California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law Tuesday banning local, state and federal law enforcement officers from using gloves that can deliver painful electric shocks to people.
The ban on shock gloves will take effect next year and remain in place until 2030. It comes weeks after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement moved to equip its officers with the gloves, which are designed to gain compliance from combative individuals. Last month, the agency awarded a nearly $17 million contract to buy 6,000 pairs.
“Trump has put his political interests above the health, safety and livelihood of American families,” Newsom said in a statement. “California is taking action to strengthen transparency, accountability, and oversight around immigration enforcement in our state.”
The law is the latest example of how Democratic-led states have been pushing back against President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement efforts since he took office last year. In California, lawmakers passed at least two dozen bills this year seeking to fortify immigrants’ rights, restrict cooperation with federal immigration agents and tighten regulations on immigrant detention facilities, among other things.
Nationwide, 17 states with Democratic-led legislatures have passed a total of more than 100 pro-immigrant bills this year, according to an Associated Press analysis using the bill tracking software Plural. The most common purpose is to limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement agents.
Democratic California Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins said she introduced the shock-gloves legislation to “put a pause” on law enforcement’s use of the devices while the state examines their potential risks. The law requires the state’s Justice Department to study their safety and report to lawmakers by 2029.
“There’s a lot of unrest and a lot of uncertainty,” she said in an interview. “A lot of people are scared.”
As long as we have immigration laws, those laws have to be enforced by a designated law enforcement agency else the laws are meaningless. I have no desire to live in a lawless country. Most civilized, responsible adults do not either.
Why didn’t ICE exist prior to 2002 if they’re so vital to a functioning society?
INS was incompetent but I’ll take incompetence over the industrial scale malice that is ICE
That’s a false dichotomy. The RUC was disbanded in Northern Ireland as a result of a long history of bias and sectarian abuse. The Camden NJ police force was also disolved due to widespread corruption. Both NI and Camden are doing far better than they were before these forces were replaced.
There’s other examples like Mexico’s Federal police being disbanded which haven’t been as successful, but eliminating ICE doesn’t mean there cannot or will not be immigration enforcement in the future.
Unjust laws should be fought, and suggesting that laws should be enforced because they’re on the books is fucking asinine.
Hope you don’t live in the US, cuz I’ve got a lot of bad news for you.
The simplest way to demonstrate the lawlessness of American society: take a drive some time (or recruit a friend for the experiment) and steadfastly remain at or below the speed limit. Especially on a long road with no passing lane. You will discover that following the law in this place is so abnormal that doing so will make your fellow Americans hate you.
There is no need to have a separate police force to deal with this, but the US loves redundant admin within law enforcement.
Jesus fucking tap-dancing, “I’ll do whatever it takes to enable fascism”, shitliberal christ.
The federal Flag Code, 4 U.S.C. § 8(i), says: “The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever.”
How much state violence should I be allowed to enact upon you, should you violate this Federal law, since you so desire to not live in a lawless country, liberal? How about shock-gloves and indefinite detention? This seems about right for your level of candor.