# 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:** 7
**Author:** ![Huey\_Freeman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/huey_freeman/32/251_2.png) [@Huey\_Freeman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huey_Freeman)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/121 "2018-06-22T22:17:56Z")
> [@Huey\_Freeman](#): > > In the Age of Trump, I know whiteness is important in vetting whether information is correct or not. If it helps in your analysis of the linked paper, please know that the [author](https://www.facebook.com/manicpanicpanda) of the linked article is white, the prestigious school (UCLA) that oversaw the work is majority white, and the editor of the prestigious journal (PLOS) that published the article is also white. Oops. I forgot to also mention the dude’s [adviser](http://anthropology.ucdavis.edu/people/bwinterh)on the project was also white. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/122 "2018-06-22T22:25:09Z")
> [@Huey\_Freeman](#): > > In the Age of Trump,\*\* I know whiteness is important in vetting whether information is correct or not. \*\* If it helps in your analysis of the linked paper, please know that the [author](https://www.facebook.com/manicpanicpanda) of the linked article is white, the prestigious school (UCLA) that oversaw the work is majority white, and the editor of the prestigious journal (PLOS) that published the article is also white. By your ad hominem logic, we might as well disregard everything Hillary Clinton, Terry McAuliffe, Nancy Pelosi, Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Elizabeth Warren, Kirstin Gillibrand, Chuck Schumer, Tim Kaine, Michael Moore, Ruth Ginsberg, etc. have to say - after all, they’re white. ---
**Author:** ![Huey\_Freeman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/huey_freeman/32/251_2.png) [@Huey\_Freeman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huey_Freeman)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/123 "2018-06-22T22:31:39Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > By your ad hominem logic, we might as well disregard everything Hillary Clinton, Terry McAuliffe, Nancy Pelosi, Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Elizabeth Warren, Kirstin Gillibrand, Chuck Schumer, Tim Kaine, Michael Moore, Ruth Ginsberg, etc. have to say - after all, they’re white. We live in different universes. In the Age of Trump, white folks _routinely_ disregard everything Hillary Clinton, Terry McAuliffe, Nancy Pelosi, Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Elizabeth Warren, Kirstin Gillibrand, Chuck Schumer, Tim Kaine, Michael Moore, Ruth Ginsberg, etc. have to say. White folks do not take anyone on this list seriously (with the possible exception of RBG). ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/124 "2018-06-22T22:57:55Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > By your ad hominem logic, we might as well disregard everything Hillary Clinton, Terry McAuliffe, Nancy Pelosi, Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Elizabeth Warren, Kirstin Gillibrand, Chuck Schumer, Tim Kaine, Michael Moore, Ruth Ginsberg, etc. have to say - after all, they’re white. Actaully, by his ad hominem logic, his debate opponents should be expected to _regard_ everything by those people because they’re white - the implication was that his cite of exhaustive statistics needed to have the additional endorsement of white-person sourcing before he could expect his debate opponents to give it credence. When interpreting ad-hominem logic it’s important to parse it correctly. 😃 ---
**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, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/125 "2018-06-22T23:13:10Z")
There’s a useful general method to illuminate irrational prejudice that’s fashionable enough to pass unnoticed and without comment - imagine exactly the same words but targetted at a different group, one that it’s not fashionable to be prejudiced against. With that in mind, going through the posts about “white folks” and mentally replacing “white folks” with “jews” is illuminating. Same words. Same way of thinking. Same “justification” of a partial correlation in shooting rates. Just a different target group. Which isn’t a difference in opinion, just in targetting. I urge people to try that and consider whether or not they still think it’s an acceptable way of thinking. Or try this: Imagine a particularly extremist MRA ranting on about about women in the same way that some posters are ranting on about “white folks”, including claiming that the police are the miltary arm of women and single out men as targets of brutality and killing, etc, etc. They’d have a much stronger “justification” than the people in this thread because the correlation is far stronger - almost all (all?) of the people shot by police in the USA are men. Ask yourselves - would you be OK with that? Would you consider it an acceptable way of thinking? ---
**Author:** ![Bruce\_Wayne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bruce\_Wayne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bruce_Wayne)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2018, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/126 "2018-06-22T23:13:12Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > [Black people are 2.5 times more likely to die in a police shooting than white people](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/do-police-kill-more-whites-than-black-people/). > [@Huey\_Freeman](#): > > White folks love to trot out these tired-ass arguments in order to justify the continued dehumanization of minorities. I consider Snopes a reliable source, but Harvard is better. > **[Redirect Notice](https://www.google.com/url?q=https:%2F%2Famp.washingtontimes.com%2Fnews%2F2016%2Fjul%2F11%2Fno-racial-bias-police-shootings-study-harvard-prof%2F)** The most interesting part: > [@](#): > > \*The 63-page study, “An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force,” appears to support research conducted at Washington State University showing that officers in simulation tests were actually less likely to shoot at blacks than whites. - The guy who did the study isn’t white either. ---
**Author:** ![Huey\_Freeman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/huey_freeman/32/251_2.png) [@Huey\_Freeman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huey_Freeman)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/127 "2018-06-23T01:58:59Z")
> [@Bruce\_Wayne](#): > > I consider Snopes a reliable source, but Harvard is better. > [https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/11/no-racial-bias-police-shootings-study-harvard-prof/](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/11/no-racial-bias-police-shootings-study-harvard-prof/) Sorry, bro. The article - or working paper - you cited is neither peer-reviewed or published in a peer-reviewed journal. You’re free to try again. ---
**Author:** ![Huey\_Freeman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/huey_freeman/32/251_2.png) [@Huey\_Freeman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huey_Freeman)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/128 "2018-06-23T02:06:31Z")
> [@I\_can\_t\_think\_of\_a\_name](#): > > There’s a useful general method to illuminate irrational prejudice that’s fashionable enough to pass unnoticed and without comment - imagine exactly the same words but targetted at a different group, one that it’s not fashionable to be prejudiced against. > > With that in mind, going through the posts about “white folks” and mentally replacing “white folks” with “jews” is illuminating. Same words. Same way of thinking. Same “justification” of a partial correlation in shooting rates. Just a different target group. Which isn’t a difference in opinion, just in targetting. > > I urge people to try that and consider whether or not they still think it’s an acceptable way of thinking. > > Or try this: > > Imagine a particularly extremist MRA ranting on about about women in the same way that some posters are ranting on about “white folks”, including claiming that the police are the miltary arm of women and single out men as targets of brutality and killing, etc, etc. They’d have a much stronger “justification” than the people in this thread because the correlation is far stronger - almost all (all?) of the people shot by police in the USA are men. > > Ask yourselves - would you be OK with that? Would you consider it an acceptable way of thinking? Go ahead, Robin. Take it from here. > [@Robin DiAngelo](#): > > White Fragility is a state in which even a minimum amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves. These moves include the outward display of emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt, and behaviors such as argumentation, silence, and leaving the stress-inducing situation. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/129 "2018-06-23T02:14:28Z")
On a board dedicated to robust debate, you take argumentation as a sign of “white fragility”? Alrighty then ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/130 "2018-06-23T06:46:19Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > And why, when a cop shouts “freeze!” or “hands up!” do you quickly reach for your cell phone? Because I’m freaked out by some screaming lunatic pointing a gun at me for no apparent reason? ---
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/131 "2018-06-23T07:10:29Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Of course, they are roughly two or three times more likely to have committed a violent offense ([cite](https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/topic-pages/tables/table-21)) so your allegation that police shootings demonstrate that police are profiling black people for brutality is completely unfounded. > > Regards, > Shodan Arrested and committed are not the same thing. Try again. ---
**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 25, 2018, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/132 "2018-06-25T04:33:24Z")
> [@Huey\_Freeman](#): > > Go ahead, Robin. Take it from here. As I expected, you have no rational answer. People with passionately held irrational prejudices rarely do because, unsurprisingly, they are irrational. You could have tried a little better at your attempt to dress up the age old “The same thing is different when the right biological group does it!” belief. You would still have failed because the belief is nonsense, but you could have put some effort in. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2018, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/133 "2018-06-25T12:43:41Z")
> [@Chisquirrel](#): > > Arrested and committed are not the same thing. Try again. Actually, if you compare the figures to those of the [National Crime Victimization survey](https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?iid=245&ty=dcdetail) you will find that they are roughly the same. Black people, especially black males, commit a hugely disproportionate amount of violent crime. Violent criminals tend to get shot by the police more than other groups. Go figure. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![MikeF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@MikeF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MikeF)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2018, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/134 "2018-06-25T17:38:59Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > I believe cops often fire before any item whatsoever is produced (or, in fact, exists at all). > > …It’s really simple : if you have your weapon drawn and trained on someone, you’re going to be able to shoot them before they can reach then pull then point then shoot at you (or anyone else). I don’t care if you’re trying to arrest Wyatt fucking Earp, \*nobody \*can out-draw someone who’s already drawn. So you wait until you’re _sure_ that’s what’s going on, not what you _think_ is about to go down or what you fear _might_ happen. And if you can’t, find another job. That sounds reasonable but, in fact, is not true. I have personally conducted training that addresses this very thing. We put a “suspect” in a room with his hands in his coat pockets. Officers are sent to search the building for a burglary suspect. Everybody is armed with guns that fire projectiles that leave a colored mark. When the officers encountered the suspect with guns drawn, and pointed at him they almost always commanded “Show me you hands!”. At that point he would draw the gun and fire at them. We did this around 200 times. I don’t recall a single instance where the officers got off the first shot. In about 80% of the cases the suspect hit an officer with that first, unaimed shot. The ranges involved here were 12-15 feet. This is what is known as the “reactionary gap”. It takes time for the officers to see what is happening, process it, decide on a course of action and then act. All this happens in a second or less. It is still more time than it takes the suspect to draw and fire. This is not due to incompetent officers or training. It is due the way human beings work. The courts realize this and allow officers to use force before there is proof- positive that a threat exists. There have a been some “what if” scenarios posited by some contributors to this thread. Almost all are over-simple and lack the details that real life encounters have. The kid in the playground, BTW, was the size of a small adult, had what appeared to be a real gun and had been pointing it at people. He wasn’t playing in the sandbox with his GI Joe. And to say officers shouldn’t put themselves in positions where the might have to use deadly force is a joke. Unless you want them to stay at HQ all day and not respond to anything. I’m sure that there are those who would be just fine with that. ---
**Author:** ![Huey\_Freeman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/huey_freeman/32/251_2.png) [@Huey\_Freeman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huey_Freeman)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2018, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/135 "2018-06-25T19:30:03Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Actually, if you compare the figures to those of the [National Crime Victimization survey](https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?iid=245&ty=dcdetail) you will find that they are roughly the same. Black people, especially black males, commit a hugely disproportionate amount of violent crime. Violent criminals tend to get shot by the police more than other groups. Go figure. > > Regards, > Shodan We’ve come full circle, then, and he still doesn’t get it. ---
**Author:** ![DavidwithanR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3bc359/32.png) [@DavidwithanR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidwithanR)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2018, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/136 "2018-06-25T23:18:34Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > If the suspect was unarmed, the answer is “no”. And the correct reaction is “what a tragedy, the police killed another unarmed man without good reason”. No, that isn’t a correct reaction, because murder is a crime, not a “tragedy”. Tragedy is different. The correct reaction is “That police officer is a cold-blooded murderer, what the hell is someone like that doing in uniform, this is disgusting, how do we get the officer and the officer’s supervisor fired, and how do we prevent this from happening again”. ---
**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 25, 2018, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/137 "2018-06-25T23:49:07Z")
> [@DavidwithanR](#): > > No, that isn’t a correct reaction, because murder is a crime, not a “tragedy”. Tragedy is different. The correct reaction is “That police officer is a cold-blooded murderer, what the hell is someone like that doing in uniform, this is disgusting, how do we get the officer and the officer’s supervisor fired, and how do we prevent this from happening again”. There’s only one possible way of doing that - stop having any police. Of course, that would result in far more innocent people being killed, but it would prevent people being killed by the police. Since there wouldn’t be any police. Other theoretically possible options that aren’t possible in practice: Make it impossible to obtain a gun in the USA. Not just illegal. Impossible. Make all police officers superhumans who can see into the future or react many times faster than a human. That might be possible with robots in the future, but it certainly isn’t possible now. Although those last two still wouldn’t be enough. The USA is already well past the stage of sufficient propaganda on this issue to create false memories of the extremely recent (a couple of minutes) past in untargetted witnesses (e.g Anthony O’Grady and Sunny Khalsa). That’s quite remarkable, since creating false memories usually requires some degree of targetting and is much harder for recent memories than it is for older memories. ---
**Author:** ![DavidwithanR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3bc359/32.png) [@DavidwithanR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidwithanR)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2018, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/138 "2018-06-26T01:51:49Z")
There’s a pretty high level of willful blindness going on. Why is this not an issue in all civilized countries? Why is it a big problem in the US, but not in Australia, not in Germany, not in Japan? If it happens in Russia or China or Angola, people will point to corruption. I get that. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2018, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/139 "2018-06-26T02:24:42Z")
> [@DavidwithanR](#): > > No, that isn’t a correct reaction, because murder is a crime, not a “tragedy”. Tragedy is different. The correct reaction is “That police officer is a cold-blooded murderer, what the hell is someone like that doing in uniform, this is disgusting, how do we get the officer and the officer’s supervisor fired, and how do we prevent this from happening again”. Really? Was the tragedy _premeditated_? What was his motive? His motive was to not get killed himself. ---
**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 26, 2018, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437/140 "2018-06-26T03:10:26Z")
> [@MikeF](#): > > That sounds reasonable but, in fact, is not true. I have personally conducted training that addresses this very thing. As have I, several times. But trying to educate some on these boards will drive you nuts. They simply know more than those who have seen how things actually work in the real world. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-california-law-to-restrict-use-of-deadly-force-by-law-enforcement/816437.md?page=8)