>> good evening, ladies and gentlemen. thank you very much for your indulgence and your patience in allowing us to have your time to speak. it's greatly appreciated. my name's allen levine. we've heard forcyte sometime across the country and in the bay area a change for the use of deadly force, and the use of bullets and batons. a friend of mine many years ago chaired with me a dilemma they had. they said they wanted change in their life and wouldn't stand for it, and that's what i hear here in the bay area. they're calling for change, but when change is offered, they won't stand for it. tazers are not a persolutionfe solution. they're not the only solution, but they are an alternative to the use of guns, they're an alternative to the use of batons. taser's may, of course, inflict unintended harm, but i know the harm that bullets and batons can do. i've worked in the city of san francisco for more than three decades now. where my office is located, the federal blank police across the street carry taser's. coast guard carry tazers. private security carries tazers. everyone has a second option except the san francisco police department. tazers are used by the general public. they're available to them all over the world. they've been used in the united kingdom and canada. they've been used in numerous situations to curb crime. i believe that's the end of my time -- oh . i implore the council to consider what we're doing now, the 19 century practice of using bullets and batons. give the san francisco p.d. another option, i implore you. thank you. >> good evening. i'm marry jac jacobs. [ inaudible ] -- and i was on one of the two community members on the working group. i think we should be very clear that when the police commission hired chief scott, who made his offer -- who -- sorry. who, in l.a., his officers had taser's, so he has experience with this, and he believes his san francisco officers should have tazers, and i believe that you should support your police chief. i think we should be clear that the sheriff's department has had tazers, and as far as i know lately, there has been no complications. i think we should be clear that most metropolitan police agencies, which is 17,000, already have tazers. as far as the use of force guidelines, i have two concerns, and one is on the use of force assault, i think we should be very clear on what assault on a police officer is, and i think that should be more clearly defined. my other concern is that under restrictions of c.e.d. use, that it -- a subject should be -- appears to be a child under 13, i think that age should be raised to 18. those are my two concerns. i always believe that we should have an option for officers, something between the baton and the gun, and that i believe that our police chief will ensure that we will have proper training and oversight and accountability, so please, let our officers have this option. thank you very much for your time. >> next speaker, please. >> thank you, commissioners. my name is al harris, and i suffered through those working groups. as an observer, i've been to all of those meetings where people have screamed and acted crazy. i thought i was in a lynch mob when i was outside before i came in here, and i would strongly suggest that the police have tazers. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. i'm sorry, commissioner, did you want to say something? >> i do. i'm just going to implore you. i'm -- i'm wondering, we have empty seats -- >> no. >> good evening, commissioners, mr. president, chief. my name's randall scott, i'm with the union square improvement district. that's 27 square blocks do you want. i am in charge of cleaning operations with the sidewalks. i work hand in hand with the chief's officers daily, and i've been witness to a number of occasions where the -- i can't say the tazer would have been a great option, but right now, it's no option, and there's no option between a baton and the gun, as people have already said. o.c., based upon my experience, as well as speaking with the officers, is really not a viable solution because if you do -- after the o.c., you do have to go hands on, and he's going to be covered with pepper spray, or she. as it stapds now, we're the only major metropolitan city in the country, other than boston, that does not use tazers. on behalf of the officers, on behalf of the property owners, on behalf of my staff, as well as the employees of all the businesses in those 27 square blocks, please, let the officers have tazers. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> my name is sharon eberhart, and i'm here to want to lend my support to allow the san francisco police department the use of c.e.d.'s. if the san francisco sheriff's can use them, why not the police? it is my opinion that allows c.e.d.'s will prevent the unnecessary loss of life of not only the police officer because he does not have to use a lethal weapon, but also the suspect of any conflict, and also, any members of the public who are present at a conflict. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is kevin benedicto. i stand here to echo the same concerns that blue ribbon panel raised in its june 21st letter to the commission, as well as concerns raised in 2016 when the use of force dgo 5.1 was originally suggested. we concur with the findings of the bar association's criminal justice task force, that now is not the right time to adopt a dramatic new force option of the electronic control weapon. our substantive concerns, we lack substantive data, we continue to have concerns about the capability, and the interaction of introduction of taser's with dgo 5.01, at a time when 5.01 seems to be working and deescalation seems to be having a real and positive effect, introducing a new weapon to hatcher those efforts and could be a significant set back. additionally, as we raised in our june 21st letter, there are serious concerns about a sufficient allocation of resources. people have noted there are 270 department of justice recommendations. the blue ribbon panel made 80 recommendation, and to spend a single night on a single recommendation when there are other recommendations in dire need, such as implicit bias training, could be a more efficient use of funds at this time. we thank the commission fore its skefshaticonservation and us to participate. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is tony tamborello, and i apologize that you were not able to hear some of the heartfelt speeches and conversations that you had when you left the room. and you say that because they were raucus in the beginning, but once they calmed down, they spoke quite eloquently, and they have concerns, and i think their concerns should have been listened to, and i'm sorry that they weren't able to do so. tazers are weaponed, let's make no mistake about that. they kill people, they cause serious injuries, and they've been falsely marketed by axon as an alternative to deadly force. people are led to believe that you could be shot with either a tazer or a gun, but that's -- that's disingenuous because the police department as well as the manufacturer says that in an incident, you're not going to use a tazer when you use deadly force. yes... the machine that axon has put forward in terms of its marketing, they say it's effective and safe, but independent studies tell a different story; and even the sergeant from richmond said a number of times, more so than the -- more than 50% of the times, it was ineffective, and it didn't work. what does that mean? it means that the failure rate is so high that what happens is you confront somebody, and if it doesn't work, they become violent or they become confrontational. it doesn't help. but what i want to say, and it's been said before, is all those warnings are a corporate way of shifting liability, and they do that -- mr. brave was not being honest. that's what they do in a lawsuit. >> thank you, sir. appreciate your time. next speaker, please. >> good evening. i'm julie tran. i think -- i look back at the number of times this commission has visited this issue, and i read the other day an op-ed piece written by presidenture turman against tazers at this time because we didn't know about, and i think about this time, this moment in time when the only weapon available to s.f.p.d. is one about which we know virtually nothing, so i really hope you take the time to ask some questions of these two good men who are still here -- and by the way, nobody's paid them. i don't know where you got that information. it's wrong. no one's paid them. these people are volunteering their time, so i want to correct the record on that. and i really hope that you continue to await further information on this new weapon. we know that in houston -- i think that's the city to watch, but even the austin police officers association president came out and said after they saw what was happening in houston, that they are worried, that this weapon doesn't seem to be working. it's not effective, it's not powerful, so they were worried, and i think we would be very wise to see more evidence and studies -- independent studies about the newest weapon, and i really want -- i'm sorry she's not here. i really wanted to thank supervisor fewer for coming here. i've known her husband john for a long time. i think she speaks for many san francisco residents, and i want this chief to succeed. i like him a great dale, so i hope you vote no. this isn't going to do it for him. thank you. >> hi. my name is laura muniz, and i'm a mom, and i'm a brand ma, and i'm here to urge you to vote no on tazers. the police force is working hard to get their officers trained in deescalation tactics, and introducing another lethal weapon to require officers to undo their weapons training would be confusing and dangerous. tazers are lethal weapons. you've heard the testimony. they're also applied disproportionately to people of color. this is not the first time you've heard this, but i hope it'll be the last. i hope that you vote no. in a 2009 u.c.s.f. study, found that fatal shootings by officers more than doubled in the first year after departments adopted tazers, and the number of fatal shootings did not return to the predeployment of tazer numbers after the first year. i urge the commission to vote know on arming the s.f.p.d. on tazer weapons. i also want to say a little bit about what you did tonight. i am absolutely shocked in my 61 years of living in this city, i have never, ever seen a commission recess and reappear in another room without letting tax paying citizens know. you should all be ashamed of yourself. thank you. >> if i hear one more clap, that person is going to be ejected. that is disruptive, period. >> my name is kevin ortiz, born and raised in san francisco. member of the la toneo democratic club. we voted unanimously against tazers, and let it be known that i'm going to be staying in here as a witness, so if you want to drag me out, so be it. tazers kill everyone. we've proved that time and time again. we have the u.c.f.s. study, and what you guys did tonight with this process, and this is coming from a nephew of a former police commissioner. this is effing shameful, and excuse me my language, but let it state, it is shameful that you guys have done this tonight. back to tazers. tazers only increase police shooting time and time again, so let the record state that i am against tazers, the latino democratic club is against tazers. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. david carlos oliveri, democratic socialists of america. >> mr. -- officers, he's fine. speak. >> the -- your human rights commissioner made a -- i think a very strong point that respect and validation are what the community wants, and a vote for tazers is, frankly, disrespect, and invalidation of what the community has very, very clearly stated. i was at the first of the community meetings, and it was 95, maybe 98% against tazers, and a very small number of people were for it, so that's the first thing. the other thing is that as most of you know, i've been doing this for a while. i think it's -- i'm in my second year now of basically trying to work with the commission and get the reforms done, and when i look at what i'm doing, you know, in the commander lazare's task force, i wonder if it really is going to have any real meaning at the end of the day. tazers go directly against the movement towards reform. you're basically putting another weapon in the hands of cops who have not yet really fully appreciated that they need dramatic cultural change. that is the -- to me, the key issue here. i don't know how i can continue to be on the accountability panel with commander lozar and the other one that i was invited to with another one of your commanders if you guys vote for tazers, so to me, it turns the back on all of the reform that you're doing and basically heads back in another direction towards the old style of policing, and -- now i think that's the most important issue here that you ought to address. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening. jennifer freidenbach. ed of the homeless project. given that almost all the recent officer involved shootings were of homeless people, we take this issue very seriously, and we've look ad it and turned it around a bunch of different ways, and we land very squarely at a place that we believe this is absolutely a bad idea, a dangerous idea, and an irresponsible idea. as a member of the e.c.w. stakeholders group, the weapon was presented as intermediate force, to use in a situation where you would be using a baton or pepper spray, yet this weapon uses lethal force, and it's not been called on. the only study that had the right size sample sized increased officer involved shootings by 227% in the first year. this company has a slick p.r. campaign but they've been sued so many times, they've had to put out eight pages of warning, and reduce the power of the weapon. the cost to each time the weapon is discharged is $10,000, $10,000, at a time when the department's asking for more resources to do the important reforms that it needs, the data collection, the information in the handhelds to make officers more safe. at the stakeholders we ask for scenarios to show where this would improve the situation the out come, and we didn't get them. the office is going to disintegrate trust in the community, it's going to be used nine times a month, only work half the time. don't implement it now. don't pass it and implement it later, and don't pass it without a policy. please be brave. please be righteous and vote against it. >> next speaker. >> hello. i'm a student from mission high school, and my name is mateo. i'm against tazers because i'm already scared of the police as it is holding a gun, and i don't think adding another mix to the arsenal's going to help us. when oscar grant died, the police who killed him said he was pulling for a tazer, but ended up using his gun, what makes it more prone for them to use their weapon? for one, it shouldn't be used when someone is subdued, and we don't need anymore reforms on militaryizing the police, we need social programs. we need senders in dealing with people with disability and caring fore people, 'cause there's a big homeless crisis, and we can't have that. they tried to build a big prison, and we took it out. you guys keep trying to add tazers, and that ain't going to work, either. the police is built for the worst case scenarios, and it shouldn't be that way, because every day life isn't a tragedy, and it isn't a disaster, and it shouldn't always be that way. i believe that -- i believe that from all the other places, the last meeting, there was 85% against this, and you need to speak on behalf of san francisco. please do it. it doesn't serve the department. we don't need a militant police, we need a caring police. >> thank you. next speaker. are there any other speakers in the hallway, sir? >> my name is tad buck ner. i'm from the harvey milk lgbt club. i'm here to talk about tazers. i also feel i have to talk about process, as well. as far as tazers go, i feel there's ample evidence that they are lethal weapons, and they should not be used by our department. this department just had a major review by the department of justice, and has said that it would embrace and expand deescalation techniques, so why are we still dwelling on tazers when deescalation is far more successful in other parts of the world, far more cost effective and far less lethal? as far as process goes, you folks are only alienating yourselves a whole lot more as a body of the community by doing what you're doing, by shutting people out, but not including people in the process to listen and share, changing rooms, playing games. you're not doing yourself a service, you're not doing the police department a service nor the community, and i think it's shameful, so that's my two cents for now. >> next speaker, please. >> hello. first of all, i want you guys to know that i've been here for the past two, three, almost four hours, and as a mother to an eight month old son, that is not fair. there's a lot of people that came here after work, stood in that line to be heard, and because you guys felt like some type of entitlement to shut us down, aren't you guys here to hear public comment, and i want to hold you guys accountable of that. second of all, we just found out about this meeting today, and that's very disrespectful. i've been at all three, four meetings and i'm really appalled. i'm here toet will you know as a young mother, i don't feel comfortable with police force having tazers. it takes about $10,000 to go about training, and instead of allocating that money to the police force and these tazer companies, you guys should allocate that money to help, you know the people who have mental health issues, 'cause ultimately, those are the people you are killing. alex woods, you guide killed him, and he was actually serving the community. i feel money needs to be allocated so the police officers are really trained for the community. we are going through really hard times. there's so much trauma that our people are going through, and you guys want to give, like, these police officers another weapon, and not a weapon, but a weapon that has deadly force? so i just want to hold you guys accountable and let you know the way today went down was not cool. and i met with a couple of you guys personally, and it's like bad that you guys can't even look me in my eyes as i speak, and i feel very disrespected, and i hope you guys take that serious. >> next speaker, please. >> it's crazy. i don't see no people in here from my community in here, and if you are from my community, you sure is a sell out, and i'm going to say that. and the cool part is, you guys all sitting up there, thinking you are listening to me. yeah, i'm going to assume. it's unfair. there's elders waiting out there, sitting in chairs to talk to you about why s.f.p.d. isn't add another weapon to their body when they already have an image that's considered a weapon to us, period, period. i mean, i met a few of you up here. you not even giving me your full attention, so what i want to say is this is all bull stuff, and it's not fair. it's not fair, period. you all need to get you all's stuff together. >> hello. i'm here to tell you guys that i am against tazers, and i'm 18 years old, and i see you all is not near 18 and near my age, but i feel like tazers shouldn't be in my world because you guys aren't going to be here later down in the future. i'm going to be here, and i'm good night to be sitting in one of those seats, and i'm going to stand against tazers, 'cause i'm not for it. i feel like it's not right that you guys feel like you need to have another weapon on your waist, chief. i feel like it's not right, and you guys shouldn't do it. >> thank you. yes, ma'am? >> hi. my name's ashley bell. i'm with the young women's freedom center, and i'm here to talk about why i feel that tazers should not be added in my community. i live in the tenderloin, and it's a community that has a lot of disabled and mentally ill people, and i really don't want the people in my community to get tased. i don't know what happened in oakland where police mistakes a tazer, and it's really a gun, and kill one of my young people. i have young brothers -- two little brothers, and i do not want them to get tased. the people in my community matter, and instead of you guys getting these tazers, spending this money on this tazer, you guys should put the money back in the community. and you guys should -- need to -- this whole meeting, this is not cool. you guys need to organize this way more better, have our better actually be in the meetings, go to fillmore, hunters point, the mission, excelsior, go to these places and let them know what's going on, what you guys are trying to vote on, what you guys are trying to spend our hard tax paying money for a new weapon for s.f.p.d., when they don't need a new weapon. what you guys need to be focusing on is housing in san francisco. that's what you should be focusing on. the reason you want to go over and taze people in the tenderloin is because they don't have nowhere to stay. they're hungry, and they don't have anywhere to eat. and actually, the two african american people is looking in my eye. when i come to these meetings, don't just be looking down, look in their eyes, and really feel the pain that they're going through. my name is ashley bell, i'm with the young woman's freedom center, i'm a community organizer. i'm doing this for my people, for my people, for the greater good of all people. you guys need to stop just thinking about one and think of us all. >> next speaker. >> hi, good evening. thank you very much for letting me speak. i wasn't planning on it. i was just here to witness the debate of tazers in the san francisco police department, and what that means. but instead, since i have this opportunity to speak, i first off wanted to thank the city of san francisco for being a sanctuary city. my name is elizabeth geith. three years ago, i was shot by the police in mississippi, and i survived. i was shot by the county police, state police, and i was told that the f.b.i. was also involved. what i learned from that was no people sitting behind the dais as you people are sitting right now can effectively address, and i think this needs to be addressed more than anything else. instead of providing another weapon to law enforcement officials, i think a lot more energy should be spent in holding law enforcement officials accountable for their actions. holding law enforcement officials accountable for the fraternal order of police, which shuts down dissent within the police department, which shuts down officers who disagree with the way police brutality can run through the ranks, and which will shutdown officers who in fact witness against another police officer. this is what i experienced in mississippi, after surviving, basically, a murder attempt, i saw and read just loads and reams of documents that were all fabrications about what had happened that day, lots of them. so with a tazer, regardless of the concepts, well, it's a less lethal weapon that would potentially save lives instead of kill more people, what we've seen across the united states is that tazers are also abused. there's a whole nother set of laws -- excuse me. >> thank you for your time. >> thank you very much. >> listen to me, please. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. first off, i'm going to say chief scott, you should pay attention to the community and stop being on your phone 'cause i see you keep looking down, and it just looks like you have no respect for us right now; and to the commission, this meeting right now, it's illegal. you guys don't even have the public meeting. you're bringing in people five at a time, and then, you're holding the protazer people in the back. we can see them on the tv of them coming out the back room. it's stupid. obviously it doesn't look you guys care about the community. you guys want tazers so something like oscar grant can happen again. oh, it is he amy tazer? i thought it was my gun. and chief scott, people see you on your phone. come on, you keep looking down every five seconds, and obviously, we all know you want tazers. we all know lapd had tazers, where you came from, and we all know you're a big supporter of tazers, but you should vote the other way for us. you think -- i'm only 16 years old. you think i want to grow up being tazered to death by one of your police officers? i don't want to do that. you think i want my kids or students that i teach? i don't want them doing that by you guys. i don't want them even getting beat up or shot by you guys. that's all i have to say. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i have a letter here that -- can i pass it to them? thank you. hello. my name is katie birnbaum and i'm a nonprofit worker here in san francisco and also a resident of the bay view district. i'm here today to express my opposition to implementing tazers with the s.f.p.d. department. i work with families around san francisco, particularly african american latino, chinese, and low income families all across san francisco and see firsthand every week the anxiety and fear that the bias policing in san francisco has caused these communities, and the strain that that puts on these families and very very small children being terrified to see a police officer come on their street, whether or not they're there for any type of policing activity. and i want to see these kids grow up and thrive in san francisco and have some type of positive and trusting relationship with the police department, and i don't think that is possible if the commission and the department chooses to do -- use tazers currently, instead of trying to more wholeheartedly implement their community policing best practices, which again, from firsthand experience, is not really had an opportunity to get all the way through the department, and i really appreciate the efforts that have been made to try to improve the relationships with minority communities in san francisco and the p.d., but i believe that tazers are just the absolute opposite message that you want to send to these communities and it's going to really take us back on any of the efforts that's been made to improve those relationships. and with that, yeah, just one last time, please do not move forward with tazers. i think there's more beneficial tools that we can use. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening. fernando marquez, university of san francisco, lifelong resident. i want to ask each of you, would you be willing to subject you or the bodies of your loved ones to up to 50,000 volts of electricity through your body. if your answer is no, i would compel you to please vote against this -- this resolution to adopt tazers. i want to open up by sharing the words of retired oakland cop like will lionisio who oversaw the oakland's police department tazer development. he said that one in four tazers failed. he said if you had a desk lamp that failed this often, if you had a car that failed this often, you would be out of business. a month ago, we had a brother who was killed by a tazer in oakland. a series of many other people who have been killed by tazers over the years. our city, our commitment to justice and for the safety of our folks is apparent, and how many people have been spending hours outside. i spent four hours outside trying to get here. i thank you for the opportunity to finally do that. please, for the safety of our marginized folks, people of color, people are health conditions, lgbt, homeless, i beg you not to subject our residents to what is essentially a handheld elect 2k4rd rocution -- electrocution device. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening. commissioners. my name is matthew cepek. i'm a resident of district five. i'd like to tell you how disgusted i am when we are here even considering this question when the citizens of san francisco have told you over and over again we do not want this in our city. the tazer, what does it represent to us? it represents fear. it represents fear of the police officer, the person they're supposed to protect. it represents fear at the hands of minorities. it represents fear of the police commission from even hearing the voices that are outside this evening. it is very clear that the residents of san francisco are against this proposition. it is overwhelming clear that tazers do not protect police officers, they do not reduce violence. it is overwhelmingly clear what you must do tonight, vote no on this resolution. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is preston. i know that you've heard many different speakers tonight, concerned citizens, roundly give the many reasons why they would implore you to vote against this resolution. i am among those who would ask that you vote against this resolution, but i also want to point out something else that's happened throughout this process is that there have been, as the human rights commission pointed out, so mappy meetings that have happened in the city, with hundreds of people, the vast overwhelming majority of which have spoken out with concerns, and not just? general, but specific problems, like the problem of safety, and the problem of money, that we're spending 4.6 million peryear on these weapons, and to me, it is remarkable that there are so many people that have gone to theet these meetings and expressed their feeling, and that there's even still a question that tazers could become a part of the arsenal of the s.f.p.d. don't play the people of san francisco who have spoken in their hundreds over a due democratic process to try to inform you that we do not want tazers in our city. also, supervisor fewer pointed out that new regulations and new leadership in s.f.p.d. have already gun to reduce the amount of use of force in s.f.p.d., so now is not the time to provide another weapon in the arsenal. please vote kn no on this resolution, and please respect the democratic will of the people going forward. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening. alex post, democratic socialists of san francisco. i just have two questions. what problem are we trying to solve with tazers, and who wants these, because we know it's not the working group. we've heard from many members who feel that their contributions have been ignored, and the san francisco bar association, which is hardly a radical group has come out and advocated for a no vote in part because of the shambolic process, that you've seen tonight. it's not the department of justice, so any policy that purports to go forward as part of the d.o.j. reforms have no independent over sight. it's the public, as you see tonight, and you've heard from the human rights commission, and the human rights commissions account aed as neutral facilitators during the public meetings, and yet, they took the recommendations seriously, and they are recommending no vote. so what wants these? let's be honest. the police officer's association wants these weapons. the police officer's association who donated tens of thousands of dollars to the republican party last year to put trump and sessions in charge want these weapons as a make up for the loss of chokeholds and for the firing of their chief. and that answers the first question. this is not -- tazers are not a solution to a policy problem, they are an answer to a political problem, so i need you to ask yourselves tonight what your role is here on the commission: are you appointed to be functionaries, to carry out political agreements with large right wing groups or are you appointed to be leaders to consider your own self-judgment and to standup against powerful interests on behalf of us, the people. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hello. mat mcgowan, district 6 resident. and community health and city college of san francisco. if these weapons are faultily, as mr. brave admitted, provide no baseline safety improvement for officers, as merexpert testimony suggested, if the introduction of tazers brings a spike in sudden death and shooting deaths which do not decrease to the existing baseline as the expert testimony suggested, then, the introduction of tazers no s.f.p.d.'s hands leads to an up tick in the violence against the marginized communities, and the study of force among s.f.p.d. carrying the -- [ inaudible ] thank you. >> thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> hi. make razza, district nine resident. first of all, i'd like to say to the commission this is disgusting how you would curb a democratic process, move a meeting and silence the voices of an entire community over, over what? over one woman talking a little bit longer than she was supposed to? these weapons are expensive, they cost up to $8 million, they're ineffective, they're largely targeted against poor and minority communities, and you have a choice tonight. you can vote to say no to these tazers, and you can vote with your community who's out here, hungry and doing whatever they else might be doing on a friday night to speak to you and to plead with you to not give police officers these weapons. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hello. i'm a student of san francisco state, and i would just like to say that having tazers is not safe for you or for us, and to please help us help you keep your own officers safe by not having tazers. tazers have been proven to be ineffective 50% of the time. having tazers is not a cost effective, just even -- it's not effective when you're trying to use it in a safety time for your own officers. please take them out. keep us safe and keep your own officers safe, please. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is kriss. >> and i'm christina, and we are two medical students at u.c.s.f., and we are also leading the south m.s.c. homeless shelter. >> okay. speak one at a time, thank you, but go right ahead. >> okay. so first of all, we just want to recognize that we know police are public servants, and we respect them for their hard work, so we come from a -- just speaking from our own experiences about working with the homeless and our understanding of pier reviewed literature. >> are you done, ma'am? it's not going to be back and forth so are you done, ma'am? >> okay. i can start with our personal experiences with the homeless. so we see patients every day who are in high need of mental health issues. they are a a very vulnerable issue. we see that tazers are exacerbating that, so we first want to recognize that it's very important that we have safer policies that are -- that make sure that these vulnerable populations continue to be treated with respect and we don't think tazers are in support of that, and the evidence, kriss will talk about. >> and we just want to reiterate the scientific evidence that's been presented today. we know that scientists have found that tazer funded studies lead to a bias in favor of the safety of tazers. we know from research from unbiased studies conducted by people who have no stake in this that tazers lead to more in custody deaths, not fewer, and unfortunately they do not protect officers, and we know that tazers disproportionately misrepresent poor and unfunded and homeless people in the clinics that we serve, and for those reasons, we strongly urge you to not support this measure. >> thank you both. miss bryant. >> good evening, commissioners. i was here since 6:30, so i'm glad i got to speak. so i am tammy bryant. i live in the western addition, and i first want to commend the police department because i've had interactions with the police, several in a row that have been much more positive, so i feel like this is a culture change coming, and i feel like they are getting the message about change, and i feel there is a difference since chief scott change. even when there was an attack at safeway, that they were able to arrest somebody with a knife and it didn't result in death, i think that's progress. i did want to lodge my complaint at changing rooms. i didn't like being left out in the dark about whether testimony was going to continue. but i just really want to go back to the positive stuff that i see; that i do see a change, and i think deescalation techniques, i think there's a lot of other tools available to the police, that i don't want in the tazers, they say they're less lethal, they're not nonlethal, and the statistics show they can actually make things more dangerous, so i would say while you're on a roll, while things aret gooding better, while there's been a change in culture, while you're doing other things like deescalation, i think you should build on that and not arm yourselves with another weapon. we need things like community policing and more investment in community, and so i think because of the danger of tazers, i'm imploring you to vote no on them. thank you. >> thank you. yes, ma'am? >> good evening police commissioners. my name is rosario cervantes. i live in the tenderloin, and there is a lot of activity there, as well. i know you have to qualify to hold a gun, but do you have to qualify to hold a tazer, so that's a question that i have, and the other thing, i wanted to voice my complaint about the switch in rooms without letting the public know, and we just had to run up here, and i really believe tazers are going to hurt, and they're not going to be something that's -- there's going to be a lot of lawsuits based on this, and i really think it's a danger, and i am urging you to vote no on tazers. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. i'm margaret staf stafford, and i'm a doctor in san francisco. we strongly oppose the itch willmentation of tazers and have done some of our own literature view. you've heard some of it already tonight, but i want to reiterate that the largest study has shown that the implementation of tazers did not lead to a decreased use of force or decreased deaths, and that the studies that were affiliated with tazer showed a bias. 96% showed the safety of tazers, whereas of those not affiliated with tazer, only 55% of those showed safety, so i think it's really important to look at the data more carefully than just say across the board, this has been shown to be safe. i also have found that there's an under reporting of deaths by tazers and have read reports of medical examiners around the country being not only pressured to not report that the tazer was the cause of death, but actually that one was sued by tazer and forced by the judge to change her death reports, so, again i and my group very strongly oppose the implementation of tazers. thank you. >> thank you, doctor. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is julie anna morris, and i'm also a doctor here in san francisco. my patient, craig, not his real name, is in his 40's and has terrible heart failure. he is black and he has told me many times that he's felt intimidated by the police for various things in his neighborhood that is heavily policed. i am worried about what will happen if he ever ended up getting in a confrontation and getting tased with his under lying heart failure he's at risk that would have an heart arrythmia. my patient sheila is 12 weeks pregnant. she has schizophrenia. she's living on the streets. she has multiple confrontations with the police throughout any given week. what would happen to her -- you could not tell she's pregnant -- if she got tased with that baby, and these are the types of things that need to give us pause. it's not a question of would you rather get tased or shot, it's a question of implementing time and distance, implementing the use of force policy, and putting effort into that before going for a new weapon. thank you. >> thank you, doctor. next speaker, please. >> good evening, police commission. a my name is jennifer roach. i'm going to read a statement from my friend, erica sandberg, who was here earlier but was unable to speak. she said she would like the task force to know that she is in 100% in favor of c.e.d.'s. they make a rational decision, being s.f.p.d. equipped with what others around the nation just makes sense. and then my statement, one, i'm here to thank the police officers for their service to our city. i'm also in support of the police department with having a nonlethal option to their use of force policy. the officers protect and serve with dead indication to us every day in the city in a challenging environment, ain one of the mot diverse cities in the country, and i'd like to see the commission pass a policy for the use of c.e.d.'s. just so you know, i was shouted down several times in line, so it took me time to get her, but i would hope that the commission would support our police officers. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good evening, commission. we've had this conversation several times before, so i won't repeat myself. you know my position. you've probably heard all of the facts several times by now with all of the testimony that is going on, so i'm just going to keep this real really simple. john lennon has a quote. life is really sich will when you're making plans. so is death. and this is the photos of people that has been killed by police in the 13 years. brian patrick o'neal, san jose, jose rios, san jose, jorge trujillo, san jose. city of salinas, san jose. charles gord on, only 26, vallejo. prince sueza, 36, san jose. garrett jones, 45, stockton. . craig prescott, 38, modesto. michael white, 47, vallejo. martin harrison, 50 years old, dublin. darnalle hutchinson, 32 years old, san leandro. donald ray mccullough. jose corruba, 26, stockton, california, and garrett schmidt, 33 modesto, and most recently on january 28 -- excuse me, september 28th of this year, 34 arcell tony, 30. all of these people have been killed by tazers in the bay area while you've been deliberating. get the point? no effing tazers. >> thank you. >> i'm sorry. was there -- >> before you say something, this meeting is going to stay civil, and it's going to stay on track. i've heard the plans that other people are whispering around, so -- sir, i'm not talking to you. >> i'm sorry. >> but this meeting's going to say civil, we're going to move through these items, and the commissioners are going to ask their questions, period. others out there are whispering things. sir please. >> hi name is ray chalker. i'm a member of san francisco for democracy. commissioner hirsch, i want to direct this specifically to you. as far as i'm aware, you're the only person who hasn't voted on this yet, and i know that's got to be kind of a difficult role, but there is he aa who's a who people out there who are afraid, and who are looking to you to join our side. i'm not sure we will ever be ready for tazers in this city, but one thing's for sure, we aren't ready now, and i think deep down in your heart, you know that, too, and i know you want to do the right thing, so i humbly ask you as a member of this city and a member of this community to please, please vote with all of us. we're counting on you. please vote no. thank you. >> commissioners, thank you. >> i'm sorry. i'm sorry. >> i'm not a public speaker, so for give me, but i think the question i have is really why this is coming to be without a policy in place, like, what is the problem that's being solved for that we can't have a policy before we then talk about the use of tazers in san francisco. i realize that we're one of the holdouts in terms of not having tazers available, and for me, that's a real source of pride in san francisco. i feel like as -- as a city, we should be the example for the rest of the country on how to do better policing, on how to have a better relationship with the community, and this is not doing that. this is falling in line with where everybody else is. i think san francisco should be a leader on this and let the rest of the country know that there are better options than killing our citizens. there's a lot of folks out here who really feel very strongly about this, and i hope you've heard and taken that really

Related Keywords

Oakland , California , United States , Boston , Massachusetts , China , Houston , Texas , Bayview District , Stockton , Canada , Dublin , Ireland , Mississippi , San Francisco , Chinese , Kevin Ortiz , Randall Scott , Jennifer Roach , Jose Garrett Jones , Alex Woods , Modesto Michael , David Carlos , Kevin Benedicto , John Lennon , Vallejo Martin Harrison , Sharon Eberhart , Tammy Bryant , Craig Prescott , Al Harris , Ashley Bell , Allen Levine , Erica Sandberg , Laura Muniz , Brian Patrick Oneal , Ray Chalker ,