# Proposed California law to restrict use of deadly force by law enforcement **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 20, 2018, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437 "2018-06-20T12:02:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2018, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/81 "2018-06-21T19:29:58Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Note that there are (per FBI) 1,248,185 violent crimes per year. There are less than 500 officer shootings. > > You are 2500 times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime than a police shooting. I think you’re comparing apples to oranges here. Do you mean there are only 500 fatal police shootings, or 500 police shootings total (including ones where the only result is injury - or in the case of really bad marksmanship no injury at all)? Assuming it’s fatal police shootings, then perhaps murder & manslaughter crimes would be a better comparison. If we wanted to compare all violent crimes to police action, perhaps we should compare them to all police uses of force (but I doubt anyone has a total of police UoF). ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2018, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/82 "2018-06-21T19:32:54Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > That’s rather tragic. Sorry. Tragic yes. But perfectly within my rights, correct? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2018, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/83 "2018-06-21T19:37:26Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > All of which would have been irrelevant if they had properly maintained their distance. If he runs, then you get back in the car and follow him at a safe distance: He can’t outrun the car. The whole point of being able to shoot him is to prevent him from shooting them, which would already be accomplished by keeping a distance. And determining whether the object he held is a real gun is only necessary if he’s within dangerous range. No, it’s not irrelevant. If he runs into the trees, you are going to follow him in the car? And “the whole point” is not only to prevent him from shooting the cops - it’s to arrest him so he can’t shoot anybody. And it is necessary to determine if he has a real gun or not no matter where he is. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2018, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/84 "2018-06-21T19:47:38Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > The street is their business. They are supposed to be there, protecting you. Which is why these laws keep coming up. Too many people die when cops make mistakes. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2018, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/85 "2018-06-21T20:30:17Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Which is why these laws keep coming up. Too many people die when cops make mistakes. Umm, you got a number on that? 500 police shootings a year, the vast majority of which are 100% justified. Maybe 10? Per cdc Heart disease: 633,842 • Cancer: 595,930 • Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 155,041 • Accidents (unintentional injuries): 146,571 • Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 140,323 • Alzheimer’s disease: 110,561 • Diabetes: 79,535 • Influenza and pneumonia: 57,062 • Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 49,959 • Intentional self-harm (suicide): 44,193 So, skip down a bit brother… Contact with powered lawnmower" — 951 deaths “Fall from tree” — 1,413 deaths “Constipation” — 2,167 deaths “Contact with agricultural machinery” — 4,183 deaths Lighting= 31. Bee sting= 13. So about as many people die per year from a _bee sting_ as a unjustified police shooting. Lawnmovers kill more that police do- justified or unjustified. of course, you can say “even one is too many” and sure. But this small number does not justify a stupid law. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2018, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/86 "2018-06-21T22:22:33Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Note that there are (per FBI) 1,248,185 violent crimes per year. There are less than 500 officer shootings. > > You are 2500 times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime than a police shooting. Um, you’re [off by a factor of two](https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/) (maybe you were only looking at 2018 so far) and that is people actually killed by police, not just shot. I’m not sure that the latter number is available. Compare this to [officer deaths of 129](http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.html) which interestingly, despite a 3.7 fold change in the US population is the same as it was in 1908. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2018, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/87 "2018-06-21T22:43:41Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Suppose, instead, that the cops had stopped **a hundred yards away** , took cover behind their car door 100 YARDS?:eek: Even if you had posted 100 feet that would have been a ridiculous distance. > [@Uzi](#): > > I don’t think it is unreasonable to say that in decent light and within the usable range of a pistol The usable range of a pistol is line of sight. In my state the one of the training test distances is 75 feet. Not with a rifle but a handgun. One must be able to hit center mass on that target at that range and qualify at least twice per year. It’s not that easy with a 4 inch barrel. It’s even harder at that distance to tell what someone is pointing at you while they disobey your commands to drop it after you just chased them 5 blocks from a crime scene. But I’m sure all the Monday morning quarterbacks on these boards will have solutions that nobody else in the last 50 years have figured out. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2018, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/88 "2018-06-21T23:25:10Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > So about as many people die per year from a _bee sting_ as a unjustified police shooting. > > Lawnmovers kill more that police do- justified or unjustified. Then the number of police affected by this law is also vanishing small. If it reduces the number of mothers who bury their children it will be worth it. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2018, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/89 "2018-06-21T23:37:37Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > If a postal worker does his job poorly, some people might have to wait a day or two longer than they should to get their mail. If a police officer does his job poorly, someone might have to bury their kid. Absolutely there should be greater consequence for that. But if a doctor screws up and leaves a clamp in someone that causes him to die of sepsis, their just as dead but we don’t charge the doctor with manslaughter. I agree with adaher that except in cases of [extreme evil judgement](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/07/south-carolina-police-officer-murder-charge), Loss of job and civil penalties seem enough. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2018, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/90 "2018-06-21T23:44:26Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Then the number of police affected by this law is also vanishing small. If it reduces the number of mothers who bury their children it will be worth it. No, it affects every law enforcement officer in that state. More officers will get injured because they didn’t deploy OC, tasers, or impact weapons, or deployed them too late. It will increase the number of children burying their parent because they didn’t use force [when they should have](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsrC5QV_Yrc) because they were more afraid of the consequences than an armed suspect. It will decrease the number of quality people going into law enforcement\*. Then you will have more problems because of the type of people you have protecting you won’t be of the same caliber as you could have had. Approximately 1 million law enforcement officers make millions of public contacts every day. The ratio of unreasonable use of force to officer is so minuscule that a law of this nature is ludicrous. But it is my suspicion that those in favor of this law are not concerned with unreasonable use of force. They are concerned with ANY use of force what so ever. \*[size=1]In my state there is a terrible lack of quality candidates applying for the many open LEO jobs across the state. This is a recent phenomenon that we’ve never seen before and it’s being credited to current trends and attitude changes across the country.[/size=1] ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/91 "2018-06-22T00:06:56Z")
Yep. > [@DrDeth](#): > > Nope. Sent from my SM-N910U using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/92 "2018-06-22T01:05:58Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > No, it affects every law enforcement officer in that state. More officers will get injured because they didn’t deploy OC, tasers, or impact weapons, or deployed them too late. Not according to **DrDeth**. So few police violate this law under current practices that it would require no change in how the rest react in confrontations. The only ones affected are the ones brutalizing the public. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/93 "2018-06-22T01:45:09Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Then the number of police affected by this law is also vanishing small. If it reduces the number of mothers who bury their children it will be worth it. Not at all. Across the USA the police have millions and millions of encounters a day. Just making then 1/10th of 1% more lethal for the police would us the police casualty rate enormously. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/94 "2018-06-22T01:48:45Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Not according to **DrDeth**. So few police violate this law under current practices that it would require no change in how the rest react in confrontations. The only ones affected are the ones brutalizing the public. No, you are misquoting me deliberately. Yes, very few police violate the law under current conditions. However, what we’re talking about are those who DON’T violate the law, this would put them in great danger for no good reason. Look, one thing we have to be careful about is trying to solve tragedies with new laws. Can’t be dont and always makes bad laws. Bad police shootings are so rare that they make the news. Bad police shootings are not a _problem_ they are a _tragedy._ ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/95 "2018-06-22T01:51:23Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Yep. Did you see those links where I showed you\* pistols that are designed to look like cell phones? \* ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/96 "2018-06-22T02:07:47Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > But if a doctor screws up and leaves a clamp in someone that causes him to die of sepsis, their just as dead but we don’t charge the doctor with manslaughter. > > I agree with adaher that except in cases of [extreme evil judgement](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/07/south-carolina-police-officer-murder-charge), Loss of job and civil penalties seem enough. Big trucks kill about 4000 Americans a year. Mostly thru falling asleep or driver inattention. In others words a accident caused by negligence. Of those 4000 about 500 were black. Where are the Black Lives matter protesters there? Trucks kill fifty times more blacks than Police officers due by unjustified shootings. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/97 "2018-06-22T02:14:03Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Where are the Black Lives matter protesters there? Trucks kill fifty times more blacks than Police officers due by unjustified shootings. Not because they were black. Police are profiling black people for brutality in a way big trucks do not. ---
**Author:** ![I\_can\_t\_think\_of\_a\_name](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ed8c4c/32.png) [@I\_can\_t\_think\_of\_a\_name](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_can_t_think_of_a_name)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/98 "2018-06-22T04:20:15Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Not because they were black. Police are profiling black people for brutality in a way big trucks do not. If you apply the same way of thinking, police are profiling male people for brutality to a far greater extent. So why isn’t that a far greater issue? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/99 "2018-06-22T04:34:17Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Not because they were black. Police are profiling black people for brutality in a way big trucks do not. Actually not so much. More white people die from police shootings than black. In any case the number of unjustified shootings is very tiny. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/100 "2018-06-22T04:41:44Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Bad police shootings are not a _problem_ they are a _tragedy._ But I suspect that those that support this law oppose any use of force by police or by anybody else for that matter. This is easily a “throwing the baby out with the bathwater” type law. It will have negative effects on both sides of the equation: more injured/killed cops, bolder criminal element, higher crime rates, shortages in police staffing due to early retirements and people simply not going into the field, and less quality candidates of those who do. Also, if an officer feels their life is in danger many are going to use force anyway regardless of what this law says. It’s human nature to want to survive, even more so if you’ve been trained with the skills. In those cases this law will not stop those uses of force that supporters of this law oppose. Resulting in those officers being incarcerated for what is a reasonable act. In other words, this law does not solve the imaginary problem it’s supposed to, but creates new, real problems instead. Exactly what I expect from the left. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437.md?page=6)