Seattle deputies carry rifles near the scene of a shooting in downtown Seattle, April 20, 2017. (AP\/Elaine Thompson) <\/p>\n
SEATTLE The Ninth Circuit seemed skeptical of Seattle police officers claims that a new use-of-force policy mandated by the Department of Justice violates their Second Amendment rights. <\/p>\n
U.S. Circuit Judge N. Randy Smith told the officers attorney he didnt have much of an argument at a three-judge panel appellate hearing on Monday. <\/p>\n
More than 100 officers sued to block the police reforms in 2014, saying the revised use-of-force policy unreasonably restricted them from defending themselves and violated their Second Amendment and Fourth Amendment rights. <\/p>\n
The Seattle Police Department was placed under a consent decree in 2012 after an 11-month investigation by the DOJ found routine use of excessive force and civil rights violations. As part of the police departments settlement with the DOJ, it implemented new use-of-force policies that stress minimal reliance on physical force. <\/p>\n
U.S. Chief District Judge Marsha Pechman dismissed the suit from the Western District of Washington in 2014, finding no case supports the officers novel theory that a police department policy outlining expectations for an officers use of force can burden conduct protected by the Second Amendment. <\/p>\n
Pechman also said the officers grossly misconstrue Fourth Amendment law by claiming the use-of-force policy is a metaphorical seizure of their right to use force. <\/p>\n
At Mondays hearing, the officers attorney, Athan Tramountanas, urged the panel to revive the case. <\/p>\n
He said the new use-of-force policy is overly complicated and dangerously restrictive. <\/p>\n
Tramountanas stuck with the argument that the new rule robs police of their Second Amendment right to self-defense. <\/p>\n
You must abandon your reason, Tramountanas said in reference to the guidelines that now require officers to use de-escalation techniques before resorting to force. <\/p>\n
The officers arent arguing for no policy, he said, just a policy thats reasonable. <\/p>\n
They have to be able to defend themselves, he added. <\/p>\n
City attorney Gregory Narver contended that the lower courts ruling was spot-on, and that this was not a Second Amendment case. <\/p>\n
Hyperbole aside, this doesnt disarm the police, Narver said. He also argued the policy doesnt keep officers from defending themselves. <\/p>\n
If the officers had real concerns about the use-of-force policy, they should have brought them before the federal judge overseeing the police reforms rather than asking an appellate panel to create a new fundamental constitutional right, Narver said. <\/p>\n
The 126 officers, sergeants and detectives who filed the suit did so without union approval. <\/p>\n
U.S. Circuit Judges Carlos Bea and U.S. District Judge William Hayes sitting by designation from the Southern District of California also sat on the panel. <\/p>\n
Read the DOJ mandated use of force policy below: <\/p>\n
http:\/\/www.mintpressnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/Use_of_Force_Policy.pdf<\/a> <\/p>\n <\/p>\n See the original post here: Seattle deputies carry rifles near the scene of a shooting in downtown Seattle, April 20, 2017. (AP\/Elaine Thompson) SEATTLE The Ninth Circuit seemed skeptical of Seattle police officers claims that a new use-of-force policy mandated by the Department of Justice violates their Second Amendment rights. Continue reading
\nSeattle Cops Sue Over Police Reforms, Claiming They Violate Officers' Second Amendment Rights - Mintpress News (blog)<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"