By Antonio Ray Harvey, California Black Media

A bill temporarily prohibiting law enforcement agencies from using electric shock gloves in California is awaiting action by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Assembly Bill (AB) 2760, authored by Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins (D-San Diego), passed the Senate 29-9 on Aug. 31. The Assembly concurred in Senate amendments the same day on a 55-16 vote.

The bill would prohibit state, local and federal law enforcement agencies from using wearable electroshock devices in California until Jan. 1, 2030. It would also bar agencies from using state funds to purchase the devices and require them to update their use-of-force policies accordingly.

Traditional handheld devices, including tasers and stun guns, are exempt.

Newsom has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto the bill. If he takes no action, it will become law without his signature.

Sharp-Collins introduced the measure after reviewing information indicating that the devices could cause serious injury or death if used without adequate safeguards and training.

“AB 2760 draws a line that public safety technology must be proven safe and accountable before it is employed. Not after someone is killed or injured,” said Sharp-Collins, a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC).

“Our commitment is to protect our communities, especially the most vulnerable. That is what AB 2760 is about and that is what AB 2760 will do,” Sharp-Collins told her colleagues.

The device at the center of the debate is known as the G.L.O.V.E., an acronym for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement awarded a $16.7 million contract for 6,000 pairs of the gloves, which are designed to deliver an electric shock through an officer’s hand.

During the Assembly debate, Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom (D-Stockton), also a CLBC member, thanked law enforcement representatives for helping negotiate amendments to the bill.

“This is something new to us (and) it’s something that absolutely should be studied,” Ransom said. “I appreciate law enforcement for agreeing to work with the legislature to figure out if this is an appropriate tool to be used.”

Neither the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department nor the Los Angeles Police Department has reported using electric shock gloves. However, the Santa Monica and El Monte police departments have obtained devices for testing.

The Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office purchased 10 shock gloves as part of a $35,000 acquisition that also included 10 remotely activated shock bands. Sheriff’s officials had been developing training and policies for the devices before AB 2760 advanced.

State Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Huntington Beach) opposed the legislation, arguing that it would unnecessarily force agencies to change their use-of-force policies and could compromise public safety.

“I don’t disagree with the author that the electric shocks are not a great option, but at the end of the day, I think it’s important to understand that we need to give law enforcement the tools they need to keep themselves safe and the community safe,” Strickland said.

Supporters countered that wearable electroshock devices have not been sufficiently studied and could pose particular risks to immigrants, children, older adults and other vulnerable groups.

“People who are Black or Brown could be test subjects for these gloves of torment,” Mark González (D-Los Angeles) said. “I appreciate law enforcement for agreeing to work with the legislature.”

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

By Tanya Dennis

Part 3

Alameda County District Attorney Ursula Jones Dickson wants the public she serves to know more about what office really does.

The key, she said, is education, helping residents understand how the office operates, what it can and cannot do, and how the public can work with the office to achieve the results they seek.

The DA’s powers and duties regarding the court system are limited, Jones Dickson explained, and that there is a process for determining when the office can become involved.

“When there’s a complaint of criminal abuse or exploitation, the DA’s office will investigate, but to trigger that investigation, a person must file a complaint first with the Police Department,” she said.

Most issues, however, remain within the court system. Within the Probate Court system, for instance, if fraud or neglect occurs, the matter will generally be referred to the appropriate agency.

Jones Dickson emphasized that each situation is “case-specific,” particularly when determining whether a matter is criminal or civil. She explained that significant documentation of criminal activity is generally necessary before the DA’s Office can intervene.

“That is where the jurisdiction starts,” Jones Dickson said. “If it’s exploitation, it begins with a police report. We only proceed when the evidence leans beyond reasonable doubt.”

The District Attorney’s Office has a Real Estate Fraud Unit as well as an Elder Abuse Unit. Jones Dickson acknowledged that the office has been addressing multiple real estate fraud cases since she took office in June.

“Cases receive priority and witness a lot more success when there’s documentation,” she said. “This is the message the DA’s Office is utilizing in their police training and consumer division. When we have the cooperation of the community, that makes us even more effective.”

When asked how the DA’s Office can assist people in probate who feel they have not received justice, Jones Dickson acknowledged that the office’s powers are limited because most conflicts must be resolved through the court system.

She noted that many probate-related referrals involving children come through Child Protective Services (CPS) or Dependency Court. When it comes to adults involved in the probate system, however, Jones Dickson emphasized the need for the public to take greater responsibility through advance planning and family communication.

“The truth is, especially in the Black community, we don’t like to think about death, much less talk about it,” she said. “I can’t stress enough how important that discussion is.

“Get that will and trust, then have that conversation with the family, exactly what your wishes are, and back it up with documentation. Hopefully that will help avoid the Probate Court altogether.”

If an issue involves an attorney, for example, a complaint may be made to the California State Bar. If it involves a judge, the matter may fall under the jurisdiction of the Commission on Judicial Performance.

Petitioning the appellate court is another option in certain circumstances, as the Court of Appeals provides a means of challenging a decision made by a lower court.

Jones Dickson said she wants the community to have a clear understanding of the DA’s role and the importance of communication between the office and the people it serves.

“I need the community to know what our job is,” she said. “Education is what we do, and when we’re supported through civil conversation, it makes communication more effective. We don’t get anywhere with mud-slinging. The DA’s Office focuses on what we are required to do, and that is to protect the community while we do the work.”

Jones Dickson also stressed the importance of recognizing the communities most affected by victimization and approaching those communities with understanding and sensitivity.

“That’s why it is so important that we acknowledge that most victimization occurs in the Black and Brown community and that we have to be especially sensitive as to how we address that community that is so deserving of our protection,” Jones Dickson said.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post