviewed the Taser policies of the LAPD, the San Jose PD, the Oakland PD, the Baltimore PD, the San Francisco Sheriff's Department, the City of Richmond PD, and the University of California, San Francisco PD, This chart and review of these policies confirmed the accuracy of Mr. Leonesio's opinion that the SFPD Draft policy is comparatively restrictive, or at least no less restrictive than some of the others in most important aspects.

(We note parenthetically that it would be very puzzling, and difficult to explain, why the SF Sheriff's Department and the University of California, San Francisco PD have long had the use of Tasers, but the SFPD would not.)

One (undocumented) argument against the use of Tasers for the SFPD is that San Francisco is "different" from others cities whose police officers use Tasers, because our City is rife with an array of the types of suspects who might be especially vulnerable to apprehension by being tased (e.g., the homeless, and suspects with substance-abuse or psychiatric problems). We reject this argument for a number of reasons.

• First, no doubt for good reason, there is apparently no documentation for this argument, the erroneous basis of which is to claim that San Francisco has a certain, inordinately large segment of its population that other cities don't have.

Second, "the percentage of local police departments 'that authorized their officers to use [Tasers] increased from 7% in 2000 to 81% in 2013." More than 12,000 local police departments in the United States have authorized the use of Tasers.4 Authorization to use Tasers has increased during years while the numbers of homeless and those with substance-abuse or psychiatric problems have likewise increased. San Francisco is not different in this regard, either.

Third, Los Angeles, for example, certainly has as many, if not more, of these types of especially vulnerable suspects for whom a Taser might be used during apprehension, San Francisco is "not different" from Los

U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics (2015) "Local Police Departments, 2013: Equipment and Technology."

7

Angeles in this regard. But officers in the LAPD have had the use Tasers for over 40 years.

Neither is our City different in this regard from other cities whose officers use Tasers, e.g., Richmond, Oakland, Seattle. If the police officers in Los Angeles, Richmond, Oakland, Seattle, and so many other cities with similar demographics utilize Tasers, so should SFPD officers.

Thus, we find entirely unconvincing the argument that SFPD officers should not have Tasers because San Francisco is so "different" from all or most of these other 12,000 cities whose populations (supposedly) do not match our City's population of certain suspects who might be especially vulnerable if their apprehension involved being tased.

Our City's population of the homeless and those with substance abuse or psychiatric problems cannot justify denying our police officers' access to a valuable tool under an appropriately restrictive use-of-force policy.

Training in the Use of Tasers Under the SFPD's Use-of-Force Policy.

Whatever the final content of the part of the General Oder regarding the SFPD's use of force involving Tasers, SFPD officers have, committed to rigorous and intensive training to ensure all SFPD officers issued a Taser are thoroughly familiar with the device and with the policy.

We fully expect this commitment will be met, Indeed, Michael' Leonessio, Oakland's Taser expert, told the Commission on June 21 this year that he had created for the Oakland PD a Taser program that resulted in no deaths due to Tasers. Surely the SFPD can borrow and incorporate the best parts of the training in this program.

Many who oppose the use of Tasers cite instances of abuse or misuse of Tasers as the reason for their opposition. Likely, however, the rigorous and intensive training of SFPD officers in the use of Tasers, coupled with the restrictive Taser policy and the strict oversight of and accountability in the officers' use of these devices (see below), will absolutely minimize the number of instances of claimed misuse or abuse of this device. So the we believe there to be little merit in the objection to Tasers based on citing numerous instances of alleged Taser misuse or abuse by other police departments.

Oversight and Accountability.

• No doubt, any policy adopted for the SFPD's use of Tasers will include detailed and strict provisions for oversight and accountability. (See, e.g., the SFPD's Draft 05/05/17 policy, pp. 6-7, paragraph 0, "DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS" [lists 17 items to be included in an officer's incident or written report, and states "Officers at the Police Academy Physical Techniques and Defensive Tactics staff shall analyze all incident reports involving CED use, upon receipt, to identify trends, including deterrence and effectiveness"]; and "SUPERVISOR RESPONSIBILITIES. When a CED has been activated, a supervisor shall follow the protocol outlined in DGO 5.01, Section VII, Section B.2." [This protocol outlines the steps a supervisor must take to determine whether any use of force was necessary or unnecessary.] These detailed oversight and accountability provisions, under discussion by Commissioner Melara's ECW working group, might become even more restrictive for the officers and their supervisors.)

Add to these rigorous provisions the use of body-held cameras by each officer. These cameras will help create even greater accuracy in determining how the device was used, and thus, greater accountability.

/

Furthermore, the devices themselves will provide even more accountability: In response to the public outcry over police shootings, in 2015 the LAPD decided to equip every patrol officer with a Taser; it ordered new Tasers that record the date, time, and duration of the firing, whether the Taser wires actually strike the suspect, and how long the electricity pulsed through the wires.

Thus, these strict policy provisions, the body-held camera, and the information from the Taser itself will provide a seemingly unrivaled level of accountability for an officer's use of the device.

One additional benefit: This level and detail of accountability and oversight should have a deterrent effect on any officer's unnecessary or premature display or use of the device.

This expected high level of oversight and accountability for these devices is one more reason for approving their use by all SFPD officers, and,

we believe, substantially lessens the force of any objections to Tasers based on potential misuse or abuse of the device.

For all the reasons outlined above, we NDCPAB members reiterate our strong recommendation that the Commission approve the use of Tasers for the.SFPD.

Rodney Chin Resident of District 5

Mary Conde Board Member of Civic Center Community Benefit District

Cow Hollow Association Liaison to NCPAB

Lynn Davis Civic Center Resident

Peter Fortune Marina Community Association Liaison to NDCPAB

Susan Horst Attorney at Law Civic Center Resident

Respectfully submitted,

Members of the Northern Police District's Community Police Advisory Board

Robert Johnstone Lower Haight

Vas Kinris Executive Director of Fillmore Merchants' Association

Greg Manitani

Audrey Moy

Rick Smith Marina District

Brain Wallace Treasurer of the Middle Polk Neighborhood Association

in

Appendix A to NDCPAB Members' Submission to the Commission

In preparation for this submission NDCPAB members have: attended the June 21, 2017 Commission meeting at which "Taser experts" made presentations; and attended meetings of Commissioner Melara's working group on Electronic Controlled Weapons (BCW working group). NDCPAB members have also reviewed and analyzed the SFPD's proposed Department General Order (Draft revision 05/05/17) regarding the use of Tasers and the many proposed amendments to that policy from various members of the ECW working group; the SFPD's chart comparing various Taser policy provisions, titled "Conducted Energy Device Policy Comparison"; the International Association of Chiefs of Police Model Policy for "Electronic Control Weapons," and the policies governing the use of Tasers by the San Francisco Sheriff's Department, the University of California, San Francisco Police Department, the San Jose Police Department, the Oakland Police Department, the Seattle Police Department, the Baltimore Police Department, the Los Angeles Police Department, and the Richmond Police Department; the "Report on Electronic Control Weapons (ECW's) Submitted to the City of Berkeley" by the Stanford Criminal Justice Center at Stanford Law School; the June 20, 2016 and May 26, 2016 submissions to the Commissionby the Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF); the April 7, 2015 updated report from the Shorenstein Center of Media, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard's Kennedy School, titled "U.S. Department of Justice: Police Use of force, Tasers and other weapons"; the National Institute of Justice's October 8, 2014 report titled "Assessing the Safety of Conducted Energy Devices"; the U.S. Department of Justice's May 2011 report titled "Police Use of Force, Tasers and Other Less-Lethal Weapons"; the September 2009 report of the Police Executive Research Forum (PFIRF) titled "Comparing safety outcomes in police use-of-force cases for law enforcement agencies that have deployed Conducted Energy Devices and a matched comparison group that have not: A quasi-experimental evaluation"; the July 2015 U.S. Dept. of Justice's statistical report titled "Local Police Departments, 2013: Equipment and Technology"; the 2012 report titled "Wake Forest Baptist Medical Study Suggests Tasers Don't Cause Cardiac Complications"; the January 15, 2009 report from the American College of Emergency Physicians titled "Serious Injuries From Taser Are Extremely Rare"; the May 2010 article in the Journal of Trauma titled "Conducted Electrical Weapon Use by Law Enforcement: An Evaluation of Safety and Injury"; the 2007 report titled "Amnesty International's concerns about Taser

11

use: statement to the US Department of Justice Inquiry into deaths in custody"; the May 18, 2017 letter from the Department of Police Accountability to Commissioners Melara and Hing summarizing previous hearings before the Commission on the topic of [Tasers]; the manufacturer's May 19, 2017 version "TASER Handheld CEW Warnings, Instructions, and Information: Law Enforcement"; the San Francisco Examiner article on March 6, 2017 reporting on the Chamber of Commerce's poll supporting police use of "stun guns"; and various other postings on that part of the SFIPD's web site devoted to "Conducted Energy Devices."

12

Tom, Risa (P0L

From: Martha Hubert ci. LJJ[TiI...-- - Sent: Sunday, October 1, 2017 4:31 AM To: SFPD, Commission (POL)

Subject: TASERS KILL

My message is in the subject. Tasers Kill Please do not make them part of San Francisco's Police Force.

We used to call Police Officers PEACE OFFICERS.

I'm afraid those days are long gone. Citizens are afraid to call the police in time of need these days. The use of tasters would only escalate that mistrust of the police. Tasers are lethal weapons. They escalate violence. In peace, Martha Hubert

Tom, Risa (POL)

From: Deborah England <j Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 2:47 PM To: SFPD, Commission (POL) Subject: No ECWs for SFPD

Commissioners,

I join my colleagues at the Bar Association of San Francisco in urging the Commission not to-approve the use of ECWs (formerly known as Tasers) by the SFPD. I will not reiterate the points made by BASF in its September 18 memorandum to the Commission. Suffice it to say that the pertinent research establishes that ECWs are dangerous to officers and the public, ineffective, and costly (both in terms of budgetary resources and human physical safety). The recent death in custody of a suspect after Oakland police officers stunned him with an ECW is tragically illustrative of the undue risk of using these weapons.

Thank you for your consideration,

Deborah C. England, Esq.

II 1iJ Iii

Marina Community Association 1517 North Point Street, No. 45

San Francisco, CA 94123

October 2, 2017

DELIVERED BY HAND AND EMAIL

San Francisco Police Commission 1245 Third Street San Francisco, CA 94158

Dear Commissioners:

The Board of the Marina Community Association ("the Board" or "we") strongly urges the San Francisco Police Commission ("the Commission") to approve the San Francisco Police Department's use of Tasers.

Background

In reaching its recommendation the Board has conducted considerable investigation, research, and deliberations regarding the use of Tasers/Controlled Energy Devices (Tasers). We shared this task with members of the Northern District's Community Police Advisory Board. Appendix A to this letter describes most of the steps and materials comprising the investigation and research.

The Board makes its recommendation for the following reasons.

The Commission Should Approve the Use of Tasers to Ensure That San Francisco Voters Do Not Usurp the Commission's Function

We have learned there would be a "movement afoot" to let San Francisco voters decide whether SFPD officers will have Tasers if the Commission does not approve their use. This measure would amend the Charter and not merely establish an unenforceable City "policy."

Taking the this step to let the electorate decide about Tasers arises from the considerable frustration with the Police Commission's having

refused over the past decade to approve Tasers; its purpose is also to prevent a well-organized "vocal minority" from denying the SFPD a valuable tool so they can better serve and protect the public.

This ballot measure could pass, possibly by a considerable margin. A recent poll found that 78% of the San Francisco registered voters responding supported giving "stun guns" to the SFPD, while only 17% opposed.' S

Also, at the MCA's Crime & Safety Committee meeting in April, attended by more than 70 residents, more than 95% of the attendees raised their hands in an informal vote of how many present wanted the SFPD to have Tasers.

In addition, the MCA recently sent an email questionnaire to over 1000 recipients in its email network. In response to the question whether the SFPD should have Tasers, 91% of the respondents were in favor of the SFPD having Tasers. Only 3% opposed (6% undecided).

The Board doesn't know the specifics of any proposed ballot measure, but understands that provisions would include: (1) requiring that the SFPD have the use of "Controlled Energy Devices"; (2) providing for the initial

S

funding; of these devices; and (3) giving the Chief of Police (not the Comimission) the authority establish a committee of SFPD officers (a) to

S choose the specific devices and the officers who will have their use and (b) to draft, and have final approval of, the use-of-force policy governing these devices.

We would much prefer that San Francisco voters not usurp one of the Commission's functions, but instead, that the Commission approve the use of Tasers and thereby preclude any chance it could forever lose control over the policy governing their use.

'San Francisco Examiner, March 6, 2017, reporting about the results of a poll commissioned by the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce. The poll reportedly had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4%.

2

• Chief Scott's Request For a Tool That Allows SFPD Officers to Prevent Escalation and in the Process De-escalate Force.

We understand that the Commission recommended LAPD Deputy Chief William Scott as one of its three final choices to become the City's Chief of Police. Presumably, the Commission is well aware of his background that made him an excellent choice: He graduated from the .:: •:

University of Alabama with a degree in accounting; he was with the Los Angeles Police Department for more than 27 years; he did assignments in patrol, the detective bureau, internal affairs, and gang operations; he reportedly stood out for his work in the department's professional standards bureau dealing with police reform; for the two years before coming here, he was Deputy Chief of a part of that department that is comparable to the entire SFPD department -- the 1700-member South Bureau in a nearly 58-.

square mile territory (which included USC, the Port of Los Angeles, and South Los Angeles, an area rife with homicides and gang violence).

Significant here is that Chief Scott has had considerable experience with the LAPD's use of Tasers. Officers in that department have used Tasers since the mid-1980's, pre-dating Chef Scott's entire tenure in that department.

•

•• Chief Scott wants to train every SFPD officer to use a Taser because "In our vision and our quest to have a tool or piece of equipment that

..... allows us to prevent escalation and in the process de-escalate -force, we

feel that this option [Tasers] accomplishes that." He has stated he well understands the risks associated with Tasers, but believes the benefits (even though they don't always work) outweigh the potential harm.

In terms of benefits versus potential harm, no direct physical means of apprehending a suspect or piece of an officer's equipment (pepper spray, baton, bean bag gun, or sidearm) is entirely free from potential harm or misuse. But the Commission has approved direct physical force and these pieces of equipment for every officer's use in accordance with policy. A Taser -- likewise used in accordance with policy -- gives an officer one more piece of equipment to help perform his or her duties.

A Taser is rarely lethal, and compared to an officer's sidearm, is certainly far less lethal and poses much less potential harm. Using a Taser is therefore far, far preferable to, and much more likely to result in far

3

less serious injuries to both suspect and officer than, use of a sidearm 2 As such, a Taser is a valuable piece of equipment to enable an officer to subdue a noncompliant or aggressive suspect with a better outcome for both the suspect and the officer.

• The Board believes Chief Scott's opinion and judgment about Tasers are solidly based on considerable experience. With all due respect to the Commissioners, his many years of firsthand experience with the use of Tasers likely exceeds, in both quantity and content, that of any Commissioner: e.g., his untold number of discussions with LAPD officers about their use, experience with, and opinions of Tasers; LAPD communications about the use of Tasers; and the likely scores of Taser incident reports he has read or learned about.

Presumably, in recommending William Scott to become our Chief of Police, the Commission believed it could trust his judgment. The Board firmly believes the Commission should, in this instance, defer to his judgment and grant his request. Give him and his officers what he believes his officers need to properly serve and protect the public: one more "tool or piece of equipment that allows [SFPD officers] to prevent escalation and in the process de-escalate force." He understands that Tasers do not always work, but they can still be a convincing deterrent (see below). Giving these officers one more option -- less lethal than a sidearm is especially important after the Commission passed a more restrictive use-of-force policy in December 2016 emphasizing the sanctity of life.

We believe, that the Commission, having a year ago recommended Chief Scott (as one of three) to lead the SFPD, should not now reject his experienced and reasoned judgment or his request that all of his police officers be equipped with and trained in the use of Tasers.

Tasers Reduce Injuries to Suspects and Officers.

A number of studies or reports address the injuries suffered by suspects and/or officers in incidents when a Taser has been displayed to a suspect or activated. The Board concluded that the likely most relevant and

2 Injury to an officer from the discharge of his or her firearm is, in most instances, the seriously debilitating psychological effects from having shot another human -- which frequently leads to remedial treatment and time off from service.

statistically valid study was performed by the well-respected Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) for the National Institute of Justice in 2009 .3 PERF collected data for comparable periods from seven Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) that had deployed CED's and six LEAs that had not deployed CED's, and analyzed the data for nine safety measures.4

The results of this detailed study demonstrate that Tasers significantly reduce injuries to bOth suspects and officers. PERF found that "CED sites" (i.e., LEAs that use Tasers), when compared with a group of matched "non-CED sites," were associated with improved safety outcomes on six of its nine safety measures: officer injuries; suspect injuries; suspect severe injuries; officers receiving injuries requiring medical attention; suspects receiving injuries requiring medical attention; and suspects receiving an• injury that resulted in their being sent to a hospital or other medical facility.

PERF found, in addition, there to be no difference between the CED and non-CED sites on the outcomes of three other safety measures: number of suspect deaths, officer severe injuries, and officer injuries requiring hospitalization. As to the measure of suspect deaths, PERF reported:

Another concern raised by critics of CEDs is that they may lead to higher death rates for [LEAs] that deploy CEDs. We found no support for that concern. CEDs seem to have a neutral effect on the number of suspect deaths related to officer use-of-force cases.

•

' PERF concluded: "For six of nine significant outcomes, our data suggest that the magnitude of the effects of the improved safety outcomes

• for the' 'CED sites (relative to the non-CED sites) was impressive."

"Comparing the safety outcomes in police use-of-force cases for law enforcement agencies that have deployed Conducted Energy Devices and a matched comparison that have not: A quasi-experimental evaluation." September 2009.

(1) Officer injuries; (2) officer severe injuries; (3) suspect injuries; (4) suspect severe injuries; (5) officers receiving injuries requiring medical attention; (6) officer injuries requiring hospitalization; (7) suspects receiving injuries requiring medical attention; (8) suspects receiving an injury that resulted in their being sent to a hospital or other medical facility; and (9) number of suspect deaths.

61

Indeed, it was very impressive. For example, for the LEAs that deployed CEDs, PERF concluded that its data "suggest that the odds of a suspect being injured are reduced by more than 40%" and "the odds of a suspect being severely injured are reduced by over .40%." For CED-only LEAs, "when officers actually use CEDs [the] .data suggest that there is a.

• 76% reduction in officer injuries" and "there is a 63% reduction inthe probability of an officer receiving an injury requiring medical attention." When a CED site deploys CEDs, "the odds of an officer receiving an injury

• requiring medical attention is reduced by at least .80%."

Tasers Can Help De-escalate and Can Create More Time and Distance.

As noted above, one of the reasons Chief Scott has asked the Commission to approve Tasers for his officers is that a Taser is "a tool or piece of equipment that allows us to prevent escalation and in the process de-escalate force. . . ." We fully agree.

Common sense dictates that the prospect of being stunned by a Taser will, in most instances, deter a rational suspect from any, or further, noncompliance with an officer's instructions or any further aggression toward the officer. Just the prospect of being "tased" should therefore help convince an initially noncompliant suspect to comply with an officer's oral instructions if the initial part .of the officer's time and distance tactic is not fully successful.

In this regard, then, the deterrent effect of a Taser, by potential or actual display or use, holds the prospect of increasing the officer's chances of successfully executing his or her "time and distance". tactic for a suspect who might otherwise consider initiating or continuing an aggressive or noncompliant response or action toward the officer.

Therefore, a Taser, with its deterrent effect, should be viewed as an integral, valuable option for use in the required "time and distance" tactic that an officer must take in appropriate circumstances -- another tool, as Chief Scott recognizes, for an officer to "prevent escalation and in the process to de-escalate force."

For this reason, we take issue with the assertion by the Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF) that "the use of Taser/CEDs run [sic]

• counter to de-escalation and time and distance." This assertion was stated to

on

be based entirely on proximity and actually firing the device: the "optimal' effects of Taser/CED are realized only if used within 15 feet of the individual tased. Effective Taser use requires close proximity between officers and suspects, the opposite effect achieved through time and distance." (Emphasis original; see BASF's June 20, 2016 Memorandum to• the Commission, p. 13.)

We do not know why the BASF neglected, or refused, to recognize the, potentially strong deterrent effect that a Taser would likely have on a noncompliant suspect, and thus, the significant value of this tool to help implement a successful time and distance tactic. In any event, the potential use of a Taser is NOT "counter to dc-escalation and time and distance." Rather, a Taser, as a significant deterrent, can clearly be an effective part of an officer's successful time and distance tactic and, thereby, a valuable tool to try to de-escalate and to prevent escalation.

We recognize, however, that a noncompliant suspect might not always respond rationally to the prospect of being stunned by a Taser -- or, for that matter, even by an officer's displaying, pointing, and/or threatening to use his or her sidearm. But one step in the process of attempting to subdue a noncompliant suspect, if the officer's time and distance techniques initially do not fully succeed, should be the prospect, or actual threat, of using a Taser. In any event, without doubt, an officer's threat of using a Taser is far, far preferable to even displaying, much less using, his or her sidearm. This is one of the most compelling reasons to approve Tasers for SFPD officers.

A Comprehensive, Restrictive Policy Will Govern SFPD's Taser Use.

The Commission must know that the SFPD officers' use of Tasers will be governed by a strict use-of-force policy. Indeed, when speaking to the Commission on June 21 this year, retired Oakland police officer Michael Leonesio, a recognized Taser expert, characterized the SFPD's Draft policy as "restrictive."

We commend to the Commission the SFPD's chart comparing its Draft Taser policy with the existing policies of 10 other cities plus the proposed policies of PERE and the IACP. In addition to reviewing the important aspects of these 12 other policies in this chart, the WOAiR]Y

reviewed the Taser policies of the LAPD, the San Jose PD, the Oakland PD,

7

the Baltimore PD, the San Francisco Sheriff's Department, the City of Richmond PD, and the University of California, San Francisco PD. This chart and review of these policies confirmed the accuracy of Mr. Leonesio's opinion that the SFPD Draft policy is comparatively restrictive, or at least no less restrictive than some of the others in most: important aspects.

(We note parenthetically that it would be very puzzling, and difficult to explain, why the SF Sheriff's Department and the University of California, San Francisco PD have long had the use of Tasers, but the SFPD would not.)

One (undocumented) argument against the use of Tasers for the SFPD is that San Francisco is "different" from others cities whose police officers use Tasers, because our City is rife with an array of the types of suspects who might be especially vulnerable to apprehension by being tased (e.g., the homeless, and suspects with substance-abuse or psychiatric problems). We reject this argument for a number of reasons.

First, no doubt for good reason, we have found no documentation for this argument, the erroneous basis of which is to claim that San Francisco has this certain, inordinately large segment of its population that other cities don't have.

Second, "the percentage of local police departments that authorized their officers to use [Tasers] increased from 7% in 2000 to 81% in 2013." More than 12,000 local police departments in the United States have authorized the use of Tasers .5 Authorization to use Tasérs has increased during years that the numbers of homeless and those with substance-abuse or. psychiatric problems have likewise increased. San Francisco is not different in this regard, either. .

Third, Los Angeles, for example, certainly has as many, if not more, of these types of especially vulnerable suspects for whom a Taser might be used during apprehension. San Francisco is "not different" from Los Angeles in this regard. But officers in the LAPD have had the use Tasers. for over 40 years.

U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics (2015) "Local Police Departments, 2013: Equipment and Technology."

Neither is our-City different in this regard from other cities whose officers use Tasers, e.g., Richmond, Oakland, Seattle. If the police officers in Los Angeles, Richmond, Oakland, Seattle, and so many other cities with similar demographics utilize Tasers, so should SFPD officers.

Thus, we find entirely unconvincing the argument that SFPD officers should not have Tasrs because San Francisco is somehow "different" from all or most of these other 12,000 cities whose populations (supposedly) do not match our City's population of certain suspects who might be especially vulnerable if their apprehension involved being tased.

Our City's population of the homeless and those with substance abuse or psychiatric problems cannot justify denying our police officers' access to a valuable tool under an appropriately restrictive use-of-force policy.

Training in the Use of Tasers Under the SFPD's Use-of-Force Policy.

Whatever the final content of the part of the General Oder regarding the SFPD's use of force involving Tasers, SFPD officers have committed to rigorous and intensive training to ensure all SFPD officers issued a Taser are thoroughly familiar with policy, the device itself, and use of the device.

We fully expect this commitment will be met. Indeed, Michael Leonessio, Oakland's Taser expert, told the Commission on June 21 this year that he had created for the Oakland PD a Taser program that resulted in no deaths due to Tasers. Surely the SFPD can borrow and incorporate the best parts of the training in this program, with the same results.

Many who oppose the use of Tasers cite instances of abuse or misuse of Tasers as the reason for their opposition. We expect, however, that the rigorous and intensive training of SFPD officers in the use of Tasers, coupled with the restrictive Taser policy and the strict oversight of and accountability in the officers' use of these devices (see below), will absolutely minimize the number of instances of claimed misuse or. abuse of this device. So we believe there to be little merit in the objection to Tasers based on citing numerous instances of alleged Taser misuse or abuse by other police departments.

Oversight and Accountability.

• No doubt, any policy adopted for the SFPD's use of Tasers will include detailed and strict provisions for oversight and accountability. (See, e.g, the SFPD 's Draft 05/05/17 pp "DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS" [lists 17 items to be included in

• an officer's incident or written report, and states "Officers at the Police • Academy Physical Techniques and Defensive Tactics staff shall analyze all

• 0 •• incident reports involving CED use, upon receipt, to identify trends, • including deterrence and effectiveness"]; and "SUPERVISOR

RESPONSIBILITIES. When a CED has been activated, a supervisor shall follow the. protocol outlined in DGO 5.0 1, Section VII, Section B.2." [This protocol outlines the steps a supervisor must take to determine whether any use of force was necessary or unnecessary.] These detailed oversight and

• accountability provisions, under discussion by Commissioner Melara's • ECW working group',might become even more restrictive for the officers

and their supervisors.)

Add to these rigorous provisions the use of body-held cameras by each officer. These cameras will help create even greater accuracy in determining how the device was used, and thus, greater accountability.

Furthermore, the devices themselves will provide even more accountability: In response to the public outcry over police shootings, in 2015 the LAPD decided to equip every patrol officer with a Taser; it ordered new Tasers that record the dtte, time, and duration of the firing, whether the Taser wires actually strike the suspect, and how long the electricity pulsed through the wires.

Thus, these strict policy provisions, the body-held camera, and the information from the Taser itself will provide a seemingly unrivaled level of accountability for an officer's use of the device.

One additional benefit: This level and detail of accountability and oversight should have a deterrent effect on unnecessary or premature displays or uses of the device.

This expected high level of oversight and accountability for these devices is one more reason for approving their use by all SFPD officers, and, the Board believes, substantially lessens the force of any objections to Tasers based on potential misuse or abuse of the device.

10

For all the reasons outlined above, the Board of the MCA reiterates its strong recommendation that the Commission approve the use of Tasers for the SFPD.

Respectfully submitted,

The Board of the Marina Community Association

Appendix A to MCA Board letter to the Commission

In- preparation for this submission one or more Board members(s): attended the June 21, 2017 Commission meeting at which "Taser experts" made presentations; attended meetings of Commissioner Mèlara's working group on Electronic Controlled Weapons (ECW working group); reviewed and analyzed the SFPD's proposed Department General Order (Draft revision 05/05117) regarding the use of Tasers and the many proposed. amendments to that policy from various members of the ECW working group; the SFPD's chart comparing various Taser policy provisions, titled "Conducted Energy Device Policy Comparison"; the International Association of Chiefs of Police Model Policy for "Electronic Control Weapons," and the policies governing the use of Tasers by the San Francisco Sheriff's Department, the University of California, San Francisco Police Department, the San Jose Police Department, the Oakland Police Department, the Seattle Police Department, the Baltimore Police Department, the Los Angeles Police Department, and the Richmond Police Department; the "Report on Electronic Control Weapons (ECW's) Submitted to the City. of Berkeley" by the Stanford Criminal Justice Center at Stanford Law School; the June 20, 2016 and May 26, 2016 submissions to the Commission by the Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF); the April 7, 2015 updated report from the Shorenstein Center of Media, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard's Kennedy School, titled "U.S. Department of Justice: Police Use of force, Tasers and other weapons"; the National Institute of Justice's October 8, 201.4 report titled "Assessing the Safety of Conducted Energy Devices"; the U.S. Department of Justice's May 2011 report titled "Police Use of Force, Tasers and Other Less-Lethal Weapons"; the September 2009 report of the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) titled "Comparing safety outcomes in police use-of-force cases for law

11

enforcement agencies. that have deployed Conducted Energy Devices and a matched comparison group that have not: A quasi-experimental evaluation"; the July 2015 U.S. Dept. of Justice's statistical report titled "Local Police

• Departments, 2013: Equipment and Technology"; the 2012 report titled "Wake Forest Baptist Medical Study Suggests Tasers Don't Cause Cardiac Complications"; the January 15, 2009 report from the American College of Emergency Physicians titled "Serious Injuries From Taser Are Extremely Rare"; the May 2010 article in the Journal of Trauma titled "Conducted Electrical Weapon Use by Law Enforcement: An Evaluation of Safety and

•

• Injury"; the 2007 report titled "Amnesty International's concerns about Taser •

• use: statement to the US Department of Justice Inquiry into deaths in • custody"; the May 18, 2017 letter from the Department of Police

• Accountability to Commissioners Melara and Hing summarizing previous hearings before the Commission on the topic of [Tasers]; the manufacturer's

• May 19, 2017 version "TASER Handheld CEW Warnings, Instructions, and • Information: Law Enforcement"; the San Francisco Examiner article on

March 6, 2017 reporting on the Chamber of Commerce's poll supporting • police use of "stun guns"; and various other postings on that part of the

• SFPD's web site devoted to "Conducted Energy Devices."

12

Tom, Risa (P01)

From: Tara Patanian <- Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 2:28 PM To: SFPD, Commission (POL Cc: [email protected] Subject Statement in favor of CEDs

Good afternoon Police Commission,

While I attended one of the public forums regarding CEDs, I would like to make a formal statement via email as well. I am a resident, home owner and worker in the SoMa District.

I strongly believe that no officer on the SFPD has the intent to kill any citizen, but everyday situations can get heated very quickly. It is imperative officers are given all options of less lethal methods available to protect the public and themselves in instances of aggressive behavior.

One of the best options is the CED or Taser. My hope is this option will decrease the number of lethal incidents which not only impact victims and officers, but their families as well. I have confidence in the training of our city's officers by the chief and Captains of the SFPD.

I'd like to also give a special thank you to Captain Darryl Fong of the Southern Station for being an anchor in our community in strength and leadership. His good deeds do not go unnoticed by residents, visitors and business owners of the Southern District.

Thank you,

Tara Patanian Executive Assistant Four Seasons Hotel San Francisco 757 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA voice: 415-633-3511 fax: 415-633-3518

email: tara.patanianfourseasons.com

Find our Valet Parking address at 217 Stevenson Street on your GPS.

Four Seasons Hotel San Francisco I MKT Restaurant-Bar

Four Seasons Hotel San Francisco introduces a new luxury standard with the, renovation of more than 15,000 square feet of event space and redesigned guest rooms and suites coming in early 2018.

In L_ Aw. 0 am& V Min L M_

(

Commissioner, Dear Commissioner

are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPD's arsenal. Tasers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPD's arsenal.

Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets. Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. Tasers are disproportionately Used on black and brown people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions. Tasers are a form of torture,

• Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental

health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions. • Tasers are a form of torture.

Commissioner,

are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPD's arsenal.


• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • lasers militarize the police. • lasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


Dear Commissioner,

Tasers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPD's arsenal.


• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • lasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


Commissioner,

ers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPD's arsenal.

• lasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.


health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions. • lasers are a form of torture.

Dear Commissioner,

Tasers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SPPDs arsenal

• lasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets

• lasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • lasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


77

r Commissioner,

ers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPDs arsenal.


• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • lasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


San rrancisco bemoratic Soclalista nE Amaica

Dear Commissioner,





Dear Commissioner,


• Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not sanctity of life alternative to bullets,



Commissioner,

Tasers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPD's arsenal



health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions, • Tasers are a form of torture.

Dear Commissioner,


• Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not sanctity of life alternative to bullets.



Co.mmissio:ner,

are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPDs arsenal.

• Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets,

• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • lasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


Dear Commissioner,

Tasers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPD1s arsenal.


• lasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


-

..

-

Commissioner,

are deadly weapons that should not be added to SPPD's arsenal.


• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • lasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


Dear Commissioner,



• lasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


::.

Commissioner,



• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • lasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • lasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental

health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions, • Tasers are a form of torture,

Dear Commissioner,



• lasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • lasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people • Tasers militarize the police. • lasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental

health crisis, the disabled, and those With heart conditions. • lasers are a form of torture

Commissioner,



• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders, • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • lasers are particularly lethal when Used on people experiencing a mental


Dear Commissioner,



• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • lasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • lasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


Commissioner,


• Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill, They are not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.


health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions. • Tasers are a form of torture

Dear Commissioner,



• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when usedon people experiencing a mental


Commissioner,




health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions. • Tasers are a form of torture

Dear Commissioner,





Commissioner,


Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets. Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions, Tasers are a form of torture.

Dear Commissioner,



• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders, • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


Commissioner,




health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions, • Tasers are a form of torture.

Dear Commissioner,





Commissioner,





THESE REASONS, I ASK THAT YOU VOTE NO ON EQUIPPING

r Commissioner,





Dear Commissioner,




health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions.. • Tasers are a form of torture.

Dear Commissioner,



• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing .a mental


Commissioner,

rs are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPD's arsenal




--

Sari Frndsco Democratic Socialists of

ir

America

Commissioner, Dear Commissioner,

ers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPD's arsenal. Tasers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPD's arsenal

• Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not a • Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental

health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions a Tasers are a form of torture. • Tasers are a form of torture,

Address:

Commissioner,

are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPDs arsenal.


• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people, • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


Dear Commissioner,



a lasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


Commissioner,

ers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPDs arsenal

a Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not a • sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown People. • Tasers militarize the police. • lasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


Dear Commissioner,

Tasers are deadly weapons that should not be added to SFPDs arsenal.


• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • lasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental


Dear Commissioner,


ajnijoi fO Wio a E)je s.esej SuO!ppUO3 Ijuaq LflIM qsoqJ puU 1P9lclS!P eL 's!SP LpieaLI

Itguaw 6upueiedxe eldod uo pesn UeqM i.Ilnid e.a sjesj o3HOd @L11 eZL1Til!W s.iesj

o1doad uMoJq puu joelq uo posn Alaliguoiliodoidsip E)ju s.esj siepinw oaijod eanpei io IUOAaid jou op sjesej..

sienq 01 OATUJIi 01!1 10 A1I3uis ou @Av icoq iipi pu 19n3oioeo 'ww JULIT uodeM A0JJ0J le OR sJosi


a Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. a Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. a Tasers militarize the police. a Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental

health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions. a Tasers are a form of torture.

puasm s,0dJ9 ol pepp eq jou pnoqs suodaM ipuep em siesj.

'iOUO!SSWWO3 mea

Dear Commissioner,

-einvoi jo WJ04 le Eme SJeSJ sUoTjpuo3 iieq 1flIM asoq pu palqsp oqT SS!J3 L191

J'eJUGW P Iiuioueuadxo aidoed uo pesn U8LlM Iind 9.re siesj a3lod @qI ezuiw sesej a

oldoed uicuq pue iq uo pesn AleuoiJodoJds!p am s.asj •siep.inw 0311od eanpai .io IUOAejd Iou op siesij a

solInq 01 auuiei e4!I Io A3US OLI @JP iceqj 'p put n3o.n,ee 'W!iW WLp UOd1eM oue am s.iesej

puesm s1gdjg 01 poppa eq iou pjn'oqs iiqi suodleM Apiap am siesj

'JOUO!SSIWWO3 mea


a Tasers are a terror weapon that maim, electrocute, and kill. They are not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

a Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. a Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. a Tasers militarize the police. a Tasers are particularly lethal when used on people experiencing a mental

health crisis, the disabled, and those with heart conditions. a Tasers are a form of torture.

Dear Commissioners:

oppose tasers for the following reasons:

Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders

• Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.

• Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on people

experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

• Tasers are a form, of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERS!

Dear Commissioners:

1 oppose tasers for the following reasons:

Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electroáutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.



a Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on people

experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions. Tasers are a form, of torture.


Name— UJ\y\e To ATa Address

Email ç C -

[i ni

Dear Commissioners:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons:

Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of. life alternative to bullets.

Tasers do not' prevent or reduce police murders Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.


Name is" "-k WAW

Dear Commissioners:







• Tasers are a form of torture.


Dear Commissioners:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of.life alternative to bullets.


• . Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.





Name

Were

Email -.

Dear Commissioners:




• Tasers are disproportionately used on black. and brown people.





Dear Commissioners:









Name--i~ I 1,—Qq I&

Addres

Email

Dear Commissioner:


a lasers are a terror weapon thatmaims, electrocutes and kill it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

• Tasers are dlsproportionate1y usedon black and brqWn.peóple.

'

• lasers do nt prevent or reduce police nuidS

• Täsers re particuIrly lethal onpèople: ëçpèrincing 'a mental health trisi, Ofle: disabled and those with heart conditions

• lasers biilitarlze the police

lasers aró a form of tortut; FOR ALL OF 'THESE REASONS I DEMAND TflAT

VOTE l

Name t(2'4 Ce (v k

Email

Dear Commissioners:







•, lasers are a form of torture.


Commissioner:

oppe tasers for the following reasons:

Vsersare terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of Ii aitèmativtQ bullets.

• lisar disproportionately used on black and b*n people.

. .' ra'ers dönót prevent or ieducé police murdL

Tasers are particularly lethal on people_...' • experiencing a mental health crisis, on the

disabled and those with heart çonditions

• Tadrs militarize the police

• lasers are a form of torture. :

FOR ALL OF TH1SE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE 20 '

Name /Mii"r '14 Address

:

Emal

Dear Commissioner:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and lcills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

•' lasers are 'disproportionately used on black and brown people,

• Ithers do' not p-èvent or reduce police murders.

Tasers are particularly' lethal on QpIi experiencing a mental health crisis, on this disabled and those with heart cnditiOts.

• Taers,i1litarie the police and area form ol

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE _NQ! Name Ji .

Addr

Dear Commissioner;

oppose tasersfor the following reasons:

'lasers are a terror weapon that maims, eleccuesafld kills, it is. not a sanctity of life alterntive to bulte

Taset are disproportionately .used on black and brown people.

• 1ers do nOt prevent or reduce police murders;

• lasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions

• lasers are a form of torture

FOR ALL OF ThESE REASONS I DEMANt5 THAT YOU VOTE I

Name

Address

Emai

Dear Commissioner:



Tasers are dispthportioMtely, used on black and brown people..-

Tasers do.notprevent or reduce police murders. :

• lasers are particuiatly.lethal oiipèopie • experiencing a mentathealth crisis, çnthe

disabled and those with heart conditiths

• lasers militarize the police and are a form of torture

OR ALL OF THESE 'REASONS IDMA1 LILt OU VOThQ

i

ddress

Dear Commissioner:

I oppsetser for the following reasons:

tasi eit'are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of Ate alternative to bullets

* lasers ar disproportionately used on black aPd broiin peop1e.

• lasers do not prevent or reduce police • murders.

• • Tásers are prticularty lethal on peop1e • experiencing a meritaJ health crisis, on the

dsãbled and those with heart conditions.

Tasers militarize the police.

• lasers are.a form of torture.

FOR ALL OF 4HESE REASONS IDEMAND THAT VOTE WX

Name r7,i 'Z/ - A -

Address

Eml

Dear Commissioner;

I oppbsetasers for th following- reasons:

•: Tasers are terror weapon that maims, -e!ectrocutesi kills, it is not a sanctity of II alternative to bullets

lasers are disproportionately used on black and brown peOple.

Tasers do iiot prevent or reduce police • - irders;

Tasers are particularly lethal On people experiencing a mental-health crisis,.On th-disebied and those with heart. conditions:

lasers thiIitariz the police. •

a lasers are a form of torture, •

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE jQ!

Name fe1 En./tiii Address

Dear Commissioners:





o Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on people




Name %)py -iJP$fhf2

Add

Dear Commissioners:









Name zuo AddrSa.

Email-

Dea-r Commissioner:


• Tasers are a ten-or weapon that maims, electrocutes and, kills, it is not a sanctity of

- life alternative tobutléts.

• Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people,.

-

. do not prevent or reduce police murders..

Tsrs.äre particularly lethal on: people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions

• Ta?ers are a form of torture

IRALL OF ThESE REASONS IDEMMfl) TTh ouvoi1-

me ( (VVI - . NJ? ---

ddress

Commissioner:

. oppose tasers for the following reasons:

Tasers are a- terror weapon that maims electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of II

- alternative to bullets.

Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown. people. . .

•. Tasers do not prevent or redqee po1ic

• Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis on the -'

disabled and those with heart conthtiots

• Tasers militarize the police

-

Taser-are a Form of torture -

FOR ALL.OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND WAIT YOU VOTE Ql •

Name

Address

Dear Commissioners:









Name

-

- -1 Email J

Dear Commissioners:




• Tasers are disproportionately used on. black and brown people.



• lasers are a form of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE JQ ON TASERS! -.

Name_ f' 0k

Address-

Email

-1rcfl--wrrmTiSSJOfler


• lasers are a terror weapon that maims electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

.Users are, disproportionately used on black and P'r6wn People.

°.

.

Tàsey do-not Otevent..Oe reduce police murders * Tasers are particularly lethal on pople experiencing a mental health crisis, on the thsabId and those with heart conditions • lasers militarize the police

• lasers are a form of tOrtqe.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS .1:DEMANJ5 THAT YOU VOTE EQ!. .

Name I

Address

Ematl

1 oppose tasers for the following reasons:

.. lasers are a terror weapon thatmaims,

I. electrocutes and kills, ft is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets; .

• Thsers,are disproporionátély Øoi black and.btown Oeople. :

• lasers do not prevent or reduce police .murdrs

• lasers are pttithIarly, lethal on péo1e eperieñcing anieritat hdaith.cri$is, ori the diabIed and those with. •rt c-ohditioris. -.

Tasers militarize the police ,.


L FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I t)EMA]MD THAT YOU VOTE QI

14anie

Address

Email

• ' •,S

Dear Commissioner

I dppóse tasers.fçr the following: reason: Tasers areii terror weapon that m ,electroQutes, and kills,' tisnot a

sctity of life alternative to bullets.

Tasers do 'not prevent or reduce police mrirder •.

Tasers' are disproportionately used on -

and brown people.. Taer militarize the police. Tasers are rticula4j lethal on people

experincinga mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions

Tasers area form Ôftorture.

FOR ALL CW THESE REASONS:I. DEMAND THAT YOU )IQTE NO I Name & _1211 Address Email'.__'T

Dear Commissioners:









Name 'JA3 I

'Dear Commissioners:.





• ' Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on people




Name Gt1V kLtie,

Address.JF

Email

Dear Commissioners:




• Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. Tasers militarize the police.

• Tasers are partiôularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.



Name

Address

Email

Nati

Em

, .

Dear Commissioners:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons: Dear Commissioner:

I 6ppóse:tasers'for the following reasons: Tasets are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a

sanctity of life alternative to bullets TaseiEsdo'not prevent or reduce police

mitrders.:" 'Ta'ers are 'disproportionately used on

1d(andbro'wn people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers ,,are artict1a.r13r lethal on people

experiencing a mental health crisis, on the djsa1léd and those with heart conditions.

Tásers are.a form -of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND HA YOU VOTE NO! Name' ' -

Address'1(

Email







FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT' YOU VOTE NOON TASERSI

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons: Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets. Tasers do not prevent or reduce police

murders. Tasers are disproportionately used on black

and brown people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

Tasers are a form of torture. FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND T}LtV1 YOU VOIE

NameC

Emailj ,

Dear CothnlissiQner: I oppose tasers for the following reasons:

Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes 'and kills, it is hot a sanctity of.•life alternative to bullets. ,

• Tasers do not prevônt or reduce police murders.

• Tasers are disproportionately used' on black and 'brown people. • Taseis mi.lifarizibAhe police. • Tasers are partict1'larly lethal on people experienctha 'mental health crisis, on the disabii:and those with heart conditions • Tasers a fonn'of torture. I

FOR ALL OF T}{ESEREASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO.ON TASERS! '

Name Mtk CV Address T


oppose.tasers for the bllowing reas6ns: Tas.er area leror Weapon that

iairns, plectracutbsAnd.kills, it is not a sanctity. of life'altdfnativ6,jo bullets.

Tasers do not prvnt or reduce )olice murders. .'

Tasers are dsprdp.oitionately blaek

used 'on llack and brown people. Tasers militaiz.the'pôlice.

.

Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the' disabled' and those :.

with heart conditions. Tasers are a, form of torture. FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO!

tame ddress I

I ,

Name

Address

Email -

)ear Commissioner:

Dear Commissioners:




•' Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.




Dear Commissioners:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons:,,




• Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on peopl

experiencing a mental health crisis, onithe disabled and those with heart conditions.




• Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people

. Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on people



FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE J.JQ ON TASERS!

Name' (c cv Ja

Address '''- J ------v •J

J

Email /1 '-"

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND-THAT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERS!

Name r)W) fl4T Address - -

Email

Dear Commissioners:


Dear Commissioners:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes. and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets. . ..

• Tasers do not prevent or. reduce police murders




• Tasers area form of torture.


Nan

Add

Em,,

Dear Commissioners:








FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE tLG, ON TASERS!

Name -

-.-------- ---'------ Address . - ___- --- •• -

Email-4m

Dear Commissioners:









Name I S

Address

Dear Commissioners:




• Tasers are disproportionately used on black' and brown people.





Name

Address

Dear' Commissioner: I oppose iasers, for- the following reasons:

['ass area terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills,'it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

Tasers d öfpiie or redude police' murders. Tasers are, 4isprop0rtion4tely used on black and broffp.eopie. I'asers militarize 'the police. Tasers are rticplariyléthal on people

experiening a theutl health crisis, on the disabled, and tlise with heart conditions.

Tasers are a fomof'tøtue.

OR ALL FFHESE REASONS I DEMAND RAT YOtL VOTE ON TASERS!

lame ddress mail

Dear Commissioners:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it Is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.







Name C-Y(A~iLt

Address

-- 1- Ema'l

ow

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons: • Tasers 'are a terror weapon that .,

maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately

black used on black and brown people. • Tasers'militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on

people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

• Tasers are a form of torture. FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YqU VOTE Q!

ddress -

mail

Dear Commissioner: I oppose tasers for the following reasons:

Tasers are a terror weapoii that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on

the disabled, and those with heart conditions. Tasers are a form of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NOON TASERS!

Name Address

--

Email -'v -

Dear Conrniissi'oner:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons: Tasers are a tenor weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a

sanctity of life alternative to bullets. Tasers ,do not prevent or redude police

0 murders. Tasers are disproportionately used on

'rMc and brown people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal on people

experiencing a mehtal health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions

Tasers are a form of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YQJ VOTE Q! Name Address-' - __• ,

0

Email


Tasers are a tenor'weapon that maims, electrocutes and'kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets. • Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health

• crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions. . Tasers are a form of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERS! Name Ak t ei i e

Address

~NNWWWI

1- ill

)ear Conmiisioner:-

oppose tars for the following reasons Tasers are a terror weapon that

aims, electrocutes and kills, it is not al gan6tIty of life aiièriiative to bullets.

Tasers. do not prevent or reduce Dlice murders.

Tasers a re disproportionately 0'

bi ised on black and brown people.

Tasers- niilitarize the police. '

Tasers are particularly lethal on -,

people experiencing a mental health

crisis on the ciisable&' and those with heart oiditioi'. -

Tasers are a form of brture. •: , : ,•.

FORALLOF THESE REASONS:I

DEMAND THAT;yoU VOTE NO!, 0 0

uneUYYOY1'. idress', aail ' •

Dear 'Commjssjonr

I çppose tasers for the following reasons: Tasers are a terror weapon that:

Maims, electrocutes and kills, it'is not a sanctity of life' alternative to bullets.

• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders.

Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.

Tasers militarize the police. j1serg are palrticularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart endi'tions.

Tasers are a firrn oftorLire.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE Q! Name Addressq Ernall

Dear Commissioners:









Name W -

Addres

-

- Emailr

L TT man-.--

Dear Commissioners:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets. -







)ear Commissioners:


asers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes nd kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to ullets.


• Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people:




OR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT OU VOTE NO ON TASERS!

Ldk!iLII

Dear Commissioners:




-. Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.





Name wll'__ __

Add rer -V

LicU .iII Ill) 1JI'I -

I oppose tasers for the following reasons

•Drcwssióner,

I opX)tasersfor the following reasons: Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a

flctity of life alternative to bullets. Tasers do not prevent or reduce police

murders; -.

Tasers are disproportionately used on

• and brown: people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal on people

• experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disablecf and those with heart conditions.

Tasers are a form óf-torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS 1 DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO! Name Addres Email y

Tars are a terror weapon that maims, e1ectr6utes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life

to bullets.

. Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.

Tasárs do not prevent or reduce police murders.

•.Tasers are particularly lethal on people eperiendng a mental health crisis, on the

41sabted and those with heart conditions.

• Tásers militarize the police and are form of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU yE,7'4

Address

Dear Commissioner:.

Idppose tasers for the following reasons: • Taserta6reLaWa&r weapon that naiins, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity We alternatiye to bullets, • Tasert8 WOpevent or reduce police murd5s. -.

• Taser-ra?e MQSArionately se

d=%ilitarize and brown people. -

• the police. i '/OU- l • TaserM eiarIy lethal on EY1C' f k9 eop1e experiencing a mental health 'tO 'YUiJ1J1 risis, on the disabled and those

-

Ntb heart conditions. • • ckecs

• Tasers are a form of torture..

•

FOR. ALL OF THESE REASONS I • DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE l • -

lame______________ Wdr

r-T-- --• --


Tasers area terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people Tasers militarize the police., Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, Oir the disabled, and those with heart ciifltiôhs. Tasers are a form of torture.

OR ALL OF THESE REASONS IDEMAND [HAT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERSI

Name f

Email

jjj

OR. ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND " : THAT DU VOTE NQ!

Pear Commissioner:


• lasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of Ii alternative to bullets.

• lasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.

• lasers do not prevent or reduce police murders.

• Tasers are pal lrtl:cularly lethal on people experiencing a mettaI haIth crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

• lasers militarize the police.


Dear Commissioner: I oppose taser for th6 following reasons:

lasers are a terror *ean that maims, èlectrocütés and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets..': • Tasers do nbtprevent.or reduce police murders. '

0

• Tasrs are disprpportionately use 0

on black and brown pebple. 0

• Tasers militarize the police. 0

• Tasers. are particularly leth.l on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions. • Tasers are a form of torture.

O FOR ALL OF,HESEREASQNS IDEMAND THAT.YOU• VOTE WON TASERS!

TZ Address

oppose tasers for the following reasons

• lasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.


• lasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. :

$ lasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions,

• lasers militarize the police and 'are ajormo. of torture.

OR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT IOU VOTE N

fame iTIc\4 Ldarcs

Dear CommiSSiOrter 0


• Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

• Tasers are disproportionately used on black

• and brown people.

•: tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders.

• lasers 'are particularly lethal on people

• xpeniencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.



FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT VOTE Not

Name

Add es*

Email LL

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose 'tasers for the following reasons: Tasers are a1error weapon that maui ectroc.utes and kills, it is not a •

"n'tit'of life alternatie to bullets, Tasers db.not prèveii or reduce police • murders:

& Tasers are disproportionately used on

• an brown.people.. o Tsers railitarize'the 'police.

Tasers are, particularly lethal on people. expiiicir a mental health crisis, on the disa15jd'aj'id thc with heart conditions.

Tasers, are a form of torture.

FOR ALL Of-THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT'YOU VOTE NOV Name Address Email

Dear Cônissioner: I dppoe"taer' for thç following reasons:

Taseis, ate,à. téror weapon that maims, ëlectreutès and'kill, it is 'not'a sanctity of life altemtivetqbtdlet

Tasers do not prevent or reduô&polic.è'. inthders.

. Tasers are 'dIsproportionately used on black and brown people Tasers militarize the police. '

Tasers are particularly 'lethal on people experiencing a rnental'health crisis,' on,

the disabled, and those with heart coñditiohs. Tasers are a form of torture.


•"S;.

Address

Email '

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons: • Tasers area terror weapon that naims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a, sanctity

of life alternative to bullets. • Tasers do not pre.rent or reduce police murders. • Taser.are ,dispropOrtionatelY

used, on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. '. .

•. Tas'ers' are 'particularly lethal.on people experiencing a mental health '

crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.'

• Users are a form of torture. FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE Q!

Name_ Addressi

-

Dar Comn'ussioner

' I oppose tasers 'for1he following reasons: Tasers are a terror weapon that iiijm, e1ectrcutes and kills, it is not a

nc,tity.pf life alternative to'' bullets. Tasers do not preveit or reduce police

murders..' Tasers are dispropurtionately used on

\4k A: " . •

and brown people'. '

, Tasers militarize the police Tasers are particularly lethal on people.

expetithcing a hiental health crisis, ,onthe disabled and those with heart condition.

Tasers -are a form of torture. ,

•'

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DR • ' ATYOTJVOTE.NO!

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons: Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a

sanctity of life alternative to bullets. Tasers do not prevent or reduce police

murders. Tasers are disproportionately used on black

and brown people. Tasers militarize the police.

D Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

. Tasers are a form of torture. FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NQ!

Name kle C Address I JJL1iLL. Email r

__ -

Dear Commissioner: I oppose tapers for the following reasons:

a. Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on


FOR ALL OF THESE REASONSJ DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERS!

Name Address dav,

Em rtt-

-U-

Dear Cominjssioner: I oppose tasers for the following reasons:

Tasers are a terror wpon that maims, electrocutes aiid kills, it is not a sanctity of life àltrnatjv to bullets.

Tasers do nof prevent or reduce police murders

S

Tasersa1e dlsptoportionately used on black and brown peo1. Tasers militarize the p1ice.

, lasers are particularly lethal on people experiening .a..mental health crisis, en

the disabled, and those with heart conditions. a Tasers areafotm of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE RIEASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERS!

Name J Addre;jqW"-$W0]P

L Email

' Dear Commissioner: ••

I oppose taers for the following reasons: •. Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a snCtity • of life alternative to bullets. •

• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. ' • Tasers are disproportionately

used on black and brown people. •••

• Thser militarize the police. I .

• Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those •

.

S

with.heart conditions. S S

• Tasers are a form of torture. S •. •

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS J •

DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO. Name S

I.


]Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. fasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental 'health crisis, on


OR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND HAT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERS!

Fame wmim____

ddress ,mail

Dear Commissioner:. . . .

I oppose tasers for the following ieasons • Tasers are a terror weapon that' maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity

of life alternative to bullets. .:.

• Tasers do not prevent or reduce: police murders. .

• Tasers are disproportionately" black ,

used on black and brown people.--' Tasers militarize the police.

• Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

• Tasers are a firm of torture. FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEM THAT YOU VOTE !

Address 4 . Email

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons: Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a

sanctity of life alternative to bullets. Tasers do not prevent or reduce police

murders. .

Tasrs are disproportionately used on ewk ti,4

and brown people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal on people


b Tasers are a form of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE No!' Name3 V/V4t7A-(1 Address -

Email 4.


Tasers are a terror weapon that mainis, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets. • Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders.. • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions. • Tasers are a form of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND

Dear Commissioner: -

I oppose tasets for the following reasons: Tasets are, a terror Weapon that

maims electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets. • Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murdets: • Tasers are disproportionately used on black and browir People. • Tasers militarize the police.

Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health , crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions. • Tasers are a form of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NOON TASERS! Name j Address

Dear Commissioner:

I.005e- tasers for the following reasons: Tasers, are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a

• sanctity Of life alternative to bullets. Tasers do not prevent or reduce police

murcirs. Tasers are disproportionately used on

and brown people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal on people



FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE Q! Name CIa 9eex

MsLJE1I

Dear Commissioner:


• Tasers are a terror w'eapon'that maims, electrOcutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.


Tasers do not prevent or rieduce poii-c murders.

• Tàses are 06rtitularly lethal on people experiendng a mental hàlth cfsis,- on the disabled and those with heart corcditions.

Tses militarize thepolice.

• Tasers-are a form of tortü1e.- -

F ALL 0F'I1ES1 REASONS 11 DEMAND THAT

Dear Coi'i1issiQncr: 1 oppose tasers for the following reasons:

Tasers are a terçr weapon. that maims, electrocues and kills, it is not a sanctity of life altertiative to-bullets.

Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. •. -

Tasers are di-sprdpqFtioately used on black and brown'pe6p1e., Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are pa cülariy lethal on people experiencing tiiental health crisis, on



Name

Address Email cr

Dear Commissioner:

• I .opose. tae'rs for the following reasons:

Tats are a terrorWeapon that maims, èlectro4its'nd kills,, it is not a sanctity of life alternative tot U I I ets

'Tses àre.dt'proportionately used on black

and br0wnpe0pte

Tasers do not prevent or reduce police

mu.rdér. •

• Tase.rsare particularly: lethal. on peopfe, • experiencing a mental health crisis, pnthe

disabled and those with heart cónditións.


FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS 1 DEMAND THAT YOU VOTENO!

Name

Addr

Email

- -

Dear Commissioners:



• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murèr

• Tasers are disproportionately used, oil black • • and Brown people. .

. Tasérs 'militarizethe police. • Tasers 'ore particularly lethal on pople

experieñ1ng a mental health crisis, on - the" disabled - and those with heart cbnditián.

• Taser.re a form of torture.

FOR ALL OFJHSE REASONS I DEMAND* "HAT YOU VOTE l4-6 0N TAsgRSl ' ••

Name

Address

Dear Commissioner:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life altemativ to bullets.

Tasers are disproportionately used on black

• nçI brown people. '

• Tàsers do not prevent or reduce police

Murders.

•, Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.


FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE

Name -e tj I k i------ .-, --.

Address . •

Email .-

Dear Commissioner:


• Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and Kills, itis not a sanctity of Ii

alternative to bullets.

Thsers are' disproportionately used on black apeopie. •

• 'Tas,i t prevent or reduce' police rrUrtierS.'

• Tasers are patticularly lethal on people 'experiencing a mentai health crisi on the disabled and those with heart cOnditions.

• Tasers militarie the police. •

• Tasers are a form of tortü're. • •

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE Q!'

i<ame ciC • /4/; fr

E

5

. Dear5Commjjoner;

IF oppose takers for the following reasons • Taers arp a terror weapon that naims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity

of life alternative to bullets Tasers ddnot prevent or reduce police murders.

Tases are disproportionately ud on black and brown people

Tasers nnlitarize the-police Taers are particularly lethal oi pele exper1Jxrcmg a rnenti haith caris, on the disabled and thoe with heart conditions

• Tasers are i5form oftortinc.

FORALLOFTBSERJA1T • DE1L4ND THAT YOU Vol N

-a

yr

'ear Commissioner:

oppose tasers for.the following reasons:

Tasèr ae a terrorWeaPOn that maims, • electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of

• life al.tenàthie t6 bullets.

Tasérs aredisproportionately used on black and brbwnpébPle.

Thsprsd0 not pr6vent0r reduce police murders

• Tasers. are particularly lethal on eopl' I experiencing 'p mental health crisis, or t* -. -

.disabled and those with heart conditions..,

• Tasers are a'fb.rm of torture.

R ALL OF TBESEREASONS I DEMAN) THAT

)UVOTEQt

Osc. 8 •

aail

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons;

• Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, efectrocuteg and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

•Tasers -are disproportionately used on black and brown people.

• Thsers do not prevent or reduce police murders. ,

• Taseis are particularly lethal on people experincirga mental health crisis, on the.. disabled?d those with heart conditions.

• Tasersare a form of torture.

FOR ALL OF ThESE REASONS IDEMAIl"[

Dear Commjssjoner

I oppose tasers for the following reasons: • Tasers area terror weapon that

iiiaims, 4ectrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity Of life alternative to buliet, Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. -

Taers e disproportionately used on black and 'brdwu pedple. ase:s 'militarize thepdiice:..

TA ser- are particuiarlr hal: on •peoie experieug a niental health efiMs, obe di bledand those

•with heart conditions. Tasers are a fcrrn of torture.

Et)RALL OF THESE REASOINS I IDRM[i-LI[' YOU VOTE iOJ

ras LS41 I. Addresj__L Emai1j

-

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose tsers.for the following reasons:


Dear Commissioner:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, 'electrocutes'-and kills, it is not a sanctity of alternative to-bullets.

•

•' Tasers are disproportionately used on black and ibrown:pe pie.

• - lasers o not prevent or reduce police mucers--- " -

Tasers are particularly -lethal on people - -. -

experiencing a mthtal health crisis, on the disabled-and those with heart conditions. -

•.• Tasers are disproportionately used on. bla and brown people.

- a' Tasers do not prevent or reduce police mUrders -

• Tasers are particularly, lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart coiiditions.


FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE Q!

Name :tVVt

Address

bear Commissioner:

I oppose tasers for- the following reasons:

• Tas'ers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of

- life alternative to bullets.

-. Tasers are disproportionately used. on black

• '- and brown people.

• -Tasèrs do not prevent or reducepol.ie-- - . 1 urders.

- :- --" • lasers are particularly- lethaf bëop-le -

experiehci-rg a. mental health crfls on the dlsa-bie'd and those with heart conditions.

• Tasers militarize the police: - -

- • Tases are a form of torture. -:

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMANEIThAT YOTJVOTEQ!

Nameahh6\()

Add -,T-UV,- 1

.-1


. FOR FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS IDEMAJlI) THAT TOU VOTE Q! -

Dear Commissioner:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, - electrocutes arid kills, it is not a sanctity of ii

lternativeto bj4llet. -

a Tasers are disproportionately used on slack and brown people.

Taers do' not prevent or reduce police - - • rn'urderg.

Tasers areparticularly lethal on peQple experiencing a mental health. crisi on the disabled 'and those with,hea'rt conditions.

• 'Taseis thilitarie the polic. .--


FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTEQ! -, - -

Name - -,

Aduress ---

- .-----

Dear Commissioner:


• Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets,


Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murder.

• Tasers are particularl' lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.



FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT

Dear Commissioner:


• Tasers area terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills; it is not a sanctity of Ii alternative to bullets.

• Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown' people. '

• Tasers do not pre vent or reduce police murders.'

* lasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those With heart con'ditions.

• Tasers militarize the police:'


)R ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAIND'THAT DUVOTE!

ime 1.VLkl,-,~ -

Idress ,JTE$*Iu7 J;,S

Dear Cominssiouer:

I oppos'e tasers for the 'olto .ng ior Taser are d terror weapon tha L

maims', electrocute 'aid k,uls i i a not. a anoti o,, ijie aliçrnatir o bulits Taseis a not pi event oi reduce P0lice murders

Ta ers are clisprbportortately uset on b1ek and brown peopre 'Iaaers nnhtanze the police

a Tas.ers are parlicularly lethal on people eperienciug a mena1 hcalL'h GiiSiS, on the disabled and those

'"with heart c'oñditions .',

• 'TQrs are a form Qftorture'.

FOR-ALL OF THESE REASONSJ' DEMMIYdHAT YOU VOTE NQI '

Nani kji41 7tiLb Addre

,

.EWail '

Dear Commissioner:




• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders..

Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditFons-

• tasers militarize the police.

• Tasers are a form of torture. '

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE

Name

Address

I

YOUV

Name

Addre

Email

.,Pear Commissioner:

lo..ppos..tasers for the following reasons: -

Taseraré a terror weapon that maims, elctoqjtes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life

-':alterratieto bullets.

''. Taers edisp -bportionately used on black I and 'b.row'rj pOple..

Taers do not prevent or reduce police murders.

-• Tasers are paricularly lethal on people, experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

• Tasers are a form of torturer

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS IDEMAIND THAT YOU VOTE Q!

/ AA Name /d.'A'4f VtC)LI '4 Address

Email

Dear Commissioner:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, eJctàcutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life' altérnativeto bullets.

'Tas'e are disproportionately used on black and brown people.

• .'. -Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murrs.

Tasers-are-particular!y lethal on-'peopie experiencing a mental health' crisi, on the disabled and those with heart conditions;


FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO! - -

Name L.••;. -- (__/ -t.-

:-. . .

Address

Email

Dear Commissioner:


-Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

.•. Tasers are disproportionately used on black and:b'rown people.

'Tasers do not prevent or reduce police. murders.

Tasers are particularly lethal on people eperiencing a mental health, crisis,: on the disabled and those with heart conditidns.


FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE l

Name

Address

Email

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose tasersfo the following reasons:

• tasers are a terror weapon that maims, el.èctr6cutes.and kills, it is not a sanctity of

•,.lifé alternative to bullets. -

• 'Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.

• Tasers do not prevent or.'reduce police -.

murders. -

• Thsers are particularly lethal on people' experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

• Tasers are a form of torture

ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT

DR ALL OF TI ESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT 'OU VOTE- NO!

ame

•ddress

Dear Commissioner:


Tasers are ateiror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

Tasers are d'isr,oportionately used on black and rown 'people.

Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders..

• Tasers are particularly lethal on people -

experiencing a mental health crisis; on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

Tasers are a form Of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND. THAT YO1,J VOTE !

Name. 7 U7ftkeu4l

Addreg •1 •: _

Email

Dear Commissioner:


• Tasérs area terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of Ii altérnátiv,e to bullets.

a

'Tapers are diroportIonately used on black and brown people.

• Tasers dq not prevent or reduce police: • thurdérs.

Tasèrsäre.particularly lethal on people experiencing.a mental health crisis, Qnthe disabled and those with heartconditiors.

• Tasers militarize the police.

• Tasérs are afdrm of torture. •

Dear Commissioner:


•. Tasers are aterror weapon that maims, • electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of

life alternative to bullets.

• Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown. people. -

. lasers do not prevent or reduce pOlice • - murders.. - - -

• Täsers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health Cfl5i, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

• Tàére militarize the police.

• Taser rea form of torture.

OR ALL OY THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE Q!

Name KU a k Address

Email

Dear Commissioner:


• Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, ' electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of 'life altrative to bullets.

• lasers are. disproportionately used on black and brown people. -

• • Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. . • ..

-.

• Tasers are pa.rticulariy lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis,on•the disabled and those with heart cOrdiions;.


FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO!

Name

Addrc

Email

I)e& CitriJc'rir:

Dear Commissioners:



• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police • murders

• Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.'





- - .- -

EmailC "

I oppose' tasevi for the.{b10 ir eao: .isey am a Ter:rcr weapon that

Pithrtis, ctt rj.&rfe .nd kiLls, ills Tio-i a sanctitc of 1if aiternativ te uUer. Ta.cis do not lTevcrit or reduce pollee murders.'

lasers are LJsp1?)partlonatei'/ S

cised on black: a, p1' •Tasers, rthlitariie -the oi't.

,

I'asers are pzrticuiarF7 Ietha or people e ).ennc.n1g a menta)..heatth. -.

cñsis' an the dia5leç and those- •

• wIth heart condiilons. Tasers are a form of torture.

FORALL OF THESE REASONS I -.

DEMATI THXF.YOUyOTENO! NamejJ4t&b2 Address Email 1

-

Dear Commissioner:


• Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it Is not a sanctity of-

life alternative to bullets.

• Taers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.

. Tasers do not prevent or reduce police :'mürdérs.' .

Tasers are' particularly lethal on. people experiencing a m,ental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

• Tasers militarize the police.

• Tasérs'are a form of torture: '

FOR ALL OF, THESE REASONS-I DEMANI) THAT

YOUVOTE!

Namell\ ULc (5

Address •

-

Dear Commissioner:


• Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocUtes and kills, it is not a sanctity of Ii alternative tobullets..-

Tasers,are disproportionately used on black and brbwn people.

• Tas'rsdb nut, prevent or reduce police rñ'urde•rs.-.

• Tasers are aticularly letha.J'.on people

• experiencing a mental health cri'si'srofl the disabledand those with heart coditibns.

• lasers militarize'the police. • ;°'.


?OR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAINI) THAT. ,YOU VOTE j!

tame SU9N \V '•I9 ddress

Dear Commissioners:









Nan

r.i

Dear Commissioners:





• Tasers militarize the police. • lasers are particularly lethal on people




Name

Address

Email,

Dear Commissioners:









Name R R M 10 i13 ax TA -

AddressJ ..

Emailj'—

Dear Commissioners:

I oppose. tasers for the following reasons:








Name c0nv1 SwIJt Address. olow"

'Fmif

Dear Commissioners:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to, bullets.







Name I S ° _

Add re-_- _'

Dear Commissioners:









Name '4/( M@ Address

Dear Commissioners:





• lasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on people

experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditiots.


FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO.' ON TASERS!

Name SC

Address Email

Dear Commissioners:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kill's, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.






FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS 1 DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERS!

Name\&)Q& \' Address

Prnil - -

Dear Commissioners:








FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS] DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERSI

Name ct&tM L-ez Address Add _

Email

Dear Commissioners:






experiencing a mental health crisis., on the disabled and those with heart conditions.



Name JJ

Address

Email

Dear Commissioners:







• Tasersare a form of torture.


Dear Commissioners:








FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERSI

Namel AT MI

Address

EmaiL\iTLIIti j1


I'asers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

fasers do not preverit or reduce police murders.

Fass are'disproportlopately used on black aid brown people. Taseiis militarize the police. Uasérs are', particularly lethal on people xperiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled, and those with heart conditions. asers are a form of torture.

)R ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND AT YOU VOTE NO ON TASERS!

ItLme idress4 nail[

Dear Commissioners:







• Tasers are aform of torture.


I

Name

Add rL*.—.

Email A.





experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions. Tasers are a form of torture.


,Iry f

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose taserg for the following reasons: Tasers arp.a. terror iieapon that mai 1ecctes and kills, it is not a Ar

âti&ity of life altethative to bullets. Tase.d:iiot preyeht or reduce police

mrders. Tasérs are disproportionately used on

and. brown people. Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are .phrticularly lethal on people

expiehcirig ental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.


FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE ! l'Tame o1 1h C Address Email

Dear Commissioners:


Dear Commissioners:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of li1e alternative to bullets.







Dear Commissioners:









F,

Name c- --- --

Address

Emai

ear Commissioners:


asers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes nd kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to ullets.






FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT

YOU VOTE NO ON TASERS!

Dear Commissioners:









Name

Address

Dear Commissioners:





o lasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on people




Dear Commissioners:



• lasers do not prevent or reduce police murders






Name

Address__- --.

-- .-.

Emai - 4

Dear Commissioners:





• lasers militarize the police. e lasers are particularly lethal on people




Name---I-'r-(W i~ OIL

Add ress-. c1

.. EmaiLL

V

Dear Commissioners:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not.a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.







Dear Commissioners:





• lasers militarize the police. • lasers are particularly lethal on people




Dear Commissioners:






experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions:



lF1ll:

Address TTTI

ITF1l

Dear Commissioners:




• Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people. -




Dear Commissioners:






experiencing a mèrftHealth crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.



0 Name_

Address _ ....

Email t


Name

.--..-

-' __r :-

Dear Commissioners:







• Tasers are a form oftorture.


Email

Dear Commissioners:









Name') Q. •'\ S

Address

Email

Dear Commissioners:





• Tasers militarize the police. Tasers are particularly lethal on people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.



Namee;q-'~,I~A C'

Address -.------------ __J-.I-. - '-

.j-

Dear Commissioners:






experiencing a mental health crisis, on the • disabled and those with heart conditions. • Tasers are a form of torture.


Name 64e-t, Address

_ Email

Dear Commissioners:









Name flJ1L( Address

Eniaili iLI[ft

Dear Commissioners:






experiencing a mental health crisis., on the disabled and those with heart conditions.



)ear Commissioners:


lasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes rnd kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to )ullets.





• Tasers are a'form of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT 'YOU VOTE NO ON TASERS!

Name

Addre

Dear Commissioner:

I oppose tasers for the following nóasons: • Tasers are a terror weapon that "

maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets. 1'

• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders. • Tasers are disproportionately

b4ek used on black and brown people. • Tasers militarize the police. • Tasers are particularly lethal on

people experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.

• Tasers. are a form of torture. FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO!

Name Tc Address :. Email

Dear Commissioners:








Dear Dear Commissioners:









Name

Address—

Email


Name

Add ____

Email 1(

Dear Commissioner;


• Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, it is not a sanctity of Ii alternative to bullets.


• Tasers do not prevent or reduce police murders.

• Tasers are particularly lethal on people

experiencing a mental health crisis, ón.thè disabled and those with heart conditions.

• lasers militarize the police.


)R ALL OF THESE REASONS IDEMAN) THAT )U VOTE !

me Jcue dress' tail

Dear Commissioners:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, itis not a sanctity Qf life alternative to bullets.

•. lasers do not prevent or reduce police murders



experiencing a mental health crisis, on the disabled end those with heart conditions. Tasers are a form of torture.


Dear Commissioners:



• Tasers do not prevent or. reduce police murders





Commissioners:


Easers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes nd kills, it is not a sanctity of life alternative to )ullets. .

.




experiencing a mental health crisis', on the disabled and those with heart conditions.



ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT VOTE NOON TASERS!

me YJ 06 N fradz

mail

Dear Commissioners:









Name ri0M1

Dear Commissioners:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons:-








fc)c I ~Icej "~49. Name

Address, Address -

Email Email

Dear Commissioners:


Tasers are a terror weapon that maims, electrocutes and kills, 'it is not a sanctity of life alternative to bullets.

• Tasers dO not prevent or reduce police murders


• Tasers militarize the police. , • Täsers are particularly lethal on people




Name Mar ''v, Lfii

Address ,

Emai

'Dear Commissioners:









Name c e

Address - --

Email

Dear Commissioners:









Name

Address -'-,---'.

Dear Commissioners:




. lasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.





Name Ar 'Al L"S Address

'-'

Email :I

.-

Dear Commissioners:









Name /4 Address

Email 6. - INI

Dear Commissioners:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons:.








4 Name Li—

Addres s _. .

Email

Dear Commissioners:







• lasers are aform of torture.

FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS I DEMAND THAT YOU VOTE NO *ON TASERS!

Dear Commissioners:









Nam

AddrE

Email

Dear Commissioners:




• Tasers are dispropttionately used on black and brown people.




Dear Commissioners:




• lasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people:





Name

Address Oliva

Email

Name

Dear Commissioners:

I oppose tasers for the following reasons








Dear Commissioners:

I oppose tasers for- the following reasons:





experiencing, a mental health crisis, on the disabled and those with heart conditions.



Dear Commissioners:







• Tasers are a form of torture. Gs C.


,'-Pn , n I r

o 6~~J,6

Dear Commissioners:









Dear Commissioners:



• Tasers do not'prevent or reduce police murders





Dear Commissioners:









N

Ac

E

ii

Dear Commissioners:









Name Me IV

Address __I__ -

Email_ t -=r--

Dear Commissioners:









Name . ic.d, 1if1QJ

Addressj WRIN .1.:

Email

Dear Commissioners:




• ..Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown people.


experiencing a mental health crisis, on the. disabled and those with heart conditions.



Dear Commissioners




• Tasers are disproportionately used on black and brown peàple.





October 2, 2017

Police Commission San Francisco Police Headquarters 1245 3rd Street San Francisco, CA 94158

Police Commission:

My husband and I are alarmed that the Police Commission will again be considering use of Electronic Control Weapons i.e. tasers. This issue has been voted down in 2004 and twice in 2010 for good reasons. There are serious dangers and risks attendant with use of this weapon. Although the weapon is marketed as an alternative to lethal force, there is no data which confirms this. A 2009 UCSF study found that fatal shootings by police increased following adoption of use of tasers. Police resources and focus should be on

rn irnpleentation;of Crisis Intervention Teams, rapport-building communication and de-escalation in place of confrontation

There is along list of "Warnings" published by the manufacturer cautioning use of their product. It is clear ven h one looks at this list, use of tasers creates hazardous situations which increases the risk of death or serious injury.

The duty of the Police Commission is to protect public safety. We urge you to vote against use of Electronic Control Weapons.

Sincerely,

Steve and EsthL.Marks

,0

[--

1 T -' r "

Nalter St. -'r

En ou Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association PMB # 301,2261 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94114

(415) 267-1821 / wwdtna.o.rg

F~I

October 7, 2017 1w Email to David.Lazar(SFOov.org, Garret.TonSFGov.onz

Commander David Lazar Captain Garret Tom San Francisco Police Department Community Engagement Unit 1245 Third Street San Francisco CA 94158

Re: SFPD Use of Conductive Energy Devices (CEDs, aka "Tasers")

Dear Commander Lazar and Captain Tom.

This confirms that the Board of the Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association (DTNA) voted to SUPPORT San Francisco Police Department's use of Conductive Energy Devices (CED's, aka "Tasers?'). We urge the San Francisco Police Commission and other approving bodies and individuals to proiptly adopt this as policy, and to fully implement it with appropriate training and operational procedures as son as possible. DTNA represents more than three thousand households in San Francisco's Duboce Triangle.

Please share this message of support through appropriate channels with all members of the San Frncisco Police Commission. Please let us know if you have questions regarding DTNA's SUPPORT for CEDs/Tasers and related items. Please also arrange for this letter to be included in the matter's permanent file and any successor files, and assure that it is provided to all relevant Commissions, hearing paie1s and individuals at the time that this matter is considered by them. Thank you for considering our comients.

11

President, Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association 4158505651

Cc by email: Supervisor Jeff Sheehy, Capt. John Sanford

Tom, Risa (P01)

From: Tom Escher <t

Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 9:19- AM To: SFPD, Commission (POL) Subject: Taser discussion

Please pass to the SF Police Commission.

I have been a resident of San Francisco for all of my life - a short 70 years.

I am involved with the Red and White Fleet, a San Francisco legacy business, located on the San Francisco

waterfront since 1892.

The San Francisco Police Commission had done a remarkable job in managing, what many consider, one of the

finest Police Forces in our nation. I want to personally thank each of you individually in supplying the SFPD

with the best tools to provide prevention and enforcement for the City's benefit.

lasers are one tool that does provide each policeperson with a reliable and less lethal option in a potentially

difficult encounter. Just because many other Departments have tasers is not a good reason for the SFPD to

have tasers. However, for the men and women in the SFPD, I feel, we need to give them every possible means

to adjust a situation before drawing their weapon which is always their last choice.

I urge each the entire Commission to allow the SFPD to use tasers.

Thank you for your consideration in this important public safety issue.

Regards,

Tom

Sustainability is defined as a requirement of our generation to manage the resource base such that the average quality of life that we ensure ourselves can potentially be shared by all future generations. ... Development is sustainable if it involves a non-decreasing average quality of life. [Geir B. Asheim, "Sustainability,9 The World Bank, 1994]

94158 - San Francisco · I am writing to share my support of the approval of Conducted Energy...

Documents

Transcript of 94158 - San Francisco · I am writing to share my support of the approval of Conducted Energy...