On October 14th, 2017 the LA Times printed an editorial titled, “A cautious step forward on police drones.”
The following is our response to that editorial.
No Drones for LAPD
To indicate we must accept Drone use by law enforcement because “technology steadily advances” and we must instead place “strict guidelines” is defeatist, short-sighted, and a failure to critically report on the part of the LA Times. In theory technology exists to serve the community but in the hands of an institution such as the LAPD with a long history of racism, violence, and abuse, technology’s purpose will be highly distorted. We cannot for a moment deceive ourselves by believing that the LAPD can or will ever be transparent or increase community safety with the use of Drones.
Historic and current realities give a clear understanding of LAPD’s racist and violent practices. Had LAPD adhered to strong policy and oversight, the department would not have required outside and independent bodies to “set things right” such as the McCone commission after the Watts uprising in 1965, the Christopher commission after Rodney King’s beating in 1991, and more recently the Department of Justice consent decree from July 2001 lasting until May 2013.
Ironically with all the hoopla of the “New LAPD,” over the last six years in 2011, 2012, 2015 and 2016, LAPD killed the most people of any police department in the country. In 2015 one third of victims of LAPD’s Officer Involved Shootings had known mental health conditions. In 2014 it was revealed that LAPD officers had intentionally sabotaged the Digital In-Car Video System or dash cams in 92 out of 300 patrol cars, most of them in the South Bureau. Police Commission President Steve Soboroff, who was the commission president at the time of this expose’ admitted to LA Times that Chief Beck had briefed him of these violations eight months prior to Soboroff’s public acknowledgement of such gross violation of public trust.
Since May 2014 when LAPD first announced they had received two Draganflyer X6 Drones as a gift from Seattle Police Department, Angelenos have overwhelmingly and repeatedly rejected the use of Drones by LAPD. Distrust, mission creep, escalating militarization, surveillance, and trauma remain the primary concerns of thousands of residents of Los Angeles. LAPD remains one of the most militarized law enforcement agencies in the country with a massive architecture of surveillance.
Just over two weeks ago, the LA Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission debated this same issue. When considering what the LA Times, Sheriff, and LAPD refer to as a “potentially valuable and even life-saving tool,” the Sheriff’s Oversight Commission was able to weigh the costs as well as the benefits. Commissioner Priscilla Ocen put it very succinctly stating, “While the law enforcement benefits are questionable, the intrusion on the privacy interests of the public are very real.” Commissioner Ocen continued, “Given this, and the very clear evidence of harm that the use of drones can produce in the most vulnerable communities in Los Angeles, I am in favor of grounding the drones permanently.”
As happened with city officials in Seattle in 2013, members of the LA Sheriff’s Oversight Commission on September 28, 2017 heard the voices of the community and voted in favor of grounding the Sheriff’s Drone. The Sheriff has since issued a statement refusing to do so, which raises a question of legitimacy with regard to civilian oversight commissions in general — for if they are not going to question the police or have the power to implement policy, what is their purpose?
We agree that the LAPD seems more intent on checking off boxes for having gone through the motions of public outreach, instead of actually doing it. Regarding the public’s opinion about Drones, in 2014 Chief Charlie Beck said, “I will not sacrifice public support for a piece of police equipment.” In October 2017, Assistant Chief Girmala added, “Trying to continue to earn the public’s trust is the cornerstone — or we can’t be out there policing.”
Yet both Beck and Girmala continue to pursue a Drone pilot program even after the LAPD’s own outreach resulted in just 6% of emails being in support of the program (and even fewer supportive voices in the four public meetings). This tells us it’s the process of feigning outreach that the LAPD is most interested in, not the feedback itself.
We reject the LA Times position that strong policy and oversight will safeguard the most impacted communities from LAPD’s abuses. We demand that the Los Angeles Police Commission do their job and hear the voices of the community as we continue to demand that the LAPD does not use Drones — not now, not ever.
