if tasers were to be adopted, i recommend careful monitoring of taser usage by officers and units, as well as department wide. regular reports should be made to the commission and to members of the public. there should also be independent oversight of taser usage by the occ as well. supervision is extremely important. this there's often -- this is shown in the numbers. it has been reported that often, tasers are overused when initially deployed. this was the case in san jose. during the first year, they were used 172 times. in 2006, the second year,232 times. in 2007, 240 times. that is when reports were issued and taser usage was issued. last year, commissioner marshall asked something to the effect, wouldn't it be better to be shot with a taser then with a gun? i think this is a good question and one that members of the public often ask when discussing tasers. i think looking at the number of times tasers are used helps to answer that question. there far more often than a gun would be used. officers are taught that tasers are not to be used in deadly force situations, because tasers

initially, police departments using the taser had much more liberal policy about using the taser. as there was recognition of risk, policies were put forth that dampened that use of taser s and that mitigated some of that risk. if tasers were to be brought, we want to prevent that 600% increase in seven deaths and not have that increase. i will point out that after the tasers were used, it did not come back to baseline. it came back to 40% above that baseline. 50 cities provided data for the study. the other question we asked was how about shootings. do they go down? about 20 cities replied. we found about six shootings per 100,000 arrests, which doubled in that first year of taser use. it came back near the baseline after that first year. but shooting stubble. one possibility is that with liberal use of tasers, confrontations escalated until lethal force was necessary. i will be the first to admit that this particular outcome -- we did not have the power to measure this outcome. only four cities provided data on officer injuries. nevertheless, we did not see a decrease in officer

i think there is a move away from taser. we're talking about this new generation of devices, which only became widespread starting in 2003, and since 2005. there is less than 10 years of history here. taser reported fourth quarter earnings, and sales are way down. i have talked to representatives from small apartments, who have told me they are thinking about dropping the device because of their concern about liability and effectiveness. i think we are going to see a phase-out of these devices over the next several years. now that i have gotten involved in this, somebody demonstrated a device to me that was a really bright light. it was so effective. this guy with the knife would not have been able to do anything. he could not have seen, just with this light. so there are a lot of alternatives to shooting darts attached to wires and running current through the person for five seconds. thank you for the time. >> thank you for coming all the way up from los angeles. could i ask that reeny first speak? she is a western regional

taser international. is there gun international? tasers and guns are not without risk. nobody is taking away the guns. what is it about the taser that bothers people more than guns? >> i think in some cases, tasers have been used inappropriately. commissioner marshall: so have guns. >> that has given them a bad name. the early history of them in new york city as they were used to torture people. people remembered that. now, today, we see them used much more strategically, much more carefully. commissioner marshall: i understand that. we have that shootings were people thought guns were used inappropriately. i'm trying to figure out what it is about tasers. no one is suggesting that law enforcement give up their guns. maybe they are. all right. i am just curious as to why -- i could never get that, really. >> you raise a good point. one of the things your department has done very well as you have restricted the use of deadly force. one of the recommendations, you should not use deadly force against a car, shooting at a car. in a number of years, it has dropped significan

>> i obviously want you to vote no on tasers. if you're still in this room, two minutes is not a lot of time, but it has been given to you and you should take it. the public comment has been almost entirely that we do not want tasers. these are people who of and set a -- have been staying all night to make their comment. if you want any semblance of representation of the public, of communities you would like to serve, you need to vote against tasers, or at least postpone it and have community engagement before you make any vote. in terms of deescalating, you have just adopted a program to try to do that. why adopt a second program at the same time? we need to try to train people to deescalate. it has been called into question whether any weapon can be escalate -- can deescalate a situation. i understand why a police officer would be scared and want to use a weapon. when people have more weapons available, they use more weapons. it is just what people do. i think bringing more weapons into this situation is in no way going to dees

i am here to emphatically ask you to oppose the taser and ask you to stop studying tasers. thank you. >> i'm a triple-bypass about two years ago. i would be at risk. former mayor newsome and the former police chief argued that it would reduce officer related shootings by 1/3. this argument is false. if they are genuinely in danger by an armed suspect, they will use a gun. they will use noncompliance subjects. 80% of taser use is against unarmed individuals. if they are adequately trained, they can handle noncompliant subjects without tasers. police policy is that officers are not to shoot unless someone is in danger. meeting that the suspect is armed. if that is true, that they will reduce police shootings by 1/3, it implies police are shooting on their own suspects. we don't agree that it is an acceptable substitute for police education. police used the taser and will make racial profiling much worse. courts do not protect against taser abuse. a 7-month pregnant seattle black woman was pulled over and she was refusing to sign the ticket. the court upheld that. [chime] >> g

officers are taught that tasers are not to be used in deadly force situations, because tasers are not always effective if lives are in danger. officers are taught to use deadly force. i was in the other room when officers told stories about incidents that had happened, the removing stories, marie scary stories. in most of those scenarios, tasers would not be an appropriate weapon. tasers are not non-lethal weapons. they are less lethal. at least six people have died nearby when tasers were used. in one of those cases, the man had been hitting a car with a garden hoe. he did not respond to commands, and officers used batons and pepper spray on him. the coroner's report said that tasers had been used 20 times. he died the next day. a comparison can be made a fatal officer-involved shootings in the five years before and after tasers were deployed in san jose. there were seven between 1999 and 2004, and seven in the five years following. however, when the number of deaths after tasers were deployed is added, it becomes 13. the numbers in san jose do not do a strong support for taser deplo

-- if tasered. many are medicated under the supervision of government- employed positions. i am speaking out to criticize positions for failure to diagnose, thus leaving a patient and the public at risk. psychosis or depression is commonly related to nutrition issues or toxic exposures, people who have uncontrolled diabetes or cut toxic conditions -- hypoxic conditions. mental status is commonly overlooked. it is overlooked in the majority of patients who present as psychosis or major depression. molecular medicine has documented reduction with use of niacin in 50% of cases. this treatment is not commonly offered in the united states and is actively bought by members of my profession, the psychiatric order. humans hate side-effects of psychotropic medications and often forget to take them. these medications damage their brain and make the person more likely to be violent. the pharmaceutical industry covers this up when there are cases that go into court. too long, my profession and the promise of th

i am here to emphatically ask you to oppose the taser and ask you to stop studying tasers. thank you. >> i'm a triple-bypass about two years ago. i would be at risk. former mayor newsome and the former police chief argued that it would reduce officer related shootings by 1/3. this argument is false. if they are genuinely in danger by an armed suspect, they will

i'm opposed to the use of tasers. there is a history of them being developed as instruments of torture. we don't need the extra costs associated with buying tasers. as we've also heard, police are likely to use force against people of color. our black and brown brothers and sisters are likely to be at an additional risk. tasers end up causing more deaths after they are adopted by the police. i was at a cafe and i noticed a commotion. there was a guy being beat up outside by someone else. the guy was left there, he was dazed and confused. people gave him water. the cops showed up, and because he would not stand up, they held him against the wall like this. and a woman cop shot him with a taser. i made a complaint. they did not find any wrongdoing. the man was taken away in an ambulance. [chime] >> my name is catherine, here i teach art at the community center. i am a little nervous about speaking. the argument that tasers are more dangerous, they are usually thought of as less lethal. they are actually lethal to some d

i don't know if taser is the right weapon. i have serious concerns about the taser. i don't want to give money to arizona. but i'm intent on voting to give our officers another weapon on a pilot program to see how it works. if it works well and we get it right and we don't have abuses then we did it right. if we did it wrong, we need to tweak it and refine it until it's right. that's my intention. >> commissioner, can i answer the question you proposed to me? the gentleman who showed the video of the mistreatment and the taser i was appalled watching those officers use those tasers on the chief of police running out and tazing a young lady running in the park like everybody else is. i'm not any happier with what i saw on tv but then again the police can misuse their weapon, they can misuse use their baton, there's a litany of other weaponry that officers have on a daily basis they can misuse. my only confusion in what you're asking me, i'm asking to look at the tasers as well as other less lethal options and i'll comba

if teasers -- tasers are adopted, they will become a stepchild of tasers because of lack of funding. they are always at the end of the line. i understand this is not the health commission, but i must say something. i am living in a kafka-esque world of mental illness. constantly having our loved ones rushed instead of individuals. just last week, we know that continued residential treatment, resources are limited. this is all we can do. with the drug dealers constant, or the family, they failed to take their medication. there is no follow-up. the police are called over and over again. they are very closely connected. >> commissioners, the evening. -- good evening. i have watched the procedures, and not one of you brought up because factor. -- the cost factor. what it will cost the city of san francisco, and not the sfpd. the previous mayor lied about the deficit. revenues are declining, and this is the most expensive weapons system. the training goes on at $90,000 a session or whatever the number happens to be and it keeps going from there. a brand new weapons system has a brand new

. -- on tasers. thank you for doing that. community engagement is the heart of effective public safety and needs to be a consideration in every step of every issue. there are two things you need to do to listen to the community. nearly every person in this room who is now wearing a blue collar does not want -- who is not wanting a blue collaearing a b s not want tasers. the same goes for those that were in the community overflow rooms. do what the aclu suggested. medical experts, representation from the school board, and representatives from the community must work with you on protocol and tactical options for less than lethal force situations. this group must look at all options, not just tasers. consensus is possible. but consensus building will seriously take time. correct me if i'm wrong, but you said last night you did not want the department to issue recommendations until after cit was implemented. is that right? if that is so, i agree. you need to give this process time to do its work properly. thanks. [applause] presi

>> at this stage, we don't have tasers. current training, their options would have been -- a knife- wielding subject is a level of deadly force. we are not trained to go lesser level of force to a higher level of force. in that situation, they could have used a taser. if that did not work, their only option is lethal force. commissioner dejesus: do you know of instances where an officer -- and i've-wielding person is four feet from the officer and use the tasered? >> i cannot answer statistics like that. >> commissioner, i would like to read one component. the problem with this weapon is the officers are all not going to be able to carry that in a patrol car. that weapon would have had to be driven out to that location, even if we were going to conceivably use that in the senate -- in this scenario, which we wouldn't have. the minute the officer grabs that weapon and has to have another officer that guards him. his gun is of no use to him because his hands are full with this. he has to have a gardening officers standing by

if teasers -- tasers are adopted, they will become a stepchild of tasers because of lack of funding. they are always at the end of the line. i understand this is not the health commission, but i must say something. i am living in a kafka-esque world of mental illness. constantly having our loved ones rushed instead of individuals. just last week, we know that continued residential treatment, resources are limited. this is all we can do. with the drug dealers constant, or the family, they failed to take their medication. there is no follow-up. the police are called over and over again. they are very closely connected. >> commissioners, the evening. -- good evening. i have watched the procedures, and not one of you brought up because factor. -- the cost factor.

in many instances, the display of the taser and the fact that the taser has a laser beam which presents a red dot where you pointed, and the person can see there is a red dot on them, is enough to deter the person and get them to comply. the petition reps refer to it as "red got compliance." people are intimidated by the taser, appropriately, know that if they are shot by it it will hurt. more times than not in our experience, the person complies with the sheriff's order at that point rather than be shocked. in more than a dozen instances, we have shocked the taser at a person who has already battered somebody else or is using a weapon to threaten a deputy sheriff. in each of those instances, the taser was effective, except for once, when both barb's did not hit the person. it resulted in compliance, but no injuries other than pain. it resulted in no lawsuits. it resulted in no injuries to any deputy sheriffs. we have, as i say -- not every deputy sheriff has one. we restrict who has them. they must receive training. we have our own trainers, who must receive more training. there must b

they used tasers and they were not effective. i was blown away by how far -- how hard and fast this weapon was. >> background comes out at 300 feet per second. this comes out at 250 feet per second. probably creates the same type of energy because the gramm weight of this is 60 grams. i know that is a little bit later. i could pass this around. you can see the type of particular round is a little bit heavier. that is why this technology has a faster, hotter charge in it. it is creating the same kinetic energy. it is just a little bit like to. commissioner hammer: i don't want to go into the details tonight. hopefully our colleagues can do that and come back with us. one of the things that intrigued me about this particular weapon and this what expert told us it is effective up to 100 feet. is that correct? >> 30 yards is the optimal distance. you can get it to about 35. when we train, we train up to about 20 yards with this one. we have a single shot version of it. we have an optic on it. we use it up to 25 yards. commissioner ha

in many instances, the display of the taser and the fact that the taser has a laser beam which presents a red dot where you pointed, and the person can see there is a red dot on them, is enough to deter the person and get them to comply. the petition reps refer to it as "red got compliance." people are intimidated by the taser, appropriately, know that if they are shot by it it will hurt. more times than not in our experience, the person complies with the sheriff's order at that point rather than be shocked.

this is not about tasers. we are going to ask the police department also look at any other non-lethal weapon that our department can use, not just tasers, but other weapons. there has been some talk about an sl6. we're going to amend the language to add, in asking for the department to evaluate and investigate other methods, to return back to this commission in 30 days with a recommendation, whether it is conducted energy devices or an sl6, or another weapon, or a combination thereof. we are going to ask that two commissioners be assigned to this task. i have asked commissioner slaughter to be one of them. i am about to ask commissioner chan, given her great work on mental-health issues. i think we all agree we need one more weapon to help protect the officers and the public. we are going to go forward with the presentation tonight. you are going to hear about conductive energy devices. you may hear a little bit about the sl6. we're went to be open-minded about this. we have incredible speakers. i want everybo