Advertisement

Readers React: LAPD cops have killed too many people who didn’t deserve it

Share

To the editor: It is time to acknowledge concerns about the Los Angeles Police Department’s killing of people who, in many cases, either presented no real threat to the “safety” of the officers involved or were not even armed. Apparently this is one topic no one wants to comment upon, unless it’s to say that police officers are “brave” and “put their lives on the line” every day to protect us. Anyone expressing critical opinions of police shootings is naturally labeled “anti-cop.” (“Shootings by LAPD double in ‘alarming’ trend, police commission president says,” Nov. 10)

Police Commission President Matt Johnson promises to investigate this “alarming development” of police use of force, yet he leaves out the obvious truth: Cops resort to lethal force too many times and often for no real reason. The explanations that the officer feared for his or her safety and that the suspect reached for a gun are simply excuses for killing someone.

LAPD Chief Charlie Beck may be a good cop, but no doubt he fears his own force more than any drug addict on the street.

Advertisement

Bob Loza, Burbank

..

To the editor: The decision by Beck to award a medal to officers who could have legally used deadly force but chose not to is a huge mistake. (“LAPD’s award-winning idea on use of force,” editorial, Nov. 11)

In every case where an officer is faced with the possibility of using deadly force, it is an individual decision based on the officer’s training, experience and state of mind. There is no right answer.

Whatever the officer decides, if all the legal tests have been passed, both the officer who used force and the officer who does not must be congratulated. Giving a medal only to one side of the equation risks the future punishment of officers who make the opposite choice.

Joseph Gunn, Burbank

The writer is a former executive director of the Los Angeles Police Commission.

Advertisement

..

To the editor: Beck’s idea of a Preservation of Life award is excellent. However, in addition to this, perhaps there needs to be a shared penalty when fatal police encounters are judged in civil suits to be wrong.

Section 1028 of the California Code of Civil Procedure says this: “When the State is a party, costs shall be awarded against it on the same basis as against any other party and, when awarded, must be paid out of the appropriation for the support of the agency on whose behalf the State appeared.”

It seems unfortunate that the $8.85-million judgment against L.A. County sheriff’s deputies for wrongful death reported in Wednesday’s Times is paid for mostly through insurance. Perhaps if it came out of the sheriff’s budget, it might help nudge police culture further toward “preservation of life.”

John Heeren, Huntington Beach

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook

Advertisement