The Virginia Senate has approved a major piece of #PoliceReform legislation that some will call anti-police. While a couple of provisions are problematic, it’s mostly a list common sense measures other states should consider. Let’s look at the main points. (Thread)

•Calls for the Criminal Justice Services Board (CJS) to adopt statewide professional standards of conduct

This should be a no-brainer. I was an officer in VA and later worked the state as a federal agent. Departments varied greatly.

•Requires sheriffs and police chiefs to notify the CJS Board within 48 hours of finding that an officer, deputy or jail guard has engaged in serious misconduct.

Again, seems logical. Accountability is the key.

•Prohibits police from using deadly force unless they believe deadly force is necessary to protect themselves or others, provides a warning before using deadly force, has a reason for using deadly force or exhausted any of the previous options.

This one is a bit questionable.

Officers don’t always have time to give a warning. However, that doesn’t mean they will be prosecuted. It simply means they can. I don’t like the “warning” verbiage without a disclaimer about their being adequate time to do so.

- Bans officers from firing into a moving vehicle, unless lives are threatened.

Another issue with this one. Officers have been dragged during traffic stops and had to fire into cars. Again, prosecution of an officer isn’t mandatory, but a disclaimer would be nice.

-Requires that officers render aid or intervene if another officer is using excessive force or unlawful use of force.

We need a culture change in law enforcement, and the “thin blue line” mentality - or perception of one - has got to go. This makes sense.

-Expands required data collection for traffic stops or pedestrian stops.

I’m assuming this is to see if race is a possible motivating factor. Data is simply data. No issue.

-Prohibits State Police or any other law enforcement agency from accepting grants or loans of personal property from the U.S. Department of Defense for use in law enforcement activities.

The is a move against the “militarization of police departments.

In my opinion, the procurement of some “military” style or tactical equipment isn’t the big issue. It’s how and when it’s used. Going after the equipment rather than the policies allowing it’s misuse is treating the symptom, not the disease.

-Requires every police chief to provide the Commonwealth's Attorney access to all records on wrongful arrests, use of force complaints or other complaints where a person has been deprived of rights.

Nothing wrong with transparency.

-Requires that one member of a civil rights organization and two members of community-based organizations be appointed to the Criminal Justice Services Board.

No issue.

-Decreases the number of representatives on the Virginia Sheriffs' Association and Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police from two representatives to one representative.

No opinion.

Requires the Department of Criminal Justice Services to develop curriculum and lesson plans for minimum entry-level, in-service and advanced training standards.

Okay. I’m a training professional, so here’s the thing -

You develop training standard first and the lesson plans are created way down the line through the Instructional Systems Design process. But... I get the intent here.

Anyway... the bill isn’t a liberal plot against police. It isn’t perfect and could use some legal clarifications, but other states can learn from this. Reform doesn’t have to be scary. A lack of understanding is a much greater fear.

This bill would also prohibit the use of chokeholds, restrict no-knock search warrants, and expand the grounds to decertify law enforcement officials who commit misconduct.

I have no issue with any of these:

I was trained to never use a chokehold (or carotid restraint) because of the risks. No-knocks have resulted in too many mistakes. And way too many bad cops end up leaving one department only to end up with another.

Rather than focus on the questionable provisions of this bill, perhaps we should be asking why the other aspects were not already written into law.