Page 11 - Sonoma County Gazette - May, 2018

#6 - GUNS: Use of firearms in crimes increases the risk of major injury or death for criminals, law enforcement, and for victims.
Law enforcement officers wear body protective gear when on duty to protect them from lethal injuries, but victims and criminals have
no protective gear to wear. Can we change law enforcement policies to shoot limbs to slow crimes-in-process instead of body core so
that all involved have the same chance of survival as the armored law enforcement officer? Where do you stand on use of guns by law enforcement officers? Can we reduce gun-related injuries by reducing the number of guns in untrained and unlicensed hands through gun buy-backs and increased regulations for gun owners?
Mark Essick
Ernesto Olivares
John Mutz
Gun violence continues to be a major public safety issue in our nation and our state. The idea of changing law enforcement policies to shoot the limbs of persons is ill conceived. Police shootings occur in split seconds under extreme stress and often
When a deadly force situation arises, police are trained to
stop the threat. The goal of any justifiable police shooting is
The number of acceptable fatalities at the hands of law enforcement is zero. Our use of deadly force is intended to stop, not kill, the person who has left us with no other options, in a situation where another human being is clearly at risk. And we
in low light situations, the idea of trying to hit a moving target as small as a human limb under these circumstances is unrealistic and uninformed.
the challenges and difficulties that come with having to use a firearm with often little, or no, warning in high-stress situations.
should always expect to be held accountable for our choices. The department must take responsibility for any incident that may arise. There should be a fair but thoroughly transparent investigation by an uninterested third party, and if it’s found that an officer acted inappropriately, the community should expect corresponding changes in the department.
The same human factors affect all of us and the expectation that a peace officer could somehow overcome these factors is not demonstrated in actual situations. As always, peace officers expect to gain voluntary compliance from those they interact with, only under the most extreme circumstances when the officer’s life or another person’s life is in danger would lethal force be warranted.
Officers spend countless hours training at the firing range or interactive scenarios, and no matter how good of a shot they are, all of that precision can very quickly and easily go out the window in a real deadly force situation.
If officers are properly trained to prioritize de- escalation and only shoot in circumstances where
a violent perpetrator is likely to injure community residents or an officer, it’s actually safer for innocent bystanders and the officers to bring the situation to a swift and safe conclusion. In these situations, which are often disorganized and hectic, spontaneous aiming for extremities is difficult and likely to be inaccurate. This is exactly why officers must be trained to do everything possible to bring an incident to conclusion without any use of force, where any choice to use lethal force is considered extreme.
We have over 300 million firearms in our country, as such, the reality is that our peace officers must be armed to protect themselves and the public they serve. A use of force policy must always recognize the huge responsibility entrusted to peace officers when it comes to the use of firearms and weigh the use of firearms against U.S. Supreme Court case law doctrine of reasonable use of force based on the facts and circumstances of the particular case.
As much as we might think an officer can
shoot a gun or knife out of a person’s hand or to deliver a non-life threatening injury, the amount
of stress they are likely under at the time make
it near impossible. Even in non-law enforcement situations, those who have fired a gun or rifle know how much focus is required to make each shot count.
Firearms related injuries can be reduced by increasing training, prohibiting those with mental illness from possessing firearms, employing universal background checks, and requiring waiting periods to purchase firearms. Gun buyback programs do not work, study after study has concluded that they do not reduce crime, they do not reduce violence and they are an ineffective use public funds.
Policies are the foundation of any law enforcement agency. They help create the culture of the organization and set the standard for everyone to be successful and to meet the community’s expectations. Policies must be legally defensible and regularly reviewed to ensure they meet changes in the law, legal standards, community expectations, and relevance.
Yes, we must keep guns out of the hands of untrained and unlicensed people. We are in the middle of an epidemic not seen in any other industrialized country. As a father and a veteran law enforcement officer, I feel we must address this with urgency. There is no reason to drag our feet — the time for implementing common sense gun laws has long past.
to stop the threat, as quickly and safely as possible. Police are trained to act quickly and efficiently, and must consider
Officer involved critical incidents can be very complex and do require a high degree of scrutiny and transparency to determine if the officers actions were justified under the circumstance.
Some Law enforcement agencies are making changes to policies which have resulted in shootings. There is research showing that in
cities where use of force reporting policies have been changed, the number of citizens killed in police shooting has dropped. A standard policy
in law enforcement is the documentation and investigation of circumstances where a firearm was fired. Some cities have changed their policies to require reporting and investigation anytime an officer draws their firearm. By review the incidents of when firearms were drawn, training needs can be identified and policies changed to reduce the number of officer involved shootings.
I would support a thoughtful buy-back program if it was implemented in coordination with gun laws that reduce the number of guns entering into circulation. Recent studies have shown greater program effectiveness with improved buy-back procedures, such as restricting the type of guns bought back or paying a sliding scale for different categories of weapons.
READ April Sheriff Candidate Questions & Answers at
SonomaCountyGazette.com on POLICE TRAINING, ETHNIC & GENDER DIVERSITY,
OFFICER-INVOLVED SHOOTINGS OF CIVILIANS. Each Candidate has equal space to answer reader questions.
CANDIDATE WEBSITES: essickforsheriff2018.com olivaresforsheriff.com johnmutzforsonomasheriff.com & their Facebook pages
After years of research there is no evidence that gun buyback programs take guns off the streets
or make communities safer. Buyback programs usually end up with hunting rifles or old revolvers from someone’s attic rather than with automatic weapons that criminals might use.
ELECTION DAY is June 5th. Poles are OPERN 7am to 8pm. Registration Status at voterstatus.sos.ca.gov
5/18 - www.sonomacountygazette.com - 11