S. F. chief reignites stun gun debate
Seeks OK to arm about 5 percent of officers with less- lethal option
The San Francisco Police Department is seeking to equip about 5 percent of the department with stun guns under a revised policy proposed Wednesday by Chief Greg Suhr in the aftermath of the recorded killing of Mario Woods in the Bayview neighborhood.
At a meeting of the city Police Commission, Suhr reignited a years- long debate in the city over the less- lethal weapons, proposing to give stun guns to officers assigned to the tactical company or specialist team. Under the proposal, officers may use
the device only “to protect the public and officers from serious injury or death by a subject armed with a weapon other than a firearm.”
Members of the public packed the room at that same meeting to speak out against the devices, accusing the department of using the Woods shooting as a way to get approval for a weapon that has been repeatedly opposed by community members.
The proposal comes two months after the fatal shooting of Woods, a 26- year- old man who police said posed a threat because he was armed with a knife allegedly used in an earlier stabbing. Suhr has said the officers who shot Woods did their best after trying and failing to subdue him by shooting him with beanbag rounds and using pepper spray on him.
Psychiatric issues
But Woods’ family said he had psychiatric issues, and the shooting drew wide outrage after video revealed that Woods was shuffling slowly along a wall — and not appearing to directly threaten officers — when five of them opened fire.
Following the shooting, many city and community leaders called for reform in how officers use force. The review of the department’s policies is part of a series of changes Suhr and other city officials have proposed in the wake of the Dec. 2 incident.
The department’s current policy, which lays out for officers when and how to use their pepper spray, batons and firearms, has been bolstered by a series of bulletins issued by Suhr in the past few years encouraging de- escalation and creating time and space when a subject is considered a threat only to him or herself.
Shortly after the Woods shooting, Suhr issued a bulletin requiring officers to file a use-of-force report whenever they point their gun at a person.
The last resort
While the policy proposed Wednesday includes equipping officers with stun guns, it also puts more of an emphasis on proportionality and doing whatever is possible so that lethal force is a last resort, signaling an effort to shift the cultural mind- set of the department.
Where the policy once called just for officers to “accomplish the police mission as effectively as possible with the highest regard for the dignity of all persons and with minimal reliance upon the use of physical force,” the new draft highlights the department’s commitment “to the sanctity and preservation of all human life, human rights, and human dignity.”
The draft calls for thoughtful communication and de- escalation, as well as a duty to intervene if officers reasonably believe another officer is about to use or is using excessive force.
The proposed policy on stun guns would prohibit officers from using the weapon on an un- armed subject, or on a subject who is a danger only to him or herself, women who are pregnant, the visibly frail, children, a fleeing subject or a subject who is passively resisting.
The stun gun proposal also calls for officers to take special consideration if a subject is exhibiting symptoms of an altered mental state, as those subjects “may be more susceptible to collateral problems” — meaning that, in the case of Mario Woods, whose family believes was in mental distress, stun guns may not have been used.
Suhr and members of the police officers’ union have said repeatedly that they believe Woods would still be alive if officers at the scene that day had been equipped with stun guns, generally referred to by the most common brand, Tasers.
“Based on what we know, if our officers had Tasers on the night of the Bayview shooting, that incident would likely have ended without the loss of a human life,” Martin Halloran, president of the Police Officers Association, said in a statement Wednesday. “Our constituents have been asking us to make Tasers available to all police officers in San Francisco. It’s time for City Hall to change its policy.”
‘ We need them here’
Halloran said Tasers are “standard equipment in other cities, and we need them here — now.”
Though Mayor Ed Lee supports Tasers, police chiefs who have tried to bring the devices to the San Francisco force have repeatedly been rebuffed by critics who say the devices are dangerous and ripe for abuse.
Suhr sought to bring Tasers to the department after the 2012 fatal shooting of Pralith Pralourng, a man believed to be suffering from a psychiatric episode when he allegedly slashed a coworker at the Tcho chocolate factory with a box cutter.
At Wednesday’s meeting, community members said better training and more compassion were needed, not a new device. They said the devices still have the capacity to kill, despite being less lethal than guns.
“How disingenuous it is to look at the killing of Mario Woods as somehow related to the lack of Tasers,” said Andrea Pritchett, a member of Berkeley Copwatch. “That is not what killed that man. What killed that man was an incredible lack of sensitivity to the value of black life. That is what killed him.”
Feds to review SFPD
Last week, officials with the U. S. Department of Justice’s community policing office announced that they would be entering into a collaborative review of San Francisco police to ensure that city officers were employing the best practices in policing. Commission President Suzy Loftus said the draft policy will be reviewed by the federal agency before it will be passed.
Any department plans to equip officers with stun guns will have to be approved by the Police Commission. Loftus said the commission will be seeking community input on the issue before voting, and the overall use of-force policy will be discussed by a working group of stakeholders similar to the group that reviewed the policy proposals for body camera use policy proposal.
Loftus said she hoped to have something to vote on by early April, but that it was at the discretion of the Department of Justice.