From PoliceOneTASER International to split brands, announces Axon division
New division aimed at expanding the company's technology platform
June 18, 2015 at 8:55 PM
By PoliceOne Staff
TASER International has unveiled a new division aimed at expanding the company’s technology platform.
Headquartered in Seattle, Axon will serve as an umbrella brand for the company’s body-worn cameras, digital evidence management software, mobile applications, analytics tools, and other forthcoming projects. The company’s weapons division, which includes the X2 and X26P less lethal devices, will continue to use the TASER brand.
In a video announcement released this morning, TASER CEO Rick Smith detailed the company’s rationale for separating the brands, comparing TASER’s situation to that of Microsoft when it decided to split its Xbox gaming division in order to differentiate from its parent company’s association with office technology.
“Axon was the name that we used for selling cameras historically, but we realized that brand had the room to grow and encompass all of our connected technologies,” Smith said.
Smith noted that Axon will function collaboratively with TASER in that its smart weapons use or interact with the same technologies found in the Axon suite. The company’s goal is for the two brands to reinforce each other and together form “a powerful set of products and services for law enforcement.”
1) "2015 will be our Superbowl" says TASER where I discuss body cameras, Tasers and the money being made off of police brutality and a policy solution to the problem. See more here.
2) House passed Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations bill including some important amendments for police reform, including Joaquin Castro providing $10 million dollars for body cameras
SECTION 16-11-535. Malicious injury to place of worship.
Whoever shall wilfully, unlawfully, and maliciously vandalize, deface, damage, or destroy or attempt to vandalize, deface, damage, or destroy any place, structure, or building of worship or aid, agree with, employ, or conspire with any person to do or cause to be done any of the acts mentioned above is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned not less than six months nor more than ten years or fined not more than ten thousand dollars, or both. SECTION 16-11-770. Illegal graffiti vandalism; penalty; removal or restitution.
(A) As used in this section, "illegal graffiti vandalism" means an inscription, writing, drawing, marking, or design that is painted, sprayed, etched, scratched, or otherwise placed on structures, buildings, dwellings, statues, monuments, fences, vehicles, or other similar materials that are on public or private property and that are publicly viewable, without the consent of the owner, manager, or agent in charge of the property.
(B) It is unlawful for a person to engage in the offense of illegal graffiti vandalism and, upon conviction, for a:
(1) first offense, is guilty of a misdemeanor and must be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not less than thirty days nor more than ninety days;
(2) second offense, within ten years, is guilty of a misdemeanor and must be fined not more than two thousand five hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than one year; and
(3) third or subsequent offense within ten years of a first offense, is guilty of a misdemeanor and must be fined not more than three thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than three years.
(C) In addition to the penalties provided in subsection (B), a person convicted of the offense of illegal graffiti vandalism also may be ordered by the court to remove the illegal graffiti, pay the cost of the removal of the graffiti, or make further restitution in the discretion of the court.
A common property damage crime is called malicious injury in South Carolina. Under SC law, it is illegal to willfully or maliciously injure, damage, or destroy the property of another. This includes buildings, animals, land, or any other personal property. The charge and potential penalty you face for this offense depends on the value of the damage committed.
If the prosecution has probable cause to believe you willfully, unlawfully, and maliciously damaged, vandalized, or destroyed or if you attempted to do any of these things to a place of worship, you will be charged with this serious felony offense.
Malicious Injury to a place of worship is a felony that carries a potential sentence of 6 months to 10 years in prison and up to $10,000 in fines. This means that you will serve at least 6 months if convicted of this crime.
The charge of burning personal property to defraud insurer is the legal term in South Carolina for arson by fraud. If you are charged with this arson, the prosecution has reason to believe that acting with an intent to defraud, you willfully set fire or burned insured personal property of any kind (whether your own or someone else’s).
This is a serious felony offense which carries a potential sentence of at least one and up to 5 years in prison.
Negligently Allowing Fire to Spread to Lands or Property of Another
This offense is committed when you carelessly or negligently set fire or burn any grass, leaves, or other combustible matter on land in a way that allows the fire to spread onto the land of another. Whether you set the fire or were an accomplice in the matter, you could be charged with this offense.
This is charged is cases of arson without fraudulent or deliberate intent to damage property.
This is a misdemeanor charge and for a first time offense the potential sentence is from 5 days to 30 days in jail and a fines reaching from $25 to $200. If you have been convicted of this offense before your sentence would be from 30 to 100 days with fines of $100 to $500.
The debate over the federal minimum wage in the nascent presidential campaign is really two debates: one among Democrats and one among Republicans.
Democrats are divided on how much to raise the minimum, currently $7.25 an hour. Hillary Rodham Clinton has spoken favorably of a Democratic bill for a raise to $12 by 2020. Senator Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley, the former governor of Maryland, as well as several congressional Democrats, support $15 an hour by 2020. Is $12 adequate to ensure a minimally decent living? Would $15 be economically feasible?
Going to $12 by 2020 would bring the minimum more in line with historical benchmarks, including wage and price inflation. But it is a stretch to believe that $12 an hour in 2020 would provide a minimally decent living. In 14 states and Washington, D.C., the cost of living for one person is already near or above $12 an hour, according to data compiled by economists at M.I.T. In most of the remaining states, one person now requires an hourly wage of $10 to $11 to eke out a living.
Fifteen dollars, phased in gradually, is the better option. It would be adequate and feasible, assuming that policy makers also take steps to raise middle-class wages, which would include tough enforcement of updated laws on overtime, scheduling, worker classification and other labor issues.
continued
keeping worker pay low to discourage capital investment is a recipe for a faltering economy and ignores history, in which new technology has both replaced and created jobs.
The job of economic leaders is to help ensure not only rising profits but also rising wages at all pay levels. The Democratic candidates get that a robust minimum wage is vital to that challenge. The Republicans do not.
In 2013 the Green Party called for a living wage and basic guaranteed income
The Green Party's national platform endorses the liveable wage and the guaranteed basic income:
My Original Article Until we can realize the problems with capitalism as a system based on inequality and establish real equality at work in the form of Socialism/Marxism, (see here and here) I am supporting the next best thing which is the Fight for $15/hour minimum wage. It is well past time.
The legislation would also eliminate an exemption for restaurants and other companies that allows them to pay tipped workers less than the minimum wage.
Liberal groups are also backing this bill like CBBP
The Raise the Wage Act would give nearly 20 million women—30% of all working women in the U.S.—a raise #RaisetheWage#12by2020
Watching MSNBC last night they were talking over the prayer circle that happened in the streets. Then MSNBC played an interview that was done with WCSC Channel 5's Raphael James interviewing the people in the prayer circle. I wanted to know who they were. Their words were so eloquent. Chris Cason pushes back against reporter Raphael James saying this is not about race
I had the interview that WCSC's Raphael James did with some of the members of the prayer group from WCSC Channel 5's livestream but I took it out when it rolled off of the page.
— عبدالله المجاهد (@AALMOJA3) June 16, 2015
The video has been deleted from the original account. Here it is in Arabic.
Here is the English Translation
“Statement Regarding the Martyrdom of Sheikh Abu Basir Nasir al Wahishi – Rahimahullah”
Praise be to Allah the Lord of the Worlds and peace and blessings be upon the noblest of the prophets and the messengers. Thereafter:
We are al Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula and we mourn our leader Sheikh Emir Abu Basir Nasir ibn al Karim al Wahishi, rahimahullah. He was killed as a result of an American strike which targeted him and two of his mujahidin brothers, may a merciful Allah have mercy upon them and accept them among the ranks of the shuhada. As a result of this incident and despite being busy with fighting the Houthis and the supporters of the deposed on more than 11 fronts in different parts of Yemen, and despite the harsh security circumstances, Allah facilitated a meeting of the biggest number of Shura council members who agreed the successor is the righteous Sheikh Abu Huraira Qasim al Rimi, may Allah protect him. He was given our pledge of allegiance (baya’a) in that matter, thanks be to Allah.
Oh Islamic Ummah, this is a hero of heroes, and a leader of leaders. He pledged to Allah, and stayed true to his word and fulfilling his promises. He fought hardships to make hijrah, end his travels, and fulfill his obligation. Afghanistan knew him as one of its mountains, and praised him for the days of hardship he endured while in Tora Bora. Allah blessed him as he was a close friend and secretary for the mujahid Sheikh Umama bin Ladin, may Allah have mercy on his soul. He was a part of the first generation of fighters against American in different parts of the world since the 1990s. He continued on the path of jihad and was not affected by the fitna, uninterrupted by the current events, and undefeated by the trials. He was arrested but then he was arrested but persevered and remained steadfast until Allah granted him and a group of brothers an escape from the taghut’s prison. He worked hard with his brothers until Allah gave him a glorious conquest on them in the Arabian Peninsula and allowed them to establish strong leadership for jihad. He built buildings and handled matters wisely and kindly. A generation of mujahidin filled with the love of Islam and love of redemption were raised under his leadership. They drank from the source of his experiences and learned form his wisdom. They were and are currently at the front of the Ummah and the hope of Muslims. Sheikh Abu Basir has a great history, may Allah have mercy on his soul.
His biography is rich with things and it can’t be summarized in one statement. Regarding this point, if we were requested as witnesses, we would claim that he fulfilled his duties and was truthful. He extended his hand to Allah, raising the banner, and sticking to his religion and remaining steadfast in his principles. At no time was he failing in an issue relating to Allah. He never abandoned jihad or left his post. He came to understand jihad as a young man then he died after reaching his peak. During his life, he showed humility and noble character and was generous.
He held himself back for the sake of Islam and the Muslims and dedicated his life to jihad and the mujahidin. He took up concerns of the Ummah at the expense of his personal issues. He spent many days in jihad in the narrow mountain passes. To his brothers he was an example worth following. He provided a foundation and was a knowledgeable teacher and a guide, and a brother who you could seek advice from and a loving father.
Then he became a martyr, as we consider him, at the hands of the Crusaders of Rome. We congratulate him for having a superior end to his life as this is a great victory.
Oh Muslims, the Prophet, peace and prayers be upon him and his family and companions, passed away, but Islam neither ended or died. Regarding this matter, Allah the almighty said: “Muhammad is no more than a Prophet: there were many prophets that died before him. If he died or were killed, will you turn back on your heels? If any did this, not the least harm will he do to Allah, but Allah will quickly reward those who serve Him with gratitude.” (Quran al Imran 3:144) At no time did the death of a man take away from the strength of Islam, it did not stop the da’wah or hinder jihad. Oh how our current jihad has transformed, by the grace of Allah almighty, from being a jihad of the elite to a jihad of the Ummah. Oh how the Ummah has filled with good qualities of jihad, though its still in its first stages. It is no longer in a state of humiliation and affliction.
It is the victorious religion of Allah. Its rule is in force and its fate is already determined. Verily, it is the Ummah of Islam that resisted and faced dangers. Even while it was at its weakest point, it became victorious. The wars of apostasy, the series of Crusades and the destruction of the Tartars were the best examples of this. The Ummah of Islam faced these in the worst of circumstances. Islam and the Muslims will continue while the enemy infidels will be defeated. Allah almighty said “Allah has promised to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will grant them in the land an inheritance of power, as He granted it to those before them. He will establish in authority their deen, the once which He was chosen for them, and that He will change their state, after the fear in which they lived to one of security and peace. They will worship Me only and not associate anything with Me. If any do reject Imaan after this, they are rebellious and wicked.” (Quran An Nuh 24:55)
In our time, a period of bounties and assassination, the leader of jihad was killed. Has the jihad ended? Has its pulse stopped? Has support for resistance and fighting died between the Muslims? Wa Allah, no, because the blood of this wonderful group has increased its persistence in jihad and added a sense of urgency. Do the enemies of Allah not know their battle is not against a person or an individual, no matter his importance or status? The battle of today, led by the enemies of the nations of crusaders and the collaborators who help them, is the clash of the Ummah of billions from one ocean to the other ocean. A huge Ummah with Muslims and elite who are aware and brave. Do Allah’s enemies not watch this? The elongated war only increase our patience and the costs we pay only increase our resolve. So go ahead and extend the war if you want because we are the people of war, we were born in it and we will die in it. To the sponsor of disbelief America, Allah has saved the worst for you. He will ruin your lives and give you the bad taste of war and defeat until you stop supporting the occupying Jews in Palestine, leave the Muslims’s countries, and stop your support for the murtad rulers. This is a war you will not last in, as it will come for your economy and destroy it. It will come after your interests and destroy them with Allah’s support and strength.
Our final prayer is to praise Allah, the Lord of the Worlds.
Today, right now, the House is debating the war against ISIS, almost a year after it began, well past the 60 day limit of the War Powers Act. Watch live here or go to the beginning around 1 hour 26 minutes Here is the Legislative Digest Here is the rule on the bill Here is the Rep Barbara Lee AUMF that will actually defeat ISIS Follow Live Tweets from @winwithoutwar
Last month I wrote about the business of police body cameras, not really getting much attention in the debate around police reform. The main point of the article was that I found this from the 2014 annual report on PDF page 36 footnote 9 click here for larger photo of the below table
Here is footnote 9, explaining when Luke Larson, Chief Marketing Officer and President of TASER since April 6th 2015 and is an Iraq war veteran, would get 10,000 "Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested"
(9) These stock awards are performance-based, and vest in full when a specified threshold is met related to camera video uploads into EVIDENCE.com
Another footnote, #6, applies to Patrick W. Smith, Daniel M. Behrendt, Douglas E. Klint, and Marcus W.L. Womack. These stock shares are related to revenue growth. Only Luke Larson gets shares based on how much video evidence is uploaded to https://www.evidence.com/
(6) These stock awards are performance based. The number of shares that ultimately vest is based upon the compounded annual revenue growth rates for the total Company and the AXON segment compared to target for the three-year period 36 ending December 31, 2016. The number of unvested shares presented equals the target shares. Reference is made to the “Executive Compensation – Performance-based Compensation Plans” section above for further information about these awards.
There has also been a lot of activity in Congress related to body cameras for police, including today's House amendment 295, "Supporting local law enforcement agencies in their continued work to serve our communities, and supporting their use of body worn cameras to promote transparency to protect both citizens and officers alike." It cites a study where
University of Cambridge’s Institute of Criminology conducted a 12-month study on the use of body-worn cameras used by law enforcement in the United Kingdom and estimated that the cameras led to a 50 percent reduction in use of force, and in addition, complaints against police fell approximately by 90 percent
The House was in session until almost 2am last night (Wednesday) discussing the 2016 NDAA, which I learned later Obama has threatened to veto regarding a disagreement with Republicans over ending sequestration, which is hilarious because Republicans love to hate it. (Rigell, McCain, McCain talks sequestration in relation to catfish). Sequestration was discussed a lot in confirmation hearings for both Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch. There were many different amendments, (this is just some of them) discussed and voted on, but I want to discuss here recent police body camera amendments, some from last night and others recently passed. I wrote about body cameras last month, discussing the business side that is not discussed much in the news. Just as a reference here are all the votes for the current House of Representatives. For daily references to votes and amendments click here for the Republican CloakRoom OK, now for the policies.
Here is text of the amendment. The text is very general in my opinion, basically just supporting the work police do and the role body cameras could play, referencing a study from England's Cambridge University. Rachel Levinson-Waldman of the Brennan Center for Justice told me that it was a good point and important that this was in there
(3) encourages State and local law enforcement agencies to consider the use of body-worn cameras, including policies and protocols to handle privacy, storage, and other relevant concerns.
Rachel will participate in an event discussing privacy policy and police body cameras on June 25th. She also found redacted body camera footage from Seattle PD as part of a pilot program.
It looks like they're experimenting with different styles and levels of redaction.
Additionally, Rep Hank Johnson introduced two amendments, one regarding transfer of MRAPs to local police, and one to prohibit transfer of flash-bang grenades to local police. (Turns out like Tasers which kill, flash-bangs are also lethal weapons). Here Rep Johnson discusses the amendment, which according to voice vote fails, and the recorded vote is postponed.
On June 2, Rep Joaquin Castro introduced an amendment to HR 2578 (see my post on CJS here) related to funding police body camerasAnd then there is Rikers prison in New York. Last week Kalief Browder committed suicide, who was imprisoned at Rikers for 3 years with no charge, accused of stealing a backpack. He was released in 2013, but had attempted to kill himself several times before. Democracy Now! interviewed journalist Jennifer Gonnerman, who wrote about him last year for the New Yorker.
Then there is Mayor de Blasio, who after the death of Kalief finally promised reforms that he should have done last year when the story of Kalief first made news.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio says a young man who committed suicide after he was imprisoned for three years at Rikers Island jail without charge did not die in vain. Kalief Browder was just 16 years old when he was jailed at Rikers without trial on suspicion of stealing a backpack. He maintained his innocence, but was only offered plea deals while the trial was repeatedly delayed. The case was finally dismissed. On Saturday, Browder took his own life at the age of 22. Speaking at a news conference, de Blasio mourned him.
Bill de Blasio: "There is just no reason he should have gone through that ordeal, and it’s a tragedy and it has touched so many of us and it’s going to lead to change. I wish we had not lost him. This is a tragic loss, but once his story became public it caused a lot of people to act, and a lot of the changes we are making at Rikers Island right now are a result of the example of Kalief Browder. So I wish, I deeply wish we hadn’t lost him, but he did not die in vain."
And now with the attention focused on Rikers, there are more stories.
the Obama administration has expanded the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance of Americans’ international Internet traffic to search for evidence of malicious computer hacking
but also shows that
the NSA sought permission to target hackers even when it could not establish any links to foreign powers,
the government disclosed another data breach of government computers, this time at the US Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the agency that among other tasks related to government employees and employment also conducts
background investigations for prospective employees and security clearances across government, with hundreds of thousands of cases each year.
There have been lots of responses to these revelations. Amie Stepanovich linked the data breach to the NSA revelation, asking/explaining that they would be doing the investigation. My uneducated guess is that in addition to hunting overseas hackers, NSA is also doing insider threathunting. Since the breach happened sometime last year and OPM discovered it in April, some asked why reveal the breach now?
One answer to "why now" is to remember that Snowden's revelations came right before a US-China meeting where Obama was going to complain about Chinese theft of US intellectual property. Disclosing last year's breach now could flip the tables back to the US doing the criticizing
Disclosure of the latest computer breach comes ahead of the annual U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue scheduled for June 22-24 in Washington, D.C. Cyber security was already expected to be high on the agenda.
Marcy wrote about the irony of the hack in the bulk collection debate
The same report notes that the hack may be linked to the hack of similar scope of Anthem earlier this year.
This is, as a lot of the current and former government employees I follow on Twitter are realizing this morning, a devastating hack, one which will have repercussions both in the private lives of those whose data has been hacked as well as generally for America’s national security, because the data in the OPM servers offers a road map for further espionage targeting.
It is also something the US does all the time — and not just against official government employees of adversary nations, but also against civilian or quasi civilian telecom targets, as well as employees of corporations of interest.
continued
The US Intelligence Community let us have a debate over a mere fraction of the bulk data being collected by the NSA — that collected domestically to target Americans. But for the stuff targeting foreigners on a far greater scale, President Obama proclaimed we would continue collecting in bulk but limit its use to all the major purposes we were already using it for before we ever got around to debating the Section 215 dragnet.
(1) espionage and other threats and activities directed by foreign powers or their intelligence services against the United States and its interests;
(2) threats to the United States and its interests from terrorism;
(3) threats to the United States and its interests from the development, possession, proliferation, or use of weapons of mass destruction;
(4) cybersecurity threats;
(5) threats to U.S. or allied Armed Forces or other U.S or allied personnel;
(6) transnational criminal threats, including illicit finance and sanctions evasion related to the other purposes named in this section.
That scope goes well beyond the scope of those affected in this OPM hack.
Whistlebower attorney Brad Moss used OPM breach to criticize Snowden
The #OPMBreach exposed far more PII than all the metadata NSA ever collected. Where is Snowden? Greenwald? Scahill?
— Bradley P. Moss, Esq (@BradMossEsq) June 6, 2015
Marcy gives one answer to Brad writing
Once the government does whatever it can to protect the millions compromised by this hack, I hope it will provide an opportunity to do two things: focus on actual cyber-defense, rather than an offensive approach that itself entails and therefore legitimates precisely this kind of bulk collection, and reflect on whether the world we’ve built, in which millions of innocent people get swept up in spying because it’s easy to do so, is really one we want to pursue. Ideally, such reflection might lead to some norm-setting that sharply limits the kinds of targets who can be bulk collected (though OPM would solidly fit in any imaginable such limits).
The other answer for Brad is that Snowden would be criticizing the zero-day exploits that the Washington Post says this attack was (and ZDnet). As Snowden describes, offensive tools used by the NSA are the same tools used by our adversaries. Brad does make one good comment though, but I don't know what the implications are yet.
Just had a thought. OPM handled security investigation of #Snowden. China hacked OPM. Guess who might have all of Snowden's PII now?
— Bradley P. Moss, Esq (@BradMossEsq) June 5, 2015
However one problem I have with the article is the explanation of a zero-day, described as
“zero-day” — a previously unknown cyber-tool — to take advantage of a vulnerability that allowed the intruders to gain access into the system.
"Previously unknown tool" makes it sound like it is a new hacking tool. New vulnerability or entry point is a clearer description, as it is not a new tool.
Tim Shorrock tweeted an article that USIS was still doing security for OPM after doing background checks for Snowden and Navy Yard shooter Aaron Alexis, and suffering its own cyber attack disclosed last year.
Why was the corrupt contractor USIS still doing cyber-security for OPM long after its problems were exposed? http://t.co/i9QaJAf6A6
Robert Caruso has a series of tweets listing categories of people who are affected by the OPM breach, from many national security journalists to almost anyone who flies and in replying to Adam Goldstein explains that USIS was doing OPM's job for them
correct—under Clinton administration, OPM outsourced the functions USIS now performs to industry https://t.co/k4wogp052q
OPM has partnered with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to determine the full impact to Federal personnel.
Here is a problem with relying on CERT
I'd just like to remind everyone that these are the folks who are demanding backdoors to our devices & privacy. pic.twitter.com/JehyBnPOA1
One difference with this hack of a government system (and not a good one) compared with other recent high profile breaches is
Researchers note that in contrast to the hacks of Home Depot and Target, personal data that might have been stolen from OPM, Anthem and the other companies has not shown up on the black market, where it can be sold to identity thieves. That is another sign, they said, that the intrusions are not being made for commercial purposes.
Back to the new Snowden revelations however, my thoughts right now are that the "hacker hunter" program is really an insider threat program as well. See here and here
This is an excerpt from this larger post on the House CJS bill. This post deals with Wisconsin Representative Gwen Moore's amendment to CJS regarding police interactions with the mentally ill like Dontre Hamilton Representative Gwen Moore spoke on the floor of the House yesterday about an amendment to CJS regarding the case of Dontre Hamilton and how police treat mentally ill citizens
Amendment Offered by Ms. Moore
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the gentlewoman offering the amendment at this point in the reading? There was no objection. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment. The Clerk read as follows:
Page 34, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.
Page 42, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
Page 44, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wisconsin.
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, my amendment transfers $2 million into the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act for the purpose of expanding and improving police training to safely and appropriately respond to mentally ill individuals. Now, Mr. Chair, we have heard a lot lately in the news about high profile police-involved shootings that have become a major subject here around the country and here in Congress. Not surprising to some of us, especially those of us who hail from large urban cities, this is a widespread problem that has been around for a while. But today, I am offering this amendment to highlight one serious issue that I think should be a major part of our current national dialogue: ensuring that police have adequate training to identify persons with mental illness and to safely, when it is possible, resolve encounters during a crisis. Mr. Chair, indulge me for a moment while I tell you a story about a 31-year- old man in my home district of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, who, unfortunately, is no longer with us today. His name was Dontre Hamilton. Dontre, like many people in this country, suffered from a mental illness. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia 1 year prior to the incident and had been off his medication due to an insurance issue. On April 30 of last year, Dontre was taking a nap on a public park bench when employees of a nearby Starbucks called the police. Two police officers came and did a wellness check and left the scene, discerning that Mr. Hamilton was no threat to himself, nor to anyone in the park or the public. Soon thereafter, yet another call came from the Starbucks employee because this gentleman was sleeping on the public park bench. Another police officer, Officer Manney of the Milwaukee Police Department, arrived and started to pat down Dontre. This pat-down turned into a struggle, and Officer Manney pulled outhis baton to help him subdue Mr. Hamilton. The struggle escalated, and Dontre got control of the baton and swung it at Officer Manney. This caused Officer Manney to draw his firearm and shoot 14 bullets into Dontre Hamilton. Officer Manney was terminated for conducting a pat-down in contravention of his training on dealing with mentally ill individuals but faced no charges in the death of Dontre Hamilton. Mr. Chair, perhaps this tragedy could have been prevented. Too often, our mental health infrastructure is woefully inadequate for many Americans. A lack of treatment can turn a treatable mental illness into a severe debilitating condition. Many can't hold a job or pay rent. Many end up homeless on the streets. In fact, more than 124,000 of the 610,000 homeless people in the United States suffer from a severe mental illness. As a result of many failures in our system, our Nation's police officers have de facto become our country's first responders to crisis calls, including those individuals experiencing mental illness. Too often these calls, many intended to be out of concern for the individual in crisis, become a tragic fatality. As we know, mentally ill persons are not generally dangerous, Mr. Chair. In fact, they are actually more likely to become victims themselves than actual perpetrators of violence. Many of these tragic encounters could be prevented if police officers are trained and follow proper procedures. The Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act is an important Federal initiative and tool that will help us bridge this gap. This law established a grant program called the Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program which helps States and localities develop collaborative approaches to dealing with the intersection of criminal justice and mental health systems. One of the authorized grant uses under the program is training to police officers for exactly these purposes: to safely respond to crisis calls and limit the chance of a tragic and often preventable consequence. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, but I am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Woodall). Without objection, the gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes. There was no objection.
Mr. CULBERSON. The gentlewoman has a good amendment, and I want to encourage Members to support it. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).
The House proposal significantly underfunds agencies, programs, and services that are critical to ensuring that the justice system works, and that the civil rights of all Americans are upheld.
Several notable amendments were passed, including
Three @RepThomasMassie amendments to protect hemp cultivation, gun rights & electronic privacy just passed House w/ overwhelming majorities.
I am wondering if it is necessary to include FBI in this amendment, which prohibits NSA and CIA (but doesn't mention FBI) from weakening encryption standards with NIST (see also here). I mentioned NIST in my post on the iPhone encryption. Representative Joaquin Castro introduced funding for police body cameras. I sent him my article on TASER.
This afternoon I will offer an amendment to the CJS appropriations bill to increase funding for police body cameras by $10M.
Amendment Offered by Ms. Moore
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the gentlewoman offering the amendment at this point in the reading?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Page 34, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.
Page 42, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
Page 44, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wisconsin.
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, my amendment transfers $2 million into the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act for the purpose of expanding and improving police training to safely and appropriately respond to mentally ill individuals.
Now, Mr. Chair, we have heard a lot lately in the news about high profile police-involved shootings that have become a major subject here around the country and here in Congress. Not surprising to some of us, especially those of us who hail from large urban cities, this is a widespread problem that has been around for a while.
But today, I am offering this amendment to highlight one serious issue that I think should be a major part of our current national dialogue: ensuring that police have adequate training to identify persons with mental illness and to safely, when it is possible, resolve encounters during a crisis.
Mr. Chair, indulge me for a moment while I tell you a story about a 31-year-old man in my home district of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, who, unfortunately, is no longer with us today. His name was Dontre Hamilton.
Dontre, like many people in this country, suffered from a mental illness. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia 1 year prior to the incident and had been off his medication due to an insurance issue.
On April 30 of last year, Dontre was taking a nap on a public park bench when employees of a nearby Starbucks called the police. Two police officers came and did a wellness check and left the scene, discerning that Mr. Hamilton was no threat to himself, nor to anyone in the park or the public.
Soon thereafter, yet another call came from the Starbucks employee because this gentleman was sleeping on the public park bench. Another police officer, Officer Manney of the Milwaukee Police Department, arrived and started to pat down Dontre. This pat-down turned into a struggle, and Officer Manney pulled out his baton to help him subdue Mr. Hamilton.
The struggle escalated, and Dontre got control of the baton and swung it at Officer Manney. This caused Officer Manney to draw his firearm and shoot 14 bullets into Dontre Hamilton.
Officer Manney was terminated for conducting a pat-down in
contravention of his training on dealing with mentally ill individuals but faced no charges in the death of Dontre Hamilton.
Mr. Chair, perhaps this tragedy could have been prevented. Too often, our mental health infrastructure is woefully inadequate for many Americans. A lack of treatment can turn a treatable mental illness into a severe debilitating condition. Many can't hold a job or pay rent.
Many end up homeless on the streets. In fact, more than 124,000 of the 610,000 homeless people in the United States suffer from a severe mental illness.
As a result of many failures in our system, our Nation's policeofficers have de facto become our country's first responders to crisis calls, including those individuals experiencing mental illness. Too often these calls, many intended to be out of concern for the individual in crisis, become a tragic fatality.
As we know, mentally ill persons are not generally dangerous, Mr. Chair. In fact, they are actually more likely to become victims themselves than actual perpetrators of violence. Many of these tragic encounters could be prevented if police officers are trained and follow proper procedures.
The Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act is an important Federal initiative and tool that will help us bridge this gap. This law established a grant program called the Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program which helps States and localities develop collaborative approaches to dealing with the intersection of criminal justice and mental health systems.
One of the authorized grant uses under the program is training to police officers for exactly these purposes: to safely respond to crisis calls and limit the chance of a tragic and often preventable consequence.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, but I am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Woodall). Without objection, the gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. CULBERSON. The gentlewoman has a good amendment, and I want to encourage Members to support it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).
The amendment was agreed to.
