Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: California Bans Non-White Paper Shooting Targets
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 15:36:31 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <v520bv$2n6c1$4@dont-email.me>
References: <Ua6cnWPzMZYw8-n7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 21:36:32 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5f6723e81ced72bfe713efc1ebd17bbb";
	logging-data="2857345"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+tUhEpGMxd1nZQ9rLtX2Lk0U5wVo8wWiA="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:OPNlrRToK/ObHGg1IKJinS7nBSQ=
In-Reply-To: <Ua6cnWPzMZYw8-n7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4899

On 6/20/2024 2:02 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> Ah, California... the stupidity never stops. <sigh>
> 
> This is the target we used for requals. We always questioned why it is that
> we were only shooting white guys.
> 
> --------------------
> https://americancop.com/banning-targets/
> 
> Since at least 2013, a tremendous number of agencies have suffered from
> "Good Idea Fairy" visits. I’m specifically addressing those "good ideas"
> that will reportedly fix society's ills but have little to no factual
> foundation. Generally, these stem from politicians "doing something" to fix
> a problem.
> 
> Some of these include-- claiming there is no national standard for using
> force while trying to throw out Graham v Connor, ignoring SCOTUS rulings
> like United States v Whren to attack pro-active policing, or protesting the
> release of positive body-worn camera footage.
> 
> Then, we had wholesale changes to various penal codes. These came from the
> various legislative bodies and ballot initiatives. One is California's
> Proposition 47-- deceptively titled (by Kamala Harris, no less) "the Safe
> Neighborhoods and Schools Act". It radically elevated the dollar threshold
> for felonies while mandating citations versus custodial bookings and no
> practical consequences. Then, there are the various bail “reform” efforts.
> No need to make bail while releasing people without consequences.
> 
> California now has Senate Bill 1020 working its way through the system.
> After passing the state senate, it is going to the Assembly. The bill will
> ban any paper shooting target in which the subject's race can be
> identified. Suppose it passes California's Assembly and is signed by the
> governor. In that case, cops in my old state will lose valuable training
> tools. In addition to targets that aid in judgment, they will lose one way
> that removes "novelty"--new or previously unseen problems-- from training.
> State Senator Steven Bradford authored the bill.
> 
> After hearing about SB-1020, I looked at Braford's web page. It mentions
> the intent of the bill is to correct "inherent racial bias that certain
> ethnic groups are more dangerous". I wonder if his staff looked at the Law
> Enforcement Officers Killed & Assaulted data. Data, not opinion.
> 
> SB1020 would enact Penal Code section 13658, which reads:
> 
> (a) Each law enforcement agency and police academy basic course presenter
> shall have a policy prohibiting the use of ethnic shooting targets for any
> training, qualification, competition, or other range activities that are
> sponsored by the agency or academy, presenter, take place on any agency or
> academy presenter property, or involve the participation of any agency or
> academy presenter personnel or academy trainees. those attending a basic
> course.
> 
> (b) The policy described in subdivision (a) shall also prohibit providing
> ethnic shooting targets to any peace officer or trainee basic course
> attendee for personal use.
> 
> (c) As used in this section, the following definitions apply:
> 
> (1) "Ethnic shooting target" means any physical range target that depicts a
> human form or part of a human form that includes skin colors or facial
> features from which a person might reasonably discern a race or ethnicity
> of the person depicted. An "ethnic shooting target" does not include a
> silhouette target or a human form target with a nonhuman skin color such as
> green or blue that does not have facial features.
> 
> How does that improve law enforcement's performance in deadly force
> situations? Does it result in better judgment skills? Does it positively
> impact the Don’t Shoot/Shoot decision-making process?

I'm guessing the targets shown aren't the ones being complained about...