San Diego County Democrats put politics before the public again

Comms Director, RPSDC Comms Director - RPSDC 1 Comment

Share

The use of lethal force by law enforcement officials has recently gained more attention in California. With continuous calls for gun control and more precautions being implemented on citizens, it is seemingly becoming impossible for individuals — and now law enforcement officials — to protect themselves, their families, and their communities.

Assemblywoman Shirley Weber is the lead author of Assembly Bill 392, which would change the situations in which law enforcement can use lethal force — from “reasonable” cause to “necessary” cause. Those opposed to AB 392 claim these new regulations would only increase the burden that is put on law enforcement officials in time-sensitive and dangerous situations.

The glaring issue with the new bill is the condition that these law enforcement officials are under, which is often unclear until after the situation is contained. Taking immediate action is often necessary in order to ensure the safety of our law enforcement officials and community. These sorts of regulations being pushed on our law enforcement officials are irresponsible and put both our law enforcement officials and citizens in danger.

Once again, San Diego County Democrats have shown their refusal to listen to reason. Law enforcement officials across the county and state agree this puts both them and our citizens in danger. Democrats, instead of doing what is right, have prioritized politics over public safety.

To come across an individual with a firearm, knife, or any other weapon that poses a threat to themselves and their community requires immediate action. The extra time required for law enforcement officials to verify that the situation is in need of “necessary” action could be the difference between life and death in a high-risk situation.

Law enforcement officials are trained how to handle these special circumstances in order to mitigate the potential risk of danger. We cannot ensure that every situation will be handled perfectly, but taking away the ability of law enforcement officials to act swiftly in each circumstance will do detrimental harm to the public.

Weber’s bill is another attempt by the left to limit gun usage and enforce more unnecessary and dangerous regulations. AB 392 utilizes the same mindset of the Obama administration: to weaponize the military in the face of an enemy while not allowing them to shoot back in self-defense. To this extent, law enforcement will merely serve as meter-maids and ticket seekers in search of revenue.

If we want to improve the perception of law enforcement in the public eye, we need to enable our law enforcement officials to take the action necessary to protect our communities. The severe limitation of law enforcement officials being able to use their firearms in potentially dangerous situations will put our families and communities at risk, something that seems totally fine to Assemblywoman Weber and her Democratic allies here in San Diego.

Visit the website of the Republican Party of San Diego

Share

Comments 1

  1. I’m outraged!

    Not as a citizen, but as a user of the English language.

    This is truly awful writing for someone with communications in their title (or in the pseudo-military speak: comms).

    “Taking immediate action is often necessary in order to ensure. . .”

    By the plain language of the proposed law, if it’s “necessary,” then there’s no problem.

    Again in what I imagine to be an attempted summary:

    “If we want to improve the perception of law enforcement in the public eye, we need to enable our law enforcement officials to take the action necessary to protect our communities.”

    Again, if the action is “necessary,” then there’s no problem. You’re using the very word in the law that you object to in describing the actions you think are okay.

    “The extra time required for law enforcement officials to verify that the situation is in need of “necessary” action could be the difference between life and death in a high-risk situation.”

    Translation: we can’t be sitting around waiting to find out if it’s “necessary” to shoot someone! We need to shoot someone first, THEN find out if it was necessary or not.

    “These sorts of regulations being pushed on our law enforcement officials are irresponsible and put both our law enforcement officials and citizens in danger. Once again, San Diego County Democrats have shown their refusal to listen to reason. Law enforcement officials across the county and state agree this puts both them and our citizens in danger. ”

    You repeated the same thought, and the exact same wording within one sentence of each other.

    RPSDC needs either a new Comms Director, or a New Comms Director Editor.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *