Never has the dysfunctional nature of the San Francisco Police Commission been more apparent than on the evening of February 17, 2010. The panel found themselves pondering one of their only-in-San-Francisco, alternate universe dilemmas: Is it better to be Tazed or shot, Bro'?
When Chief George Gascon accepted the job in San Francisco, he did so despite this city's reputation as an inane political madhouse whose inmates elect some of the most inept civic leaders in the nation. Thus forewarned, he came anyway, and what he learned on the 17th was that public and officer safety issues mean little to some of the pretentious Commissioners. In the classic fable, the incompetent emperor wore no clothes. At the February 17th Commission meeting, it was a virtual court of nudists.
"In the classic fable, the incompetent emperor wore no clothes. At the February 17th Commission meeting, it was a virtual court of nudists."
For years, the POA and knowledgeable individuals have been telling the commission that the less-lethal Taser was an effective tool being utilized by nearly every major police department in the United States. Of course the Commission didn't want to hear that from the SFPOA. As I said, these are persons who consider themselves to be more knowledgeable than the true experts that address them each week, regardless of the subject at hand. That self-serving omniscience rose to the fore when the Taser debate commenced.
When Chief Gascon took control of the SFPD, he was stunned to learn that his officers were not equipped with the Taser, but he was absolutely shocked when told that the Commissioners had rejected it numerous past occasions. The Chief, knowing that the Taser is a standard tool in law enforcement agencies nationwide thought that obtaining Tasers would be the proverbial "no-brainer" for the sitting police commission. Well, welcome to San Francisco Chief!
Mr. Gascon presented his case logically and factually to the panel. After a litany of testimony from PERF (Police Executive Research Forum), the group that recommended all of the current changes in the SFPD that it seems this commission so embraces, Sheriff Mike Hennessy, whose officers have safely utilized the Taser for years, Scott Greenwood, lead council for the ACLU in Ohio, and some of our own SFPD officers who testified to the fact that the Taser could have been an effective option in their own experiences, at least four Commissioners decided they knew better. They deferred the vote. After all, they concluded, a Taser could actually be painful!
Now, these are four people who have never confronted a violent, resisting felon on the street, have never been in a shoot/don't shoot situation, have never had to fear for their lives, or face the ultimate responsible of taking the life of another. Yet, despite testimony from the ACLU that every jurisdiction that has adopted the Taser has seen police shootings dramatically decrease, these four Commissioners are certain that they know better. The fact is they do not know better, and probably don't really care anyway. I refer back to the fable analogy: Tasers aren't the issue, it's the clothes.
They all realized they needed time, time to vet the critical decision with their advisers and get the correct political take on the situation. Remember that these are all political animals, and each sees a bright future for his or herself beyond the confines of the lowly SF Police Commission. It's a common affliction with their kind and there is a term for it. It's called delusional self-aggrandizement. It is, frankly, the placing of their own political future in more immediate concern than the safety of the public and the officers they oversee.
You see it's never about the cop, and it's always about the politics. Some Commissioners say they speak for the citizens of San Francisco in opposing the Tasers. I will bet you we see a fine parade of concerned citizens show up on March 3rd when the issue is reconsidered. Welcome to your new world, Chief!
Oh, and by the way, you look good in uniform. |
Contact the President
