. >> secretary kilshaw: are you going number one and then -- >> commissioner: i'm taking the language already there dealing with an armed weapon. >> secretary kilshaw: i got that. >> commissioner: but i'm limiting the use of a taser to when the subject is causing immediate physical injury to a person or threatening to cause immediate physical injury and there's the thought the person has the ability of carrying out that threat. that's all number one. the next one is the exact same language without the armed weapon. instead of assaulting or battering or displaying an intent to assault or batter, i couldn't follow that and frankly i could think of a scenario where we would not want somebody to have a taser used again him or her but they would still fit within that language. for example, if somebody is sitting against the wall and an officer is trying to arrest that person and the person sitting down says i'm going to kick your [bleep] that's an intent to assault or batter a person. i don't want a taser used in a situation like that and if we start thinking of examples that meet outside

as you know, we have a police commission staff, we have sergeant ware, we have sergeant kilshaw, but officer ryan jones of our office are proud to announce that he and his wife are the proud parent of justgen rye justgen -- justin ryan jones. congratulations, and i'm sure you're home watching us today. >> president turman: with that, public comment on items, i'm going to call it 1-a through d. seeing none, public comment is now closed. all right. next line item, please. >> clerk: item four, general public comment. the public is now welcome to address the commission regarding items that do not appear on tonight's agenda but are within the subject matter jurisdiction. speakers hard address their remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners and dpa or police personnel. neither police or dpa personnel nor commissioners are required to respond to questions presented by the public, but may provide a brief response. individual commissioners and police and dpa personnel should refrain however from entering into any debates or discussion with speakers during public

. >> secretary kilshaw: the last one is on page four. >> this one relates to the 96a report. the dpa requests reinstate paragraph that was deleted. it stands on the 96a report citing in doing so it would be similar to the sheriff's department and lapds commission report. the department believes if you do appendix not all use of force which is what the code covers and once implemented would be included in the 96a report. so i think it summarizes up whether the summaries are to be included in 96a or not. but again, chief, correct me if i'm wrong on that one. >> commissioner turman: again, the 96a issue we believe is the redundancy. and the purpose of board is to continually review the training and policy and procedures stated in paragraph four in the draft policy. the 96a appendix deals with a lot of what's in 96a effective july 1st for the state collection standard. we believe not only is it redundant, there's a change in through requires changings -- changes in reporting and better served in reporting change like we're doing with 96a and we'd raernl have that not locked into

when it comes to the review board, we will -- >> secretary kilshaw: item one, use the dpas language. >> commissioner turman: we will use the dpa's language. item number two, we will have two commissioners. item three, we'll add language as suggested by the dpa. and item number four we will leave as-is. with that, commissioners, we will now take public comment on the first item which is listed as item number two the policy of the ddo policy on ecd and the appendix. two minutes per speaker. one at a time, please. members of the public you are now invited. >> i want to say as a veteran of two rounds of working groups, the use of force and tasers it continues to amaze me how collaborative the process has been and how seriously the views of stakeholders have been taken. in terms of the discussion around the authorized use of the weapon i will say this. i understand the chief's view on consistency but as someone involved in the 5.0 negotiations we were not considering tasers. if one thing that's been proven over tasers being debated is it's controversial and dangerous. there's scientific d