►
From YouTube: Committee on Government Operations on August 10, 2020
Description
Docket #0811 - Ordinance restricting the use of chemical crowd control agents and kinetic impact projectiles
A
A
This
matter
is
sponsored
by
counselors
ricardo
arroyo
and
counselor
andrea
campbell
and
was
referred
to
the
committee
on
june
17th
and
according
to
governor
baker's
march
12
executive
order
modifying
certain
requirements
of
the
open
meeting
law.
We
are
having
this
hearing
on
zoom.
This
enables
the
city
council
to
carry
out
his
responsibilities
by
adhering
to
public
health
accommodations.
A
The
public
may
watch
this
meeting
via
live
stream
at
w
www.boston.gov
city
council
tv.
It
will
also
be
rebroadcasted
at
a
later
date
on
comcast
8
rc,
slash,
rcn,
82,
verizon
1964
for
public
testimony.
Written
comments
may
be
sent
to
the
committee
email
at
ccc.go
boston.gov
and
will
be
made
part
of
the
record
and
available
to
all
counselors.
A
A
Okay,
we
are
also
joined
by
several
guests
today,
superintendent
ridge
and
also
deputy
superintendent
mcgoldrick,
dr
rani
rohini,
har
attorney
foyer
from
the
national
lawyers
guild
and
attorney
rason
hall
from
ace
from
the
aclu
turning
it
over
now
to
the
lead
sponsors
and
I
apologize
superintendent.
I
said
your
name
incorrect
superintendent
bridge.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I'll,
keep
this
brief
so
that
we
can
make
the
most
of
the
time
we
have
with
our
panelists.
But
the
the
purpose
of
this
is
chemical
crowd.
Control
agents
are
actually
strictly
prohibited
in
warfare
due
to
the
geneva
protocol
in
1925,
tear
gas
and
the
things
that
we're
seeking
to
restrict
here
would
actually
be
illegal
if
used
on
enemy
combatants
in
a
war
zone,
but
are
perfectly
legal
to
use
on
our
constituencies.
C
And
so,
if
that's
the
case-
and
we
know
very
well
that
and
we'll
hear
testimony
to
the
fact
that
these
these
crowd
control
agents,
whether
it's
kinetic
rubber
bullets,
pepper
spray,
bullets,
pepper
spray
or
tear
gas,
have
incredibly
disruptive
and,
in
some
cases,
fatal
impacts
on
people's
health,
and
so
this
is
an
attempt.
If
we're
not
gonna
outright
ban
it-
and
this
isn't
an
outright
ban,
we
should
be
restricting
it.
C
We
should
be
making
sure
that
the
highest
levels
of
you
know
restriction
are
put
on
something
that
can
have
that
kind
of
impact
that
can
have
a
discriminate
impact
on
people
doing
legal
or
lawful
assembly
that
can
have
an
impact
on
people
from
as
young,
as
you
know,
as
young
as
you
can
take
to
a
a
rally
or
a
protest
or
as
old
as
exists.
I've
I've
been
protesting
myself
with
70
80
year
old
folks,
and
this
has
a
disparate
impact
on
different
ages.
C
You
have
mayors
who
have
through
executive
order,
put
in
bans,
there's
lawsuits
currently
pending
in
several
municipalities,
la
seattle,
denver
and
minneapolis,
to
make
sure
that
these,
these
chemical
crowd,
control
agents
and
kinetic
impact
projectiles
are
no
longer
used
by
law
enforcement,
and
so
this
is
an
attempt
to
get
ahead
of
that
here
in
the
city
of
boston.
I
would
add,
in
closing,
we
know
that
this
is
that
these
things
are
dangerous.
C
Victoria
snellgrove
rest
in
peace
in
2004
was
killed
by
a
rubber
bullet
to
the
eye
in
boston
during
the
2004
world
series
championship
celebration
that
was
occurring
outside
of
fenway,
and
so
we
have
personal
experience
in
the
city
of
boston
with
the
dangers
of
of
these
things,
and
so,
with
that
in
mind,
you
know
I'd
like
to
now
hand
it
over
to
my
co-sponsor
and
jerry
campbell.
Thank.
A
B
Campbell,
thank
you
councillor
edwards,
and
thank
you
council
arroyo
for
the
partnership
we
are.
We
are
in
an
important
important
moment
right
now,
in
which
we're
examining
questioning
and
rewriting
how
policing
and
public
safety
are
done
in
the
city
of
boston,
so
that
these
systems
are
more
accountable,
transparent
and,
most
importantly,
just
people
exercising
their
lawful
first
amendment
rights
during
a
protest
or
demonstration
shouldn't
be
met
with
destructive
and
even
deadly
weapons.
B
Although
chemical
crowd,
control
agents
and
kinetic
impact,
projectiles
are
often
referred
to
as
non-lethal
methods
of
controlling
crowds.
They
cause
incredible
discomfort
and
pain
to
those
they
are
used
upon
and
with
prolonged
use.
They
can
cause
permanent
harm,
such
as
blindness
or
in
some
or
in
severe
cases,
death
their
agents.
B
These
agents
also
have
a
deleterious
environmental
effect,
as
chemicals
settle
and
lingle
for
days
linger
for
days
after
use
as
indiscriminate
weapons
by
design.
These
agents,
which
council
royal
also
spoke
to,
are
especially
difficult
to
direct
away
from
bystanders
or
groups
especially
affected,
such
as
children,
the
elderly
and
those
with
pre-existing
conditions
and
in
the
midst
of
covert
19.
I
think
we
have
to
be
extremely
mindful
of
that.
B
B
We
have
representation
from
the
police
department,
which
is
critically
important
to
this
conversation,
as
well
as
from
legal
experts
and
advocates,
and
one
of
the
things
I
also
want
to
stress
is,
of
course
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
protect
our
residents
and
that
absolutely
includes
our
police
officers,
who
are
on
the
front
lines
every
single
day,
and
so
I
I
do
think,
I'm
looking
forward
to
this
hearing
and
discussing
what
are
some
other
alternatives
or
how
we
restrict
the
use
of
these
agents
only
in
the
most
severe
circumstances.
B
Lastly,
I
have
to
give
a
special
shout
out
and
thank
you
to
sadie
who's,
one
of
our
amazing
summer
interns
who
did
a
lot
of
research
on
this
topic,
including
looking
at
best
practices
and
other
municipalities
across
the
country.
We
all
know
we
have
limited
human
capital
in
our
council
offices,
our
interns
and
fellows
play
a
really
incredible
role
in
this
summer.
They've
done
a
really
incredible
job,
so
a
special
shout
out
to
sadie
on
my
team.
Thank
you
again,
council
royal
for
the
partnership
and
thank
you.
Councilor
edwards,.
D
I
know
we
highlighted
some
of
the
some
of
the
issues
that
have
happened
in
the
past,
but
I
I
want
I'd
like
to
know.
If
there
are
demonstrations
taking
place,
you
know
taking
away
this
option
for
the
police.
What
impact
would
that
have
on
public
safety
in
general?
Those
are
the
types
of
questions.
Those
are
the
types
of
answers
and
questions.
I
hope
to
ask
during
this
debate
again
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
my.
D
My
colleagues
are
filing
this
and
for
council
edwards
for
sharing
it,
but
I'd
also
like
to
say
thank
you
to
the
boston
police
department
for
being
here,
as
well
for
being
very,
very
responsive
and
professional
on
these
matters.
Thank
you.
E
This
issue
is
personal
to
me.
I
grew
up
in
northern
ireland
and
that's
where
they
invented
the
rubber
bullet
for
use
against
civilian
protesters
in
the
streets
of
northern
ireland
and
they
were
used
with
the
result
of
15
people
actually
dying
from
the
use
of
rubber
bullets,
and
so
it's
very
personal
to
me.
E
I
understand
the
need
for
effective
ways
to
try
and
manage
protests
street
protests
that
are
be
turning
violent
and
getting
out
of
control,
but
I
really
do
feel
strongly
that
these
rubber
bullets
are
not
non-lethal
that
they're
very
dangerous
and
that
we
would
like
I'd
like
to
see
a
protocol
that
and
measures
to
to
have
clear
protocols
for
when
when
they
should
be
used
in
in
circumstances
such
as
public
disorder.
E
I
look
forward
to
the
conversation,
thank
you
so
much
for
the
wonderful
range
of
folks
on
the
panel
police,
department,
etc,
and
I
look
forward
to
learning
more
and
coming
coming
up
with
a
policy
that
will
make
this
a
method
of
last
resort
in
our
city.
Thank
you.
F
George,
thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
don't
have
any
sort
of
formal
opening
remarks
just
happy
to
be
here,
I'm
looking
forward
to
having
a
better
understanding
of
the
policies
and
procedures
that
are
currently
in
place
and
how
we
can
work
in
collaboration
to
make
them
more
appropriate
and,
I
think,
better,
on
a
better
understanding
and
a
deeper
understanding,
not
just
for
us,
but
for
the
general
public
as
well.
I
appreciate
the
makers
bringing
this
before
us
and
look
forward
to
today's
conversation.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank.
A
G
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
shall
be
brief.
Just
wanted
to
thank
the
makers,
councillor
royal
and
councillor
campbell,
thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
to
our
panelists
agree
with
everything
that's
been
said
by
my
colleagues.
G
Obviously
you
know
something:
that's
deemed
non-lethal
can
be
lethal
as
it
relates
to
tear
gas
and
other
chemical
agents,
we're
learning
more
and
more
how
they
can
have
just
a
disastrous
effect,
particularly
on
reproductive
health,
particularly
on
trans
men,
and
it's
just
an
important
conversation
to
have
to
make
sure
that
we
can
always-
and
I
know
we
all
share
this-
every
person
on
the
zoom
shares
that's
doing
what's
right
for
the
safest,
safest
policies
and
procedures
that
we
will.
G
We
will
affirm
and
making
sure
that
these
are
obviously
the
last
resorts.
So
look
forward
to
the
question
and
answers
look
forward
to
learning
more
and
look
forward
to
supporting
the
two
lead
sponsors
in
this
endeavor.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you.
I
don't
see
any
other
city
council
so
I'll
just
briefly
state
I'm
excited
about
this.
I
just
have
several
points
that
I
hope
we
can
cover
today.
I'm
curious
about
the
eight
can't
wait
and
how
that
is
measured
with
the
non-lethal
on
that
continuum.
I'm
curious
about.
If
no
tear
gas,
if
no
rubber
bullets,
are
we
just
left
with
regular
guns
or
batons,
what
what
is
what
is
in
their
tool
kit?
How?
A
What
is
the
demonstration
protocol
with
regards
to
de-escalation,
I
understand
the
use
of
non-lethal
force
is
important,
is
intended
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
hurt
people
beyond
necessary,
but
I
am
curious
how
how
we're
d
using
it
to
de-escalate.
I
don't
know
that
it
necessarily
does,
or
maybe
it's
not
intended
to
I've,
never
actually
seen
a
rubber
bullet.
So
I'm
curious,
I
don't
know
if
anyone
brought
one,
but
I
am
I've
never
seen
one.
I
don't
know
what
they
look
like
or
how?
What
is,
how
is
it
supposed
to
work?
A
Does
it
just?
Is
it's
just
supposed
to
be
a
hard
ping
against
the
body,
so
I'm
curious
to
literally
learn
about
that.
I
know
I
know
about
tear
gas
and
then
finally,
I
am
curious
about
the
reporting
requirements
for
the
use
of
non-lethal
force.
Is
there
something,
after
the
fact
and
a
protest
that
we
learn
about
the
use
and
the
impact
and
who
got
hit
and
who
didn't
and
why
so
I
I'm
here
to
learn
as
much
as
possible.
A
I
do
appreciate
all
the
guests
who
are
here
to
help
us
educate
us
and
also
help
to
form
the
best
policy.
I
was
informed
by
one
of
the
the
co-chairs
or
excuse
me
one
of
the
makers
that
dr
ramini
is
might
have
to
leave
sooner
than
later.
So
if
it's
okay
with
everybody,
we
normally
go
to
the
administration
and
would
normally
start
with
the
police,
but
we're
gonna
go
ahead
and
start
with
dr
amini
for
some
a
quick
or
some
presentation.
A
H
Hi,
thank
you
and
thank
you
for
having
me.
I
don't.
I
know
I
just
want
to
speak
for
a
short
amount
of
time
and
I'm
hoping
to
just
give
you
a
little
bit
of
information
about
our
research
and
what
we
know
about
crowd
control
weapons
from
the
medical
side.
So
just
this
background,
I
am
an
emergency
room,
physician
in
oakland
california,
and
adjunct
professor
of
epidemiology
at
uc
berkeley.
H
So
most
of
the
the
slides
and
images
I'll
present
today
are
based
on
a
long,
systematic
review
we
did
of
all
of
the
injuries
we
could
capture
in
the
medical
literature
between
1990
and
2015,
and
then
I'll
give
you
a
brief
update
on
what
we've
what
we've
understood
from
the
past
few
months.
H
I
will
say
thank
you
for
having
me
today
and
it's
really
unusual,
to
get
to
be
a
researcher
and
share
information
with
legislative
bodies
and
policy
makers
who
actually
make
a
difference.
So
this
is
very
exciting
for
me
as
well
to
see
how
the
law
is
made
and
then
miss
edwards.
You
mentioned
you'd,
never
seen
a
rubber
bullet.
H
So
I'll
just
show
you
one
right
now,
so
this
is
one
I
picked
up,
not
in
the
u.s,
but
this
is
a
typical
foam
baton
and
I
don't
know
if
we
use
exactly
the
same
ones
in
the
us,
but
it
has
plat
like
like
very
very
hard
foam
on
top
and
a
plastic
base
at
the
back,
and
you
can
see
it's
kind
of
like
a
bullet
but
also
large
and
a
bit
softer.
H
What
I'll
do
is
very
briefly,
share
some
information
about
about
these
weapons
and
their
injuries,
and
then
afterwards,
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
or
stay
on
for
a
bit,
so
the
one
I
showed
you
is
a
little
bit
like
the
blue
one
over
here,
but
that's
not
the
only
kind
of
rubber
bullet.
One
of
the
major
issues
with
doing
this
research
is
that
all
different
kinds
of
weapons
are
used
in
the
us
and
and
boston.
I'm
sure
uses
a
range
of
different
ones,
but
there's
foam
batons
there's
bean
bag
rounds.
H
These
are
rubber
coated
metal
bullets
which,
thankfully
we
don't
use
much
in
the
u.s
different
kinds
of
foam
and
rubber
baton,
and
then
these
are
sometimes
called
stinkers.
We
call
them
scatter
shot
where
there's
multiple,
multiple
balls
inside
a
single
canister.
So
when
they
fire
you
fire
a
bunch
at
once,
as
you
can
expect,
there's
a
range
of
severe
injuries
that
are
caused
by
these
rubber
bullets,
which
I'll
speak
about
first
before
tear
gas
and
the
vast
majority
are
to
the
skin
or
the
bones
muscles
limbs
and
lacerations
things
like
that.
H
Forgive
me
if
these
are
a
little
bit
graphic,
but
I
want
to
give
you
an
actual
perception
of
what
we
see
in
the
emergency
room
and
what
kind
of
injuries
occur
from
the
use
of
rubber
bullets
oftentimes.
We
call
these
non-lethal
or
less
than
lethal,
but
I
would
argue
very
strongly
that
those
are
incorrect
terms
that
should
be
retired.
H
These
are
very
much
lethal,
it
all
depends
on
how
they
are
used
and
when
they're
used
and
how
often
so
again,
forgive
me
for
some
of
the
graphic
pictures,
but
you
can
see
this
young
man
got
shot
by
the
scatter
shot
bullets,
so
there's
multiple
injuries
if
he
was
farther
away.
This
could
hit
multiple
people
at
once.
H
H
H
This
is
even
more
concerning,
but
when
they
hit
from
close
range,
these
bullets
go
almost
as
fast
as
as
live
ammunition.
They
can
fracture
the
skull
sometimes
lodge
inside
the
skull.
You
can
see
a
few
pictures
of
that
of
this
hitting
so
hard
that
it
actually
fractured
the
skull.
That's
pretty
clear
on
that
one,
and
then
this
it.
I
think
it
entered
through
the
temporal
bone
and
you
can
see
it
that
it
fractured
and
lodged
in
its
skull.
These
are
essentially
unsurvivable
injuries
and
occasionally
just
cause
permanent
brain
damage.
H
H
And
I'll
briefly
share
that,
just
in
the
past
three
months,
we
have
been
using
a
social
media
and
online
investigation
to
try
to
identify
how
many
injuries
have
occurred,
just
since
the
murder
of
george
floyd
and
so
far
just
using
online
sources.
We
have
identified
over
116
people
with
significant
head
and
neck
head
neck
eye
and
face
injuries
that
will
be
published
in
the
next
few
weeks,
but
that's
a
pretty
dramatic
number
for
just
two
months
in
the
us
alone.
H
H
Because
again
it's
about
how
they're
used
just
as
much
as
which
weapons
they
are
so
the
canisters
we
know
about,
cannot
confirm
more
commonly,
but
there's
also
canister,
grenades,
there's
also
pepper
spray,
of
course,
and
other
kinds
of
spray,
as
you
can
expect
most
of
the
injuries
that
we
see
there
are
also
to
the
skin
and
eyes,
but
the
real
deathly
deadly
injuries
from
chemical
irritants
are
typically
respiratory
or
often
from
the
canister
themselves,
to
the
brain.
The
skull
I'll
show
you
pictures.
H
H
H
As
I
mentioned,
most
of
the
deaths
and
we've
identified
over
50
deaths
from
tear
gas
are
because
of
either
the
canister
injuries
to
the
head
or
because
of
respiratory
damage
to
the
lungs.
So
you
can
see
all
this
white
schmutzy
stuff
here,
that's
abnormal
and
here
is
a
bronchospheric
bronchoscopy
image
of
the
same
young
woman
on
the
right.
You
can
see
normal.
This
was
three
months
later
and
on
the
left,
you
can
see
how
how
much
tissue
breakdown
actually
occurs
in
the
lungs
when
you're
exposed
to
tear
gas.
H
We
conclude
in
our
research
that
tear
gas
is
undis
indiscriminate,
so
you
can't
identify
a
single
or
group
of
violent
protesters
and
tear
gas
them.
What
you
have
to
do
is
disperse
the
entire
crowd
and
when
you
do
that,
you
are
at
risk
of
exposing
bystanders,
children,
the
elderly,
people
with
asthma
and
all
kinds
of
other
issues,
and
ultimately
these
weapons.
They
tend
to
escalate
tensions
and
make
the
situation
worse
rather
than
safer.
H
There's
a
range
of
other
weapons
that
people
often
use
in
the
u.s
that
I'll
just
be
very
briefly
mentioned,
but
among
those
are
stun
grenades
which
can
cause
burns.
Propublica
did
a
report
in
2015
identifying
over
50
people
who
died
because
of
stun
stun
grenades
and
water
cannons,
which
we,
thankfully
don't
use
too
much
in
the
united
states,
but
are
starting
to
bring
back.
They
can
also
cause
pretty
significant
injuries.
H
I
will
conclude
by
saying
that
I
know
you
asked
and
a
lot
of
people
ask
me
all
the
time.
Well,
if
phr
is
calling
for
banning
all
of
these
weapons,
then
police
don't
have
a
range
of
use
of
force,
but
you
know
we're
not
starting
from
scratch.
There's
many
countries
all
over
the
world
that
don't
use
these
weapons
and
I
think,
when
you
ban
these
weapons
when
boston
takes
a
step
like
this,
what
you're,
gonna
do
is
force
more
dialogue
and
more
open
communication.
H
That
actually
is
the
solution.
I'll
stop
there
and
and
and
ask
if
you
could,
if
you
have
any
questions
specifically
about
the
weapons
or
the
health
impacts,.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Dr
har.
We've
also
been
joined
by
councillor
flaherty
and
councillor
mejia,
councillor,
flaherty
or
councilmember.
If
you
had
any
brief
remarks,
if
not,
I
would
turn
over
to
allow
some
colleagues
to
ask
questions.
I
I
I
would
like
to
move
to
the
questions.
Thank
you
for
hosting
and
looking
forward
to
participating
in
the
dialogue.
Thank
you.
Councillor,
flaherty.
A
He
may
have
had
some
technical
issues:
okay,
very
well,.
A
A
We'll
skip
the
opening
remark:
counselor
flaherty
and
we'll
see
if
we
can't
get
a
better
connection
for
questioning.
If
that's
okay.
A
So
I
didn't
know
if
anyone
had
any
quick
questions
for
dr
parr
or
if
it
makes
sense
to
the
makers,
maybe
to
have
maybe
some
introductions
or
some
remarks
from
the
police
as
well,
so
the
questioning
kind
of
goes
for
all
of
them.
A
A
Yeah
and
then
I
think
we
would
have
yeah
council
phone,
I
saw
your
hand
up.
Did
you
have
a
brief
question
or
were
you?
Okay,
with
waiting
you're,
a
mute.
D
Thank
you,
council
edwards.
I
know
you
want
to
get
on
to
the
others,
but
I
I
just
had
a
question
for
the
doctor
dude
during
these.
The
pictures
that
you
showed
us
they
were
they.
It
took
place
across
the
country,
but
do
we
also
know
if
any
of
the
you
know,
public
safety
people
or
that
were
working?
D
These
nights
also
were
injured
by
any
of
these
types
of
you
know,
you
know
no,
I
wouldn't
I
wouldn't
use
the
word
weapons,
but
were
they
injured
at
all,
because
maybe
other
protesters
may
have
had
these
similar
similar
equipment.
H
H
It
is
common
and
I
think
our
police
officers
can
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
this,
but
tear
gas
and
pepper
spray,
especially
because
they're
sensitive
to
the
wind
conditions
and
things
like
that
sometimes
often
do
spray
back
in
the
law
enforcement's
face
and-
and
I
know
in
oakland
anyway,
police
are
loathed
to
use
pepper
spray
unless
they
have
to,
because
if
it's
windy
or
if
they're,
if
they
have
to
arrest
the
individual,
they
sometimes
get
exposed
themselves
to
pepper
spray,
and
it
doesn't
feel
great.
H
But
I,
and
in
the
in
the
past
two
months
that
we've
looked
at,
I
know,
there's
been
a
number
of
injuries
to
law
enforcement
officers.
But
I
don't
think
those
have
been
from
the
the
any
of
these
weapons.
A
D
Yeah,
what
is
what
is
the
most
common
injury
that
a
a
public
safety
person
would
have
during
a
demonstration
if,
from
from
the
demonstrators,
what
would
what
would
some
of
those
injuries
be.
H
You
know
I'm
probably
not
the
right
expert
for
that,
because
I
don't
study
the
injuries
on
the
law
enforcement
side.
It's
also
impossible
to
study,
probably
because
those
aren't
necessarily
like
I'm
an
epidemiologist,
so
we
studied,
if
we
don't
have
public
records,
it's
hard
for
us
to
to
identify
those
and
thank
you
so
it's
hard
to
get
that
information.
A
I'm
sure
I'm
sure
bpd
could
speak
to
their
experiences,
speaking
of
which
we
have
four
additional
panelists.
I
know
I
saw
you
counselor
braden,
but
I
really
want
to
to
get
to
the
other
panelists.
Okay.
Thank
you
counts.
A
Excuse
me,
so
I
told
you
superintendent
I'd,
be
calling
you
a
counselor,
soon,
superintendent
ridge,
then
deputy
superintendent,
if
you
would
like
to
follow
after
him
or
if
you're
speaking
together
and
then
I'd
like
to
go
to
attorney
fear
foyer,
you
corrected
me
before
I'm
sorry
attorney
from
the
nlg
and
rason
hall,
then
everyone
would
have
kind
of
done
some
introductory
remarks
and
that
allows
for
a
robust
conversation,
so
a
superintendent
kind
of
an
overview
and
then
we'll
allow
for
other
people
to
speak
as
well.
L
Okay,
very
good
good
morning
appreciate
the
ability
to
be
able
to
to
speak
to
the
to
the
hearing
today.
Just
some
background
information
on
myself,
I've
been
to
police
offices
since
november
of
1983,
I've
been
currently
the
bureau
chief
of
field
services
since
2017..
L
Prior
to
that
I
was
in,
I
was
in
the
community
of
the
special
events
unit,
so
I
want
to
say
in
my
career,
I've
been
to
hundreds
and
hundreds
of
demonstrations
in
both
both
situations.
Where
you
know
the
the
police
have
been
put
in
the
middle,
keeping
keeping
two
groups
separated.
You
know,
there's
been
situations
where,
where
we've
we've
had
to
had
to
use
some
type
of
force.
L
However,
in
my
in
my
almost
37
years
as
a
police
officer,
the
only
time
that
we
ever
used
what
we're
calling
tear
gas
was
was
was
may
31st
in
37
years.
That's
the
only
time
we
had
to
do
that.
There
was
not.
That
was
not
a
peaceful
demonstration.
It
was.
It
was
a
riot.
Our
our
officers
were
being
attacked.
They
were
being
attacked
with
with
frozen
water
bottles,
they
would
be
in
attack
with
rocks
bricks.
L
We've
had,
we
still
have
offices
that
have
been
out
injured
from
from
broken
arms.
From
from
whether
you
call
them
m80s
firecrackers
quarter
sticks
of
dynamite,
whatever
those
were
thrown
at
our
offices
and
in
the
in
the
ability
for
us
to
defend
ourselves
needs
to
be
maintained.
We
cannot
leave
our
offices
on
the
line
with
with
basically
what
you
mentioned.
Council
was
with
a
stick
and
a
gun.
We
need.
L
We
need
tools,
we
need
tools
to
be
able
to
to
disrupt
and
disperse
these
groups
that
are
attacking
us
and
they're
attacking
us
again,
not
not
to
get
into
any
any
political
considerations,
because
we've
we've
been
there,
we've
been
there
countless
times.
L
You
know
our
our
job
has
always
been
to
protect
everybody's
first
amendment
right
to
peacefully
protest,
but
when
we
have
a
situation
where
our
officers
is
being
attacked
with
with
I
I
know
the
the
doctor
mentioned,
she
hasn't
heard
of
it
before,
but
our
officers
were
attacked
with
cs
gas.
The
the
protesters
were
throwing
cs
gas
and
they
were
also
using
pepper
spray
on
our
offices,
along
with,
along
with
a
number
of
other
projectiles
that
were
coming
down
towards
us.
L
In
particular,
you
know
when
you,
when
you
talk
about
a
peaceful
protest,
we
had.
We
had
people
there
that
were
that
had
their
own
gas
masks,
they
had,
they
had
leaf
blowers
to
blow
any
any
any
chemical
munitions
that
would
what
were
thrown
at
them
back
at
the
offices.
They
had
people
with
with
welders,
gloves
that
were
able
to
pick
up
munitions
to
throw
back
at
the
offices.
L
So
this
is
this
was
a
well-prepared
group
of
of
of
rioters,
not
peaceful
protesters
and
the
only
times
that,
like
I
said
that
I've
used
it
in
my
37
years
was,
was
that
night
of
may
31st
and
again
there
was
not
a
peaceful
protest.
That
was
a
riot
and
our
officers
were
being
attacked
and
our
officers
were
being
hurt
specifically
because
they
were
boston,
police
officers.
So
you
know
the
ability
for
us
to
defend
ourselves
has
to
be
paramount.
L
L
You
know
the
the
the
less
lethal
option,
if
you
will,
is
it
legal
in
certain
circumstances,
it
could
be,
however,
when
you,
when
you
have
quarter,
sticks
of
dynamite
thrown
at
you
when
you
have
frozen
water
bottles
thrown
at
you
when
you
have
sticks,
rocks
bricks
thrown
at
you
that
that
escalates,
that
is
no
longer
a
peaceful
demonstration
and
pretty
much
you
know
our
people
held
the
line
as
best
they
could
under
extremely
trying
circumstances
that
evening,
and-
and
I
at
no
time
do-
I
ever
want
to
be
able
to
to
restrict
the
use
of
of
any
of
those
options,
in
particular
when
we
use
those
options.
L
Those
are
those
are,
the
the
permission
is
given
strictly
at
the
highest
levels
would
be
the
chief
of
field
services
myself
in
in
a
police,
commissioner
degrasse.
We
would
be
the
only
ones
that
are
authorized.
That
and
that's
that's
basically
in
our
rules
of
engagement,
so
it's
not
like
we're
out
there
indiscriminately
using
this
stuff.
L
You
know
I
said
I
I've
been
been
to
hundreds
and
hundreds
of
demonstrations
and
and
that's
the
only
time
we've
had
ever
had
to
to
resort
to
using
those
type
of
weapons
in
our
in
basically
to
defend
ourselves.
So.
A
Thank
you,
deputy
superintendent.
I
don't
know
if
you
wanted
to
add
to
or
your
thoughts
as
well.
M
N
Would
just
say
we
need
to
be
careful,
look
at
a
few
different
sides
of
this
issue.
It's
not
just
a
question
of
whether
the
the
fleets
are
using
a
certain
type
of
force,
there's
also
the
risk
involved
in
letting
a
riot
run
unabated
or
be
controlled
ineffectively,
there's,
obviously,
downside
risks
to
the
public
when
that
happens.
N
So
this
is
a
means
of
stopping
a
riot
stopping
violence,
stopping
some
destruction,
which
you
know,
there's
plenty
of
environmental
impact
to
that
as
well
I
mean
numerous
fires
were
lit
and
including
on
some
public
property
and
parks.
I
I
personally
saw
some
fires
in
the
public
gardens,
and
you
know
this
is
this
there's
other
risk
than
than
just
than
just
the
risk
of
us
using
riot
control
agents
to
the
doctor's
point
about
dialogue
and
communication,
I
agree:
100
percent
that
is
usually
effective
for
us.
N
N
We
do
have
to
realize,
though,
especially
recently,
there
are
people
that
want
to
do
harm
cause
chaos
cause
injury.
Unfortunately,
we've
seen
more
of
that
than
I
have
ever
seen
in
my
career
and
just
as
the
superintendent
mentioned,
I've
never
seen
these
riot
control
agents
and
and
and
sponge
rounds,
which
is
much
different
than
you
know.
To
the
point
of
the
the
previous
speaker,
the
sponge
rounds.
N
This
is
the
first
time
I've
seen
them
used
the
first
time
that
they've
been
authorized
to
my
knowledge.
So
that's
you
know,
and
we
would
obviously
take
great
care
because
there
is
risk,
but
no
one's
diminishing
the
fact
that
there's
risk
when
you
use
impact
weapons
like
that
and
those
diminishing
the
fact
that
there
is
risk
involved
in
riot
control
agents.
But
it's
a
balance
of
risk
correct
like
and
everything
that
we
do.
N
We
want
to
balance
the
risk
of
action
versus
other
action
or
no
action
and-
and
I
think
on
the
night
of
the
31st
of
may
would
have
been
quite
calamitous
if
we
didn't
take
action
and
unfortunately,
we
used
a
lot
of
the
other
tools.
We
typically
use,
including
engagement
and-
and
I
will
say,
the
vast
majority
of
the
protesters
there
that
evening
were
peaceful
protesters
and
as
they
started
to
leave.
N
People
who
had
clearly
no
intent
on
being
peaceful
protests
is
bringing
the
explosives
that
they
brought,
bringing
canisters
military
grade,
cancers
of
cs
and
cn
gas.
Clearly,
there's
some
people
who
weren't
going
to
take
peace
for
an
answer,
so
so
that's
problematic.
Just
looking
a
little
bit
at
some
of
the
restrictions
on
the
ordinance
itself.
N
A
couple
of
my
concerns
are:
it
makes
no
allowance
for
say
a
sudden
attack
where
of
the
public
is
at
risk.
I
did
see
on
the
evening
of
the
31st
that
there
was
a
car
with
with
a
young
child
and
they
were
trying
to
safely
get
out
of
the
area
that
would
be
challenging
to
do
if
we
had
to
wait
and
get
approval
to
use
any,
even
even
to
use
pepper
spray,
so
defense
of
others
self-defense.
N
I
I
think
we
should
probably
consider
working
that
into
the
wording
somehow,
including
trying
to
get
ems
and
fire
assets
to
someone
who
might
be
injured.
Perhaps
you
know
if
someone
has
a
weapon
and
they're
causing
chaos
insider
in
a
crowd.
Maybe
we
want
to
consider
some
options
for
using
using
impact
weapons
on
on
that
particular
person
without
having
to
wait
for
them
to
actually
use
that
violence
among
the
crowd.
M
N
Would
also
point
out
that
the
the
categorization
of
any
group
of
10
or
more
and
basically
any
group
whatsoever,
occasionally
there
are
large
crowds
in
bars
downtown
and
you
will
have
more
than
10
people
fighting.
You
will
have
people
being
violently
attacked
and
you
might
have
only
one
or
two
officers
showing
up
initially
using
the
pepper
spray
that
they
would
typically
have
on
their
belts,
can
disperse
the
crowd
pretty
quickly
and
save
people
significant
injuries.
N
I
I
know
it
seems
perhaps
like
a
trivial
thing,
but
if
you've
seen
some
of
the
results
of
some
of
these
bar
fights
and
and
fight
set
events
that
involve
you
know,
people
being
kicked
in
the
head
or
struck
with
objects
the
additional
time
it
would
take
to
get
sufficient
resources
there
to
intervene
rather
than
using
pepper
spray
to
get
some
people
safely
extracted
from
that
area
or
prevent
some
of
the
violence
and
address
the
address
the
others
is,
it
makes
a
difference.
My
other.
N
A
Thank
you
very
much
attorney
attorney
foyer
yep.
O
My
name
is
jeffrey
foyer,
I'm
an
attorney
in
a
small
community-based
law
office.
I'm
here
representing
the
massachusetts
chapter
of
the
national
lawyers
guild
you've
heard
from
the
expert
physician,
dr
har,
about
how
dangerous
and
even
deadly
these
weapons
can
be.
I
want
to
talk
to
you
now
about
how
these
weapons
are
being
used
on
our
citizenry
recently
unnecessarily
and
indiscriminately.
O
O
It's
also
contradictory
what
they've
said
because
secretary
deputy
sorry
superintendent
ridge
talked
about
needing
approval
at
the
highest
level
to
use
this
deputy
superintendent
mcgoldrick
says
we
can't
wait
for
approval
at
the
highest
level
to
use
some
of
these
weapons.
We
need
to
be
able
to
use
them
in
certain
situations.
O
O
O
I
have
been
both
a
participant
and
a
neutral
legal
observer
at
many
of
these
demonstrations
and
despite
the
issues
that
these
demonstrations
often
cause
until
recently,
the
boston,
police
and
other
law
enforcement
agencies
never
used.
Tear
gas,
pepper
spray,
rubber
bullets,
flash
bank
grenades
and
other
indiscriminate
or
dangerous
crowd,
control
weapons
to
disperse
the
people
of
boston
who
are
exercising
their
first
amendment
rights
all
of
a
sudden.
O
Now
they
feel
the
need
to
have
the
use
of
those
weapons
with
the
police,
murders
of
george
floyd
brianna,
taylor,
philando
castile,
and
so
many
more
and
the
increased
activism
of
the
black
lives
matter.
Movement.
The
boston
police
have
begun
to
use
these
dangerous
weapons
to
try
and
stop
the
city
citizens
of
boston
from
voicing
their
concerns
in
our
streets.
In
fact,
we
have
learned
that
the
bpd
has
even
been
supplying
tear
gas
police
departments
in
other
massachusetts
cities
to
be
used
against
protesters
there.
O
The
national
warriors
guild
has
collected
eyewitness
reports
from
people
and
our
own
legal
observers
of
the
indiscriminate
and
unnecessary
use
of
tear
gas,
pepper
spray,
rubber
bullets,
flashbang
grenades
and
other
weaponry
to
try
and
disperse
non-violent
groups
of
demonstrators
during
several
of
the
black
lives
matter,
protests
that
have
occurred
recently,
indeed,
our
own
neutral
legal
observers
have
been
targets
of
these
weapons.
At
times,
bystanders
and
passers-by
have
also
been
severely
injured
by
tear
gas
and
pepper
spray,
because
those
weapons
cannot
be
limited
in
who
they
target
or
who
they
affect.
O
This
is
what
she
wrote.
The
crowd
was
slowly
trickling
away.
This
was
about
eight
o'clock
at
night,
but
a
large
group
of
us
remain
standing
at
the
state
house
and
that's
when
things
got
crazy
out
of
absolutely
nowhere.
The
entire
group
of
people
started
screaming,
pushing
and
pulling
yelling
watch
out,
and
my
god
get
out
of
the
way
it
took
moments
and
all
of
a
sudden
I
got
thrown
completely
out
of
the
way
as
three
police
cruisers
sped
through
the
entire
crowd
of
people.
O
Splitting
us
right
down
the
middle
with
no
warning
the
screaming
continued
and
the
whole
crowd
got
chaotic
and
confused
distress
all
around
people
screaming.
I
fled
boylston
street
and
ran
into
the
commons,
as
I
didn't
know,
where
else
to
go
my
partner
and
I
got
separated.
So
I
ran
around
alone
scared
and
confused
the
police
trapped
us
in
the
park
and
had
police
at
every
accessible
accident
corner.
They
were
throwing
tear
gas
and
shooting
rubber
bullets
into
the
dark
park.
Lights
were
turned
off.
We
couldn't
see
where
to
go.
O
The
tea
got
shut
down,
so
we
couldn't
get
out.
The
streets
were
blocked
off
with
riot
police
who
were
shooting
rubber
bullets
and
anyone
that
came
in
their
direction.
I
finally
made
it
out
after
an
hour
or
so,
but
I'm
traumatized,
I'm
now
afraid
of
helicopters,
cops
cop
cars
crossing
streets,
fireworks,
fog.
The
list
goes
on.
It
turned
one
of
the
most
beautiful
days
I've
ever
experienced
into
a
true
living
nightmare.
O
O
These
demonstrations
in
no
way
required
the
police
to
use
the
dangerous
and
indiscriminate
weapons
to
control
peaceful
demonstrators.
In
fact,
it
is
the
unnecessary
use
of
these
weapons
by
the
police,
which
creates
the
very
chaotic
and
potentially
violent
situations
which
the
police
are
supposedly
trying
to
avoid.
O
Under
these
regulations,
prisoners
are
more
protected
from
the
use
of
these
harmful
weapons
than
our
citizens,
exercising
their
constitutional
rights
out
on
the
public
streets
and
in
the
parks
the
ordinance
being
considered
by
you
does
not
ban
the
use
of
these
weapons.
Rather,
it
places
reasonable
restrictions
on
when
and
how
the
police
can
use
them.
It
serves
to
protect
the
rights
of
our
citizens
to
engage
in
peaceful
protests,
and
it
provides
consequences
for
police
officers
who
violate
those
rights
by
using
these
weapons
unnecessarily,
as
has
occurred
recently,
similar
or
even
harsher.
J
O
Issued
restraining
orders
and
injunctions
against
police
forces
in
denver,
minneapolis
portland,
seattle,
los
angeles
and
washington,
d.c
and
lawsuits
are
pending
in
other
cities.
I
urge
you
to
pass
this
ordinance
to
restrict
the
unnecessary
use
of
these
dangerous
and
indiscriminate
weapons
in
order
to
provide
the
same
protection
to
ordinary
citizens
as
we
provide
to
prisoners
in
massachusetts.
P
Thank
you
very
much,
madam
chair
good
morning
to
the
committee
members
and
to
the
makers
of
the
bill.
My
name
is
rason
hall,
I'm
the
director
of
the
racial
justice
program
for
the
aclu
of
massachusetts.
So
we
are
thankful
that
the
council
has
decided
to
hold
this
important
hearing
and
take
up
this
very
timely,
yet
long-standing
issue,
the
use
of
chemical
agents
and
kinetic
projectile
weapons
for
the
purpose
of
crowd
control.
P
The
proposed
ordinance
does
not
go
far
enough
and
I
would
encourage
the
council
to
consider
an
outright
ban
of
these
weapons.
However,
recognizing
the
perspective
and
influence
of
of
law
enforcement
and
the
public's
perception
of
the
need
to
control
unruly
crowds
and
the
political
realities
of
this
moment,
I
realize
that
an
outright
ban
may
not
be
politically
feasible.
That
said,
this
ordinance
and
this
hearing
and
any
subsequent
working
group
must
come
as
close
to
banning
these
weapons
as
possible.
P
What
this
body
ultimately
puts
forward
is
only
valuable
if
it
is
much
stronger
than
it
currently
is.
The
use
of
chemical
agents,
which
can
cause
physical
injury,
permanent
disability
and
even
death,
as
dr
haar
has
explained
at
length,
is
often
excessive,
indiscriminate
and
a
violation
of
civil
and
human
rights.
Tear
gas,
as
many
have
said,
has
been
outlawed
as
a
method
of
warfare
on
battlefields,
but
those
prohibitions
have
not
extended
to
domestic
law
enforcement.
P
Unfortunately,
law
enforcement
personnel
used
tear
gas
all
too
often
against
peaceful
crowds,
and
I
appreciate
the
representation
by
superintendent
ridge
and
deputy
superintendent
mcgoldrick
about
the
limited
use
in
in
boston.
We
have
seen
the
indiscriminate
deployment
and
use
of
chemical
agents
and
kinetic
weapons
in
this
country
for
decades,
but
we
should
not
be
so
naive
as
to
believe
that
they
have
been
used
without
controversy
or
in
furtherance
of
maintaining
dominant
culture
and
the
status
quo.
P
The
the
use
of
these
weapons
in
theaters
of
war
led
to
their
ultimate
exclusion,
and
so
we
should
similarly
seek
to
exclude
them
in
domestic
settings.
The
the
so-called
lease
less
than
lethal
weapons
do
not
account
for
the
significant
injuries
that
have
accompanied
their
use.
We
only
need
harken
back
to
bloody
sunday
as
hundreds
of
peaceful
protesters
attempted
to
march
from
selma
to
montgomery
and
alabama
to
demand
the
promise
of
full
citizenship
for
black
people.
P
P
The
use
of
tear
gas
and
other
chemical
irritants
are
an
indicator
of
how
much
further
we
have
to
go
as
a
nation.
Similarly,
the
use
of
kinetic
projectile
impact
weapons
should
be
banned.
We
need
to
look
no
further
than
the
city's
own
fateful
history.
When
jubilant
red
sox
fans
took
to
the
streets
to
celebrate
a
long
desired
victory
only
to
have
the
night
come
to
a
violent
and
deadly
end.
P
The
life
of
victoria
snellgrove,
whose
counselor
arroyo
has
also
offered
up
her
memory,
should
serve
as
a
stark
reminder
of
the
inaccuracy
of
the
term
less
than
lethal,
whether
seeking
to
express
joy
or
demanding
accountability,
we
cannot
allow
crowd
control
weaponry
that
does
anything
but
control
a
crowd,
any
weapon
that
indiscriminately
impacts
those
who
are
involved
in
disruption,
as
well
as
those
exercising
constitutionally
protected
activity,
should
not
be
allowed
or
used
within
this
city
by
its
law
enforcement
officers
or
any
law
enforcement
officer
within
the
city's
boundaries.
P
P
There
is
a
likelihood
of
irreparable
injury,
and
so
with
that,
I
strongly
encourage
this
body
to
not
only
pass
this
ordinance
but
to
work
strenuously
to
strengthen
the
ordinance
so
that
we
have
the
greatest
protections
for
the
residents
of
the
city
and
anyone
who
is
within
its
bounds
and
also
the
protect
the
protection
of
the
principles
embodied
within
the
first
amendment.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
very
much
we're
going
to
start
going
through,
starting
with
the
sponsors
of
questions
of
the
counselors
for
the
guest
speakers.
If
I
know
some
of
you
mentioned
each
other's
names
and
whatnot,
I
don't
know
if
you
have
the
blue
button
on
your
screens,
but
if
you,
if
you
feel
the
need
to
counter
something
or
have
a
question
for
another
panelist,
please
let
me
know
I'm
going
to
do
my
best
to
traffic
control.
A
This
hearing,
which
is
a,
I
think,
a
very
robust
intent,
and
it's
going
to
be
a
very
robust
hearing.
It's
all
I'm
saying
and
I'm
trying
to
traffic
control
this
as
much
as
possible.
So
please
raise
blue
hands
and
we're
gonna
go
ahead
and
start
with
our
lead
sponsors.
It's
1203
right
now
and
I
would
like
to
make
sure
that
I've
seen
you
no
need
for
the
counselors
to
raise
the
hands
I'm
going
to
go
in
order
of
arrival.
This
the
blue
hands
is
for
the
panelists.
A
Excuse
me
the
the
guest
speakers.
I'm
gonna
try
my
best
to
get
through
this
as
soon
as
possible
and
there
are
not
a
significant
number,
but
there
are
people
who
do
have
questions
in
public
testimony.
So
I
would
like
to
my
counselors
to
to
do
their
best
to
keep
this
to.
Maybe
one
round
go
through,
we
can
go
to
public.
A
Testimony
is
that,
okay
with
the
lead
sponsors
and
then
we
can
go
back
to
counselors,
okay,
then
so,
let's
get
started
no
more
than
five
minutes
counselors
and
even
then
try
and
keep
it
conservative,
knowing
that
people
are
waiting
to
speak
counselor
arroyo.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
so
I
just
want
to
be
clear
for
everybody
on
what
this
does,
because
I
was
hearing
a
lot
about
banning
and
taking
it
from
officers
hands.
This
isn't
a
ban.
So,
first
and
foremost,
though
I
know
that
there's
a
lot
of
pressure-
and
I
agree
with
it
to
ban
weapons
like
this-
that
there's
no
ban
here.
What
this
is
a
restriction,
it
would
require
that
bpd
give
warnings
to
the
crowd.
C
I
would
codify
something
that,
if
it's
not
in
practice
should
be
in
practice,
is
that
bpd
would
give
a
warning
to
the
crowd
before
they
use
any
kind
of
chemical
control
agent
or
kinetic
impact
weapon
that
they
would
then
give
time
for
the
crowd
to
disperse
specifically
two
minutes
before
doing
so,
and
that
they
would
have
to
witness
acts
of
violence
and
or
property
destruction
before
authorizing
that,
and
that,
as
vpd
has
said,
is
already,
their
policy
would
codify
having
only
the
upper
echelon
of
bpd
administration
have
the
ability
to
okay
the
use
of
a
weapon
that
is
indiscriminate.
C
That
impacts
entire
groups
of
people
that
can
hurt
and
has
hurt
individuals
who
are
not
the
essential
target
or
the
reason
for
their
usage,
and
that
can
take
lives,
and
so
I
think
those
are
appropriate
measures.
This
is
not
a
ban
just
to
be
clear.
Nobody
is
taking
it
away
from
bpd.
C
It's
simply
codifying
language
that
protects
constituencies
and
actually
serves
to
de-escalate,
give
an
opportunity
for
de-escalation
to
truly
take
place,
and
hopefully,
by
doing
so
protect
lives
of
both
officers
and
our
our
constituents,
and
so
with
that,
just
so
everybody
understands
what's
on
the
table?
That's
that's
what
we're
talking
about
and
just
for
some
questions
do
we
have
dr
ahar
still
here.
C
Thank
you.
I
just
wanna
one
thing
that
I
saw
recently
and
I'm
very
interested
in
it
came
up
during
the
recent
situations:
tear
gas
and
other
chemical
crowd
control
agents.
It
appears,
has
a
impact
on
women's
menstrual
health
and
reproductive
health.
Is
that
something
that
we've
seen
in
data
or
science
or
I've
seen
a
couple
articles
on
it
that
there
there's
been
situations
where
it's
actually
an
impact
on
menstrual
health?
But
I'm
trying
to
get
a
better
idea
as
to
whether
or
not
that's
something
that
that
we
have
any
data
or
science
on.
H
That's
a
very
good
question:
it
has
been
coming
up
a
lot.
Actually,
I
think
it's
really
important
for
women
to
report
their
experiences
and
for
us
to
promote
those
voices,
but
from
the
medical
side.
There's
actually
no
evidence
that
that
these
findings,
you
know
that
that
tear
gas
disrupts
menstrual
cycles
or
causes
miscarriages
I'd
be
a
little
bit
afraid
of
intimidating
women
away
from
protesting.
C
I
respect
that
so
one
other
question
for
you
specifically.
I've
spoken
to
doctors
about
this
and
what
they
said
is
different.
Chemicals
can
have
different
reactions
when
medics
try
to
treat
folks
with
medicine
or
trying
to
figure
out
what
exactly
the
chemical
is.
That
they're
they're
having
an
issue
with
part
of
this
ordinance
would
require
the
boston
police
department
in
their
announcement
that
they're
going
to
use
these
weapons
to
state.
C
Specifically
what
they're
going
to
use
is
there
a
medical,
beneficial
practice
for
that
part
where
they
say
this
is
the
chemical
we're
going
to
use?
This
is
the
weapon.
H
Yes,
actually,
as
an
er
doctor,
I
can
tell
you
very
clearly
that
that
would
be
hugely
beneficial.
Just
as
an
example.
Pepper
spray
is
typically
an
oil
soluble
compound.
So
if
I
was
a
doctor
trying
to
get
rid
of
it,
I
would
be
more
likely
to
use
soap
and
water,
whereas
tear
gas
is
water,
soluble
like
cs
or
cn
and
and
just
fresh
air
and
lots
of
wind,
and
maybe
some
water
would
help
as
well.
H
Phr
has
documented
so
physicians
for
human
rights,
which
we've
been
working
on
this
for
for
decades
now,
has
documented
that
there's
also
newer
chemicals
in,
in
addition
to
cs
like
the
heavier
silicated
versions,
and
so
it
would
be
really
important
to
understand
if
these
newer
versions
are
being
used
more
and
more
often
because
they
tend
to
last
longer-
and
someone
mentioned
about
the
environmental
impact.
H
C
Thank
you
so
much,
and
then
I
one
last
question.
If
I
have
the
time
for
the
aclu
or
or
jeff
whichever
one
of
you
can
answer
this,
but
I'm
directing
it
to
the
aclu,
have
you
had
documented
any
kind
of
documented
data
in
terms
of
the
suppressive
effect
that
the
fear
of
tear
gas
or
kinematic
impact
projectiles
have
had
on
say,
lawful,
assembly
or
folks
who
who
worry.
D
C
P
So
so
the
you
know
the
the
no
is
the
is
the
short
answer.
There
are
certainly
folks
who
have
reached
out
to
us
expressing
concerns
about
how
to
organize
an
event,
and
I
don't
have
an
accurate
account
of
how
many
instances
that
would
be.
I
could
probably
run
through
our
intake
and
find
out
if
we
have
numbers
on
how
many
people
have
called
to
inquire
and
raise
concerns
about
those.
P
Yes,
the
you
know,
even
in
regards
to
the
may
31st
event,
I
had
occasion
to
speak
to
some
of
the
young
people
who
organized-
and
that
was
one
of
the
concerns
that
was
discussed
and
raised
in
particular,
concern
around
engagement
with
the
proactive
engagement
with
the
police
because
of
concerns
related
to
how
they
will
be
deployed.
O
Thank
you.
We've
done.
The
national
lawyer
still
does
a
lot
of
training
with
activist
groups
about
their
rights,
their
legal
rights
to
protest,
and
we've
received
numerous
concerns
about
what
will
happen
to
them.
Following
what
happened
on
may
29th
and
may
31st
in
boston
people
being
particularly
concerned
about
doing
any
kind
of
demonstration
out
in
public
and
what
kind
of
reaction
they
will
get
from
the
police
as
a
direct
result
of
the
use
of
these
weapons
on
may
29th
and
may
31st.
A
Thank
you
so,
as
the
time
is
up,
counselor
roy,
I'm
gonna,
okay,
counselor
campbell.
B
Thank
you,
councilor
edwards,
and
thank
you
again
to
the
panelists
and
and
thank
you
council
royal
for
stressing
the
fact
that
this
is
not
an
absolute
band
and
I
respect
rasan
and
aclu's
position
that
that
is.
I
know,
council
roy
and
I
have
spoken
about
this-
that's
where
we
want
to
go
and
get
to
this
is,
as
jeffrey
has
spoken
to
what
is
not
only
a
restriction
but
a
quite
reasonable
restriction,
and
so
I
guess
I
want
to
hear
first
from
the
police
department
and
thank
you
guys
for
your
testimony.
B
B
I
I'm
curious
to
know
specifically
what
is
the
processing
protocol
and
is
that
documented
somewhere
and
if
so,
would
can
we
get
a
copy
of
that
through
the
chair,
but
would
love
to
hear
more
around
the
specifics
in
terms
of
process
and
protocol,
because
I
think,
based
on
what
we've
drafted,
that
the
ordinance
just
codifies
the
existing
practice
of
the
department,
which
of
course
is
also,
I
think,
very
reasonable.
B
The
ordinance
is
very
reasonable
because
of
that-
and
this
is
my
son
aidan-
who
will
be
with
me
for
the
rest
of
this
so
say
hello.
Thank
you,
councilor
edwards
and
thank
you
to
the
police
department.
I
might
have
another
question
or
two
depending
on
how
long
it
takes
the
department
to
respond.
A
Thank
you
to
either
one
of
the
officers.
L
Hi,
thank
you
so
in
regards
to
I
I
I
think
I
seem
to
be
getting
lost
in
in
in
in
in
the
connotation
of
a
peaceful
demonstration
and
a
riot.
We,
we
don't
use
these
these
weapons
for
any
type
of
peaceful
demonstration
and
we
haven't.
L
L
Then
then,
you
know
it's
probably
it's
probably
a
good
time
to
leave,
because
that's
no
longer
a
peaceful
demonstration-
and
I
I
I
don't
know
who
would
who
would
argue
that
it
still
is
when
we
say
that
they're
used
indiscriminately
when
you're
being
attacked
and
and
and
we
were
being
attacked
that
that
that
night,
then
then
the
fact
that
that
you
know
you
know,
I
know,
council
arroyo's
talking
about
give
them
a
two
minute
warning,
give
them
this
and
that
I
I
what
once
once
once
it
escalates
into
a
riot
and
and
and
we
have
to
use
those
in
those
devices
that
we
have,
then
you
know
I
I
don't
I
don't
see.
L
I
don't
see
the
need
that
that
that
we
we
need
to
stop
putting
restrictions
on
it
because
in
the
city
of
boston,
we're
not
we're
not
using
those.
Unless
we
have
a
riot
situation
and
it's
not
it's
not
ever
used
for
for
a
lawful
demonstration
and
protest
when
you
start
throwing
m80s
and
and
and
frozen
water
bottles
and
rocks
and
bricks
at
the
police,
it's
no
longer
a
peaceful
demonstration.
B
Just
for
the
I
know
I
only
have
like,
I
don't
know
three
minutes,
so
I
hear
you
with
respect
to
the
distinction
between
the
rioters
and
protesters.
I
guess
what
would
be
helpful
to
to
us
is
one.
It
sounds
like
the
department
is
not
currently
in
favor
of
the
ordinances
drafted,
because
that
that
hasn't
been
made
crystal
clear,
which
would
be
helpful
and
then
the
second
is.
B
What
currently
is
the
practice?
Is
there
warnings
that
are
given
out
if
you
are
seeing
something
on
the
ground
that
is
becoming
turning
it
from
a
peaceful
protest
to
something
more
violent?
Or
you
know
what
is
the
practice
and
protocol
that
you,
the
commissioner
and
the
department
actually
go
through
before
you
authorize
use
of
these
weapons?
I
guess
more
clarity
on
that
would
be
helpful,
so.
L
When,
when
when
feasible,
one
is
given,
however,
it's
it's
it
in
all
circumstances,
we
can't
say
that
we're
able
to
give
a
warning
when
somebody
is
under
direct
attack.
The
feasibility
of
giving
a
warning
is
is
is
is
not
is
not
it's
not
gonna
happen
because
they're
being
attacked
right
then,
so
you
can't
say
you
know
we'll
let
you
attack
us
for
two
minutes
and
then
we're
gonna,
I'm
gonna
retaliate
or
or
respond.
Rather,
this
is
the
appropriate
word,
but
I
I
I
just
don't
see.
L
I
don't
see
the
the
need
to
to
say
that
no
you've
got
to
get
have
a
give.
A
two-minute
warning.
You
know
right
now,
when
that
stuff
is
is,
is
is
being
observed
and
we
we
we've.
When
we
have
these
events,
we've
got
numerous
members
of
the
command
staff
that
they're
out
there
that
they're
observing
this
stuff.
You
know
between
superintendents
deputy
attendance
captains,
you
know,
for
the
most
part,
our
policy
and
protocol
is
that
that
it
has
to
be.
L
It
has
to
be
at
that
level
before
we
disperse
a
crowd.
However,
when
you're
under
attack,
then
then
then
the
fact
that
you
didn't
get
permission
to
to
use
something
because
you're
you're
being
and
when
I
say
use
it
would
be,
it
would
be
oc
spray
in
particular,
which
is
you
know.
A
part
of
part
of
this
being
on
on
chemical
munitions.
Are
restrictions
is,
is,
is,
is
not
feasible
so
right
now
you
can.
L
If,
if
somebody's
under
attack
direct
attack,
they
can,
they
can
use
oc
spray
if
they,
if
they
were
to
use
and-
and
the
only
thing
that
we
have
in
our
inventory-
is
the
cs
gas.
If
they
use
cs
gas,
then
they
have
to
get
permission
that
has
to
be
given
from
from
the
police,
commission
or
his
designee,
but
the
use
of
oc
on
sprays
everyday
occurrence.
When
someone
someone
is
being
attacked,
they
do
have
the
right
to
use
that.
B
Is
that
you
know,
based
on
your
your
chesmar
superintendent?
Oh
I'm
sorry
say
hello.
Based
on
your
testimony
in
the
deputies,
you
know.
Clearly,
everyone
has
a
different
way
in
which
they
respond.
Some
through
communication,
some
through
other
other
processes,
and
so
the
fact
that
there
isn't
something
that
is
consistent
or
standard
practice
is,
is
a
little
concerning,
and
so
the
goal
is
to
try
to
get
to
a
place
where
there's
something
in
place.
B
Even
after
you
guys
leave
the
department
where
there's
a
common
understanding
as
to
when
these
will
be
used,
how
they
will
be
used.
Who
has
the
power
to
authorize
that
in
what
circumstances?
B
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
council
edwards.
I
just
wanted
to
follow
up
with
superintendent
ridge.
I
know
you
mentioned
that
during
the
sunday
evening
I
think
was:
may
31st
boston
police
officers
were
subjected
to
cs
gas
peppa
spray
in
dynamite
is
that
is
that
accurate,
supernova.
L
Yeah
dynamites
or
whatever
type
of
explosives
we
we
currently
have
at
least
two
officers
that
I'm
aware
of
that
that
have
been
out
injured
since
then,
because
they
literally
had
an
explosive
device
thrown
at
them
and
detonated
right
right,
basically
right
in
their
face,
and
if
they
didn't
have
protective
gear
on,
they
certainly
would
have
lost
lost
sight.
Both
of
those
officers
are
currently
out
injured
in
in
their
return.
Yeah,
and
one
in
particular,
is
in
doubt
because
of.
D
L
We
had
we
had
numerous
injuries
in
numerous
degrees.
There
were
over
20
offices,
there
were
there
were
that
were
hurt,
and
I
believe
I
think
we
have
six
to
eight
that
are
still
currently
out
injured
from
broken
bones
to,
like,
I
said,
explosives
going
off
right,
right,
right,
basically
right
next
to
their
their.
D
Head,
you
know,
I'm
all
like
all
my
colleagues
for
peaceful
protesting,
but
what
we
witnessed
on
that
sunday
evening.
D
You
know
the
most
people
that
were
protesting
were
protesting
peacefully,
but
what
we
also
witnessed
was
the
intentional
violence
against
the
boston
police
at
times
into
into
for
anyone
to
use
dynamite
or
pepper
spray
or
cs
gas,
so
superintendent,
if,
if,
if
you
didn't,
have
the
opportunity
to
respond
with
the
proper,
with
the
proper
response
in
terms
of
tools
and
your
toolbox,
what
what
could
you
do
if
you,
if
this
happened
again
and
you
weren't
able
to
if
we
were
able,
if
we
restricted
you
on
what
you
could
do.
L
Well,
when
we
start
the
more
tools
we
take
away,
the
the
less
options
we
have
you
know
to
to
to
to
just
put
our
offices
out
in
the
street,
with
a
with
a
baton
in
in
a
service
weapon
leaves
leaves
very
limited
ability
to
to
to
disperse
a
riot
crowd.
L
And
again,
I
stress
the
fact
that
this
was
this
was
a
crowd
that
was,
there
was
rioting.
You
know,
you
know,
setting
fires
looting,
damaging
property.
This
was
a
rioting
crowd
and
and
the
more
the
more
tools
that
you
take
away,
the
less
the
less
options
we
have.
You
know
to
go
back
to
the
to
the
baton
and
and
and
use
of
a
you
know.
L
A
firearm
is
is,
is
very,
is
very
disenchanting
to
to
our
people
on
the
street
that
they
don't
have
the
proper
tools
or
these
restrictions
that
will
be
put
on
them
to
think
that
everyone
every
time
that
they
they
use
something
they're
gonna,
be
second
guessed.
If
you
will
that
that
you
know
you
really
weren't
under
attack,
you
really,
there
really
was
no
need
for
that.
L
It's
kind
of
is,
like
I
say,
is
disenharmoning
to
the
to
the
men
and
women
of
the
boston
police
department,
who
are
out
there
every
day
making
sure
that
everyone's
first
amendment
right
is
is
is
adhered
to.
You
know
we,
we
don't
have
the
luxury
of
taking
sides.
You
know
to
to
to
come
down
on
on
either
side
of
any
political
issue.
L
You
know
we're
there
to
do
our
job
and
our
job
is
to
to
make
sure
that
everyone
has
the
right
to
peacefully
demonstrate-
and
we've
done
that
for
many
many
many
years
without
without
any
any
instances
or
need
for
any
type
of
restrictions.
A
Thank
you,
counselor
braden,.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
just
had
a
question
for
dr
dr
howard,
if
she's
still
with
us
in
terms
of
the
long-term
injury,
more
morbidity
from
injuries
to
from
ballistic
weapons
used
for
in
riot
control,
is
there
any
any
record
of
long-term
injury
and
disability
so.
H
In
our
systematic
reviews
published
with
phr
in
2017,
we
found
293
people
who
were
had
permanent
disabilities
secondary
to
the
projectiles
like
foam
rounds,
rubber
bullets
that
sort
of
thing
the
majority
of
those
are
because
of
head
injuries
and
eye
injuries,
but
also
loss
of
limbs
and
amputations
and
neurovascular
injuries
as
well
I'll
quickly.
Just
refer
you,
we
wrote
a
letter
to
the
boston
city
council
that
I
think
is
in
the
record,
outlining
our
studies
and
the
injuries
that
you
can
always
refer
to
afterwards
as
well.
H
E
You
and
then
I
also
had
a
question
for
superintendent
superintendent
ridge.
Are
your
officers
trained
in
the
use
of
rubber
and
appropriate
firing
methods
for
rubber
plastic
bullets,
whatever
they're
called
these
days
so.
L
So
we
we
we
have,
we
have
sponge
rounds
that
are
are
deployable
that
we
have
in
our
inventory,
and
the
sponge
rounds
are
only
authorized
for
use
by
our
our
specifically
trained
officers.
So
there's
there's
a
very
limited
amount
of
officers
that
have
the
the
ability
to
to
use
the
sponge
rounds.
In
particular,
we
have
swat
people
and
they
they
go
through.
They
go
through
training.
The
the
rank
and
file
officers
on
the
street.
Don't
have
don't
have
those
weapons
and
they
don't
and
they
don't.
L
E
L
The
sponge
around
is
like
you
know,
we
call
it
a
target
specific
weapon,
so
they're,
particularly
aimed
at
at
some
person
who
is
doing
something
so
egregious
that
most
most
likely
would
actually
escalate,
or
in
in
in,
would
probably
justify
the
use
of
of
deadly
force.
L
When
you
have
someone
throwing
a
a
a
well
stick,
a
dynamite
or
a
explosive
device,
so
it's
it's
it's
center
of
mass
is
is
what
is
what
they
they're
they're
trained
to
hit,
and
then
it's
a
kinetic
impact
weapon
that
that
that,
because
it's
the
sponge
round
it
it
kind
of
disperses.
L
Again
it's
it's
a
it's.
It's
it's
less
lethal,
I'm
not
gonna!
You
know.
We've
we've
heard,
we've
heard
the
doctor,
and-
and
I
I
don't
dispute
that
that
it
can
be
lethal
at
certain
circumstances,
but
the
situations
that
that
we've
used
them
in
it's
it's.
L
It
is
actually
escalated
into
the
into
the
realm
of
of
of
the
ability
to
use
lethal
force.
When
somebody's
throwing.
You
know,
as
you
said,
the
stick
of
dynamite
are
explosive
at
our
offices.
J
F
It
is
the
thoughtful
and
thorough
presentations
and
conversation
to
date
to
to
this
time
and
really
understand
just
this
morning
alone.
I
have
a
better
understanding,
of
course,
still
questions
remaining
and
that's
what
we're
here
for
now
is
there.
Has
the
rules
for
superintendent
rich?
Has
the
rules
of
engagement?
Is
that
posted
somewhere
or
is
that
a
shareable
document.
L
I
it's
been
posted,
it's
part
of
our
operational
plan,
which
is
law
enforcement
sensitive.
That
said,
you
know
the
commissioner
would
have
to
be
consulted
on
on
whether
he's
gonna
he's
gonna
release
that
so,
but
it
is
it
is.
It
is
disseminated
to
our
officers
in
the
form
of
the
operational
plan,
what
what
the
rules
of
engagement
are.
F
Those
based
on
are
those
incidents
specific
or
event
specific.
L
They're,
it's
it's.
I
would
not
say
it's
event,
specific
it
it's
it's
an
evolved
document.
You
know
that
that
has
been.
I
guess,
every
time
that
we
have
some
type
of
event.
We
we
we
constantly
tweak
our
operations
plans
and
same
thing.
We
kind
of
tweak
our
rules
of
engagement
to
to
to
include
you
know
the
use
of
chemical
munitions,
whether
whether
whether
it's
it's
it
pretty
much
follows
our
our
our
rules
on
our
rules
and
regulations
that
there
are
available.
L
In
particular,
you
know
we
we
have
a
rule
for
for
less
lethal.
We
have
a
rule
for
non-lethal
use
of
force.
We
also
how.
F
Do
you
for
different
events
and
thinking
back
to
the
may
31st
event,
which
a
number
of
my
colleagues
have
said,
and
I've
said
you
know
the
the
earlier
rally
and
protests
in
march
were
incredibly
peaceful
and
beautiful.
I
attended
most
of
that
day's
events.
I
didn't
stay
until
the
evening
when
things
took
a
a
wild
change
of
of
there
was
a
change
in
sort
of
what
happened
over
the
day,
how
or
over
the
course
of
the
evening.
F
How
do
you
as
a
department
and
you
as
superintendent,
prepare
for
that
event
and
make
determinations
on
what
being
prepared
means.
L
A
lot
of
it
has
to
do
with,
with
with
past
history,
whether
we
have
a
past
history
with
with
a
particular
group
what
we
can
expect.
Normally,
when
we
have
a
a
demonstration
like
I
use.
If
we
go
back
to
the
woman's
march
a
few
years
back,
when
we
had
well
over
a
hundred
thousand
people
there,
they
were
all
and
they
were
all
there
for
the
same
reason.
L
So
we
didn't
have,
we
didn't
have
opposing
groups
if
you
will,
and
sometimes
that's
what
we
look
at
like
what
what
what
what
what
what's
gonna?
What's
gonna
happen
when,
when
this
amount
of
people,
if
a
hundred
thousand
people
come
out
and
they're
all
for
the
same
thing,
are
we
going
to
have
any
issues
or
if
we've
got,
we've
got
100
people
in
in
in
100
people
and
they
have
diametrically
opposing
views?
L
What
is
the
dynamic
going
to
be
that?
What
would
that
be?
And
we
get
that
through
intelligence?
You
know
we,
we
monitor
how
many
people
are
coming
so
that
we
can
kind
of
decide
like
what
we're
gonna
we're
gonna
have
for
staffing.
So
you
know
we,
we
kind
of
look
at
a
number
of
different
factors
that
we
get
from
intelligence
from
from
the
history
of
what
we
have
we've
had
with
these
groups.
F
F
Do
we
have
any
data
around
injuries
to
both
civilians
and
police
officers,
because
I'm
obviously
concerned
about
any
civilian
that
has
been
injured
and
also
want
to
make
sure
that
our
officers
have
the
protection
in
our
other
first
responders,
because
I
do
know,
boston,
fire
and
ems
were
also
on
the
scene.
That
day
that
evening,
do
we
have
information
or
data
around
the
injuries
sustained
by
both
civilian
and
first
responders.
L
I
do
not
have
that
readily
available
as
far
as
injuries
to
to
to
to
to
to
offices
yeah.
We
certainly
have
that,
and
it
was.
It
was
well
over
20
that
that
were
that
were
hurt
in
in
regards
to
the
civilian
population.
I
do
not
have
those
those
figures
for
your
council.
F
Okay,
so
I
think
that's
I'm
probably
hitting
up
against
my
time.
I
am
interested
in
the
rules
of
engagement
piece
and
how
we
are.
You
know
how
we're
making
those
decisions
appreciate.
The
explanation
today
and
sort
of
can
understand
the
logic
behind
it,
but
would
like
to
see
what
that
official
protocol
is
and
the
official
action
around
rules
of
engagement.
That's
it
for
me
this
round,
madam
chair,
thank
you
and
thank
you
to
the
presentations
by
all
of
the
panelists
today.
A
I
Thank
you
because
I
I'm
a
little
bit
short
on
time.
Just
a
quick
question,
I'm
just
curious.
This
is
for
bpd.
Are
we
currently
tracking
incidences
with
chemical
agents
or
projectiles
that
are
used,
and
if
so,
is
this
information
available
public?
Is
there
like
a
database?
Is
there
like
a
dashboard
where
we
can
see
and
keep
track
of
this
publicly.
L
I
will
have
to
get
back
to
you
on
where
it's
kept
do
do
we
do
we
keep
statistics
on
use
of
force,
absolutely
we
do
and
then
and
that
that
that
that
is
public
when
you're
asking
specifically
like
how
many
I
I
don't,
I
don't
have
that
information
available,
but
we
we
do.
We
absolutely
track
all
uses
of
force,
whether
it's,
whether
it's
you
know
any
type
of
chemical,
diminishing,
oc
spray,
you
know
hands-on
or
or
whatever
we
have
to
do.
That's
all.
I
Yeah,
it
would
be
helpful
to
know
specifically
around
the
injuries,
so
at
some
point
it
would
just
a
recommendation.
I'm
curious
in
terms
of
other
tactics.
I
know
conflict
resolution
and
de-escalation,
not
sure
what
other
tactics
are
employed
before
we
go
to
this
route.
I
L
So
we
we,
we
have
our
supervisors
and
we
we
we
train
them
when,
when
they're
going
through
supervisor
school
is,
is
to
engage
with
any
and
all
sides
of
any
type
of
peaceful
demonstrations,
so
that
we
do
have
a
dialogue
that
we
are
talking
to
them,
that
we
have
a
go-to
person.
L
If
you
will,
if
there's
any
issues,
and
they
have
specifically
a
supervisor-
would
be
the
the
intermediary
for
for
any
issues
that
they
they
were
to
have,
and
we
we
do
this
rather
rather
very
successfully
on
through,
through
hundreds
and
hundreds
of
of
public
demonstrations,
where
we,
why
identify
some
of
the
leaders,
some
of
the
organizers
we
speak
to
them.
You
know
we
go
so
you
know
ask
I
ask
them
what
what
is?
What
is
the
route?
L
Where
do
you
want
to
go,
and
then
you
know
we
we
we
do
our
best
to
assist
them
with
with
traffic
control,
to
make
it
safe
for
everyone,
but
yeah
they
they
they
are
trained
in
to
to
do
that
to
again
come
up
with
make
a
dialogue
so
that
you
have
you
have
someone
to
talk
to.
I
And
I'm
curious
just
in
terms
of
when
we're
deploying
officers
to
these
scenes.
Are
we
looking
at
the
rates
of
either
aggression
or
or
officers
that
have
been
known
to
have
anger
management
issues
like
what
type
of
prevention
or
or
or
framework,
are
we
looking
before
we
deploy,
because
I'm
thinking
that
oftentimes
you
know
if
there
are
any
issues
around
anger
management
that
these
things
may
escalate
further
just
curious.
Well,.
L
I'm
not
sure
how
to
answer
that,
but
I'll
just
tell
you
that
that
every
officer
is
is
put
into
a
squad
and
that
squad
is
assigned
a
supervisor
either
a
sergeant,
a
lieutenant
and
it's
that
supervisor's
job
and
they
are
trained
to
to
to
to
watch
out
for
the
for
their
people
in
their
squad.
Particularly,
you
know
we
train
them.
L
If
you
know,
if
you've
got
a
an
officer
on
the
line,
whether
with
history
or
not
aside,
you
know
you,
you
might
have
an
officer,
that's
being
specifically
targeted
and
being
taunted
and
in
the
supervisors
are
watching
those
offices
they're
looking
to
see
what's
going
on
and
they
they
do
and
have
the
authority
to
pull
that
person
off
the
line.
If
things
start
to
be
escalating
with
that,
that
particular
officer
so
they'll
pull
them
back.
I
Then
this
is
done
specifically
in
in
regards
to
the
ordinance
under
section
d,
part
four:
what
is
the
current
discipline
system
for
excessive
use
of
force?
How
is
that
determined
does
bpd
plan
to
change
their
current
discipline
system
in
accordance
with
this
ordinance.
L
And
I
I'd
have
to
defer
to
the
commissioner
on
on
that
in
regards
to
any
any
any
type
of
changes
and
then.
I
Okay
and
then
in
the
ordinance
under
exception,
it
gives
the
serving
supervisor
power
in
response
to
specific
acts
of
violence.
What
specific
acts
of
violence
are
we
talking
about,
and
how
is
that
categorization
being
communicated
to
the
public
in
a
sense
of
what
is
considered
an
act
of
violence?
I
think
communication
usually
is
what
I
feel
where
we
can
strengthen
our
efforts,
because
sometimes
what
you
all
understand
and
believe
as
acts
of
violence
is
going
to
be
different
than
the
everyday
folks.
I
So
I'm
just
curious
about
what
what
active
violence
looks
like
how's
that
well,
I
would
say.
E
A
L
Very
good,
I'm
just
what's
an
act
of
violence,
it
would
escalate
to
a
physical
assault.
You
know,
name-calling
would
not
would
not
escalate
into
an
act
of
violence,
but
what
a
physical
assault
or
against
either
either
an
officer
or
or
someone
else
would
would
constitute
an
act
of
violence.
I
think
that's
that's
pretty
pretty
self-evident.
If
you,
if
you
go
to
punch
someone
or
throw
something
at
someone,
then
that
that's
that's
an
act
of
violence.
There.
I
A
You
councillor
mejia
councillor,
flaherty,.
K
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
and
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
obviously,
to
to
the
superintendent.
I
know
the
commission
is
not
on
but
he's
doing
a
great
job,
along
with
the
men
and
women
of
boston
police
department,
and
it
was
helpful
to
kind
of
run
through.
So
what
some
of
the
protocols
are,
as
well
as
the
training
and
experience
of
superintendent
and
his
team
as
well.
So
I
guess
my
perspective
is
everything's,
probably
a
balance.
K
There's,
there's
peace,
peaceful
protest
and
and
there's
demonstrations
and
we've
got
a
lot
of
parades
in
our
city,
and
you
know,
there's
obviously
a
lot
of
pride
in
our
neighborhoods
in
boston's
diversity,
and
then
there
are
times
when
folks
cross
over
the
line
and
that
it
becomes
unpeaceful
things
get
a
little
chaotic
and
then
like
what
you
guys
have
experienced
lately
with
having
bricks
thrown
at
you
in
rocks
and
feces
and
bottles
of
urine
etcetera.
K
So
I
guess
at
what
point
is
a
decision
made
when
to
sort
of
take
a
different
type
of
action,
as
opposed
to
sort
of
standing
down,
particularly
in
instances
where
you're
out
me
and
or
the
crowd
is
so
big
and
it
starts
to
turn
violent.
So
I
I
think,
we're
all
on
the
same
page
with
peaceful
demonstrations.
Quite
frankly,
that's
not
what
we
saw
recently
in
our
city.
Let's
take
a
walk
down
newbury
street
and
that
kind
of
sums
it
up,
but
in
any
event
they
just
would
get.
K
I
want
to
get
a
perspective
from
from
the
superintendent
and
his
team
as
to
sort
of
what
goes
in
what
what's
the
process
that
goes
into
when
sort
of
a
different
tactic
is
is,
is
undertaken.
L
Well,
I
would
say
a
different
tactic
being
undertaken
is
is
when
when,
when,
when
it
starts
to
escalate
into
a
situation
where,
if
you
don't
take
action,
you're
going
to
lose
control
you're
going
to
lose
control
of
of
of
of
the
situation,
so
so
you
would
need
to
escalate.
That
is
there
a
particular
trigger
point.
You
know
if
one
fire
gets
set,
it's
okay!
If
two
fires
get
set
that
that
triggers
this,
that
that's
that's,
that's
not
what
happens.
L
I
mean
we
take
in
totality
of
the
circumstances
of
what's
going
on
there
and
if
and
if
we
don't
take
action,
what
what
more
will
escalate
or
what
is
the
potential
for
it
to
escalate
and
what
what
damage
damages
could
be
cause?
You
know,
so
it's
it's!
You
know
you
weigh
the
risks
on
that
counselor.
So
there's
no!
No
particularly
like
formula
for
it.
L
If
you
will,
however,
you
know
when,
when
it
escalates
to
a
situation
where,
where,
where
where
we've
I'm
about
to
lose
control,
and
the
only
the
only
alternative
is,
is,
is
to
to
to
to
use
some
of
the
other
tools.
If
you
will
in
our
toolbox
and
then
then
then
that's
that's
what
we'll
revert
to
again,
it's
the
totality
of
the
circumstances
of
what
we
have
going
on
at
that
time,
on
weighing
the
risks
of
of
of
of
of
either
taking
in
action
or
or
taking
the
action.
K
And
obviously
it
as
it
it's
just
as
important,
obviously
to
protect
the
citizens
of
boston
and
and
in
our
neighborhoods,
as
it
is
to
make
sure
the
men
and
women
that
serve
on
our
police
department
that
they
get
to
go
home
safely
to
their
loved
ones
as
well.
So
I
know
that
that's
that's
an
important
factor
that
goes
into.
K
I
guess
all
the
decisions
making
sure
that
we're
protecting
public
safety,
which
is
what
you
charge
to
handle
on
behalf
of
the
presidents
in
taxpayers
of
boston,
at
the
same
time,
making
sure
that
the
men
and
women
of
your
department,
you
know,
are
safe
as
well
and
have
the
equipment
that
they
need
to
to
make
sure
that
they
do
go
home
safely.
K
Based
on
your
experience,
superintendent,
what
percentage
of
those
individuals
not,
I
guess
most
recently.
We
know
that
one,
because
I
think
that
was
reported
in
the
paper.
But
overall
you
know
again
whether
we
go
back
to
sort
of
like
the
st
patrick's
day
parade
and
all
the
parades
and
festivals
and
other
protests
that
we've
had
in
this
city.
What
percentage
of
those
that
are
actually
taken
into
custody
are
from
boston.
L
Yeah
again
I
I
it
would
be
anecdotally
for
me,
I
I
don't
have.
I
don't
have
the
specific
numbers
there,
but
there
there's
the
majority
of
those
those
persons
taken
in
into
custody
in
in
in
in
these
demonstrations
that
are
not
city
residents.
L
You
know
I
I
know
just
you
know
in
in
in
past
and
and
again,
and
you
can
look
at
our
history.
We
we
we
tend
not
to
to
make
an
arrest.
We
tend
not
to
make
an
arrest
more
than
more
than
more
than
most
departments.
We
we
shy
away
from
that.
L
K
Gotcha
and
we're
obviously
and
no
department
is
perfect
and
no,
you
know
a
police
officer
is
perfect,
but
I
I
do
have
to
comment
on
on
the
the
dis
in
the
tolerance
that
I've
witnessed
firsthand
in
a
number
of
different
situations
across
the
city
over
the
years.
So
and
they've
been
that's
again,
that's
based
on
the
training
and
the
experience
of
our
offices,
arguably
which
are
the
envy
of
of
cities
across
the
country.
So
I
appreciate
the
work
you're
doing
for
me
again.
K
It's
about
striking
a
balance,
it's
about
recognizing
peaceful
demonstrations.
It's
about
recognizing
you
know
the
parades
and
the
festivals
and
and
tend
to
you
know,
there's
a
difference
when
someone's
a
little
out
of
hand
because
of
inebriation
and
what
have
you
and
then
there's
when
you
cross
the
line,
and
you
start
to
hurl,
you
know,
bricks
and
and
smash
windows
and
destroy
the
cars
and
stop
lighting
fires.
It
just
takes
on
a
total
different
perspective
and
I
think
that
work
that
you
guys
do
and
trying
to
balance.
K
That
is
commendable.
So
again,
no
one's
perfect.
We
should
be
learning
after
every
one
of
our
incidents
in
our
city,
but
again
I
talked
to
government
officials
to
the
contemporaries
across
the
country
and
they
always
talk
about
the
work
that
the
boston
police
department
does
and
they
wish
that
they
had
that
type
of
police
force
in
their
jurisdiction.
So
with
that,
I
appreciate
your
time
and
attention
and
look
forward
to
working
with
you
and
the
colleagues
on
this
to
continue
to
learn
and
to
make
strides
and
move
boston
forward.
A
Thank
you,
I'm
going
to
be
brief,
because
I'm
it's
between
me
and
public
testimony
and
some
questions,
so
I
just
wanted
to
note.
A
So
I
think,
and
we're
going
to
be
clear
and
talk
about
boston
we
need
to
be
while
I
think
other
cities
can
inform
we,
we
have
a
unique
and
different
we're,
not
la
we're,
not
minneapolis
we're,
not
those
cities
in
terms
of
the
policing
or
the
issues.
We
do
have
our
own
issues,
but
I
just
wanted
to
recognize
that
I've
only
heard
of
two
incidents
today.
So
if
there
have,
we
may
hear
from
more
from
public
testimony,
and
I
look
forward
to
hearing
from
that.
A
I
I
firmly
wanted
to
echo
counselor
campbell's
comments.
I
just
believe
with
all
the
people
here
at
this
table:
city
councillors,
attorneys
and
police
officers
that
we
can
together
come
up
with
a
protocol
that
strikes
a
balance
between
the
practical
needs
of
our
officers
and
the
civil
liberties
and
safety
of
those
who
are
protesting.
A
I
know
that
we
can
do
that
and
what
I
hear
from
this
is
not,
and
as
attorney
hall
noted,
this
is
not
a
ban,
but
I
do
think
what's
key
is
and
what
what
I'm
hearing
people
ask
for
is
a
clear
understanding
of
when
you
do
and
don't
use
this.
I'm
hearing
from
the
officers
that
those
lines
blur
very
quickly
and
two
minutes
does
seem
like
a
long
time
to
feel
the
need
to
start
to
use
a
tear
gas
or
a
rubber
bullet
and
then
to
give
a
two
minute
warning.
A
That
seems
very
far
in
distance
to
me.
I
have
organized
protests
myself.
The
first
thing
I
did
was
call
the
local
police
officers
and
tell
them
that
we're
coming
and
where
we
were
going
to
be
so
that
is
a
prop
protocol,
I'm
not
unfamiliar
with,
as
you
mentioned,
the
superintendent
ridge.
So
I've
done
it
and
I've
coordinated
that
and
we
were
right
in
front
of
the
person's
house
and
they
knew
about
that
and
we
were
left
alone.
A
That
being
said,
I
think
it
is
now
as
councillor
campbell
as
councilor
arroyo,
as
my
other
colleagues
have
said,
we're
now
in
a
different
moment
a
different
time
where
people
are
calling
on
us
and
questioning
how
we've
done
business
and
again,
I
want
to
acknowledge
I've
only
heard
today
of
one
incident
in
2004
and
may
31st.
A
That's,
I
think,
a
good
thing
again.
We
may
hear
from
more
people
today,
but
I
think
we
should
walk
away
with
the
goal
of
having
a
standard
understanding
of
what
the
protocol
is,
and
I
think,
without
with
you
there
with
the
officers
there.
We
can
do
that
and
I
think
that's
a
reasonable
request.
Considering
that
this
we
don't
ever
want
to
think
that
we're
scared
of
of
regulation
or
that
we're
scared
of
of
you
know
being
clear
about
how
we
do
things
in
boston.
A
If,
in
anything,
I
want
it
to
be
out
there
for
the
whole
world
to
know
so
that's
all
I
want
to
say
I
did
want
to
ask
either
of
the
police
officers
either
of
the
the
superintendents
when
council
or
when
attorney
foyer,
mentioned
farming
out
some
of
our
materials
to
other
cities.
A
L
So
I
I
am
not
aware
of
us
farming
out
stuff.
I
know
that
we
don't
did.
We
do
not
have
a
huge
in
because
we
don't
we
don't
use
this
stuff.
Very
often
may
31st
was
the
first
time
that
we
have
a.
We
have
a
small
inventory
of
of
of
that
if
those
munitions
again
because
it
expires
so
there's
no
sense
buying
it
when
it
expires
and
we're
not
using
it.
L
I
knew
that
after
that,
we
depleted
all
our
resources
and
we
we
borrowed
stuff
so
that
we
would
have
an
inventory
and
I
would
have
to
look
into
it
for
you,
but
I
believe
some
of
that
was
giving
stuff
back
that
we
borrowed
from
from
other
agencies.
L
Okay,
but
again
that
that
that's
that's
what
I
believe
happened.
I'm
not
you
know,
I'm
not
gonna,
say
that's
exactly
what
happened,
but
I
know
I
know
we
we
we
ran
out
of
our
own
stuff
because
we
don't
have
a
very
big
inventory
of
it
because
we
don't
use
it
and
it
and
it's
got
an
expiration
date,
and
I
know
we
borrowed
stuff
to
put
back
in
our
inventory
and
then
at
some
point.
L
A
Thank
you
at
this
point.
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
public
testimony
or
at
least
allow
for
members
of
the
public.
There
have
been
four
people
who
signed
up
in
advance
to
speak.
I
do
see
other
names,
so
I
will
first
go
through
the
first
four
na
the
names
that
I
see
and
then
other
people
can
raise
their
hand
if
they
are
here
to
testify.
A
Hi
very
well,
and
just
before
you
start
we'll,
so
we
can
get
as
many
people
we'll
probably
keep
public
testimony
two
to
three
minutes.
Q
All
right
that
sounds
great
okay,
so
thank
you
very
much,
members
of
the
council,
madam
chair,
thank
you
for
having
me
today
to
provide
public
testimony
on
this
matter.
So
my
name
is
michael
reese,
I'm
an
engineer
by
trade
and
a
community
activist
and
advocate.
So
I
know
that
we've
all
witnessed
in
person
or
news
media
really
brutal
crowd,
control
tactics
that
have
resulted
in
people
having
lifelong
disabilities.
So
I'm
here
today
in
support
of
the
ordinance
restricting
the
use
of
chemical
crowd,
control
agents
and
kinetic
impact
projectiles.
Q
I
strongly
support
this
for
two
reasons.
First,
as
a
bioengineer
by
profession,
I
have
studied
the
effects
of
chemical
agents
used
in
biological
warfare.
These
are
the
same
chemical
agents
that
are
being
used
here
in
our
cities,
and
the
effects
of
these
chemical
agents
is
not
minor
or
even
moderate,
as
a
deterrent,
the
molecules
disperse
into
the
airmen
to
overwhelm
our
lung
cells
and
chemically
choke
humans.
I
believe
it's
inhumane
to
use
chemical
agents
against
peaceful
protesters
and,
let's
be
clear,
our
neighbors
that
disagree
with
us
politically
are
not
our
enemies.
Q
Q
Q
So
I
want
to
say
we
can't
allow
opportunistic
agents
of
chaos
to
diminish
the
movement
for
human
rights.
We
must
prioritize
de-escalation
training.
I
myself
have
de-escalated
a
person
with
a
gun
that
had
me
in
a
chokehold
and
was
mugging
me.
So
I
know
it's
possible
deadly
force
or
slightly
less
than
deadly
force
is
not
an
acceptable
initial
course
of
action
for
crowd.
Control
and
I'll
close
by
saying
that
I
offer
my
full
support
to
enacting
and
enforcing
this
ordinance.
Thank
you.
A
A
R
Sorry
about
that,
okay,
so
thank
you
so
much
to
the
council
of
madam
chair
for
allowing
me
to
speak
today.
My
name
is
canada,
jeffrey
and
on
may
29th.
In
2020
I
was
pepper
sprayed
by
a
boston
police
officer.
While
I
was
attempting
to
film
an
arrest
at
a
black
lives
matter
protest.
I
am
really
uncomfortable
being
here
today
because
I
was
really
lucky.
I
have
been
to
other
protests
before.
I
knew
that
this
was
a
possibility
that
it
could
happen.
There
were
a
lot
of
other
people
who
weren't
prepared.
R
There
are
people
who
had
contacts
in
which
is
a
horrible
thing
to
get
pepper
spray
under
a
contact
lens.
There
are
also
people
who
just
weren't
psychologically
prepared
for
the
possibility
of
violence,
but
having
that
privilege
means
I
should
be
here
to
talk
to
you
about
what
lucky
looks
like
so
lucky
was.
I
saw
it
coming,
which
a
lot
of
people
don't
get
lucky
was
I
managed
to
blink
in
time
so
most
of
it
ended
up
on
my
eyelids,
and
I
was
just
blind
and
hurting
every
time.
R
A
Thank
you,
olivia
dubois
boy.
Apologies.
I
S
On
may
29th
of
this
year,
I
attended
an
action
that
began
in
terrence
coleman
park
in
the
south
end
attendings
brought
water,
masks,
signs
and
loved
ones
as
they
marched
to
district
4.
Where
people
stood
together,
attendees
chanted,
I
can't
breathe
black
lives
matter,
say
his
name
and
the
boston
police
came
armed
with
guns,
batons,
chemical
weapons
and
bikes
that
they
used
to
create
a
wall
between
protesters
and
themselves.
S
For
much
of
the
action
I
stood
back
often
being
across
the
street
from
district
4
police
station,
but
at
around
7
30
pm
I
walked
across
harrison
ave
toward
the
crowd.
I
stood
with
the
crowd
for
about
a
minute
before
I
heard
the
boston
place,
yell
move
move
moo
and
I
started
to
run
back
as
I
felt
people
being
shoved
and
hit
with
batons
behind
me
seconds
later.
I
heard
screams
from
people
being
trampled.
S
I
felt
my
eyes
begin
to
burn
and
I
saw
the
boston
police
spray
something
into
the
faces
of
several
other
attendees
of
the
action
I
saw.
Attendees
fall
to
their
grounds
screaming
in
pain.
I
was
a
lucky
enough
to
avoid
direct
contact
from
the
spray
of
the
chemical,
but
the
remnants
of
the
chemical
in
the
air
could
be
felt
by
many
of
the
people
who
stood
across
the
street
from
district
4
police
station.
S
I
think
it's
important
to
point
out
that
this
action
was
attended
by
people
of
all
ages
and
abilities,
families
and
young
children.
People
living
in
the
housing
complex
across
the
street
from
district
court
district
4
came
out
to
show
support
for
the
action
along
with
many
children
from
the
neighborhood
after
the
police
used
chemical
weapons,
community
members
tended
to
those
who
were
directly
sprayed
with
the
chemical
people
provided
aid
with
water
and
milk
pouring
it
all
over
the
face
of
the
people
who
were
sprayed.
S
S
A
Thank
you,
zachary
lone
long.
A
T
T
Okay,
thank
you.
So
my
name
is
zachary
loud.
I
practice
law
in
boston
and
I'm
a
board
member
of
the
national
lawyers
guild.
I
wanted
to
begin
very
quickly
by
just
sharing
some
photos.
Are
you
able
to
allow
me
to
share
photos?
I
also
have
them
on
my
phone,
which
I
could
hold
up.
T
Sorry
about
that,
so
not
a
problem.
I'll
I'll
hold
up
my
phone,
sorry,
I
wasn't
sure
as
to
the
technology,
so
as
I
said
that
I'm
an
attorney
at
practice,
law
in
boston-
and
I
wanted
to
begin
by
just
sharing
a
couple
photos
if
you're,
if
you're
able
to
to
see
it.
This
photo
is
of
the
may
29th
demonstration
and
I
believe
that
it
was,
I
think
it
was
councillor
campbell
who
asked
about
the
specific
instances
of
crowd
control
weapons
being
used.
T
T
Some
also
did
ask
for
injuries
in
terms
of
what
happened
to
the
people
of
boston,
who
came
out
to
protest
for
the
record.
We
did
receive
the
national
lawyers
guild
conducted
intakes
and
we
did
receive
over
30
accounts
from
different
people
who
were
injured
by
the
police
officers
use
of
crowd
control
weapons.
T
The
other
thing
that
I
wanted
to
just
touch
on
really
quickly
is
that
I
think
there's
a
misconception
here
in
terms
of
the
incidents
when
the
officers
use
these
weapons.
The
officers
on
the
panel
a
couple
of
officers
spoke
over
and
over
again
about
a
riot.
There
are
various
videos
out
there
they're
available
on
youtube.
We
can
send
them
to
the
counselors.
The
demonstrators
are
passionate
and
loud,
but
you
can
watch
the
videos
for
yourself
and
decide
whether
they
depict
a
riot.
T
Thank
you
for
your
patience,
so
this
is
in
front
of
the
police
station
on
may
29th,
and
you
can
see
the
video
is
very
short,
but
you
can
see
initially
that
people
are
chanting
and
protesting
and
officers
spray
them
at
about
point
blank
range,
as
they
are
crowded
in
front
of
the
police
station
shouting
about
their
their
grievances.
T
So
I'm
not
gonna.
Try
and
do
that.
I
have
several
other
videos.
I
won't
try
to
to
pull
those
up,
but
I
will
say
that
the
claim
that
the
officers
used
weapons
in
only
the
most
extreme
circumstances
against
violent
individuals
is
is
plainly
contradicted
by
some
of
the
testimony
that
you
heard
today,
and
also
by
many
of
the
accounts
that
we
received
from
individuals
who
did
not
know
each
other
and
provided
accounts
that
were
largely
consistent
and
interlocked
on
the
key
points.
T
A
E
A
I'm
going
to
go
back
to
my
colleagues
and
check
in
with
them
in
terms
of,
if
do
any
of
the
panelists
have
any
that
they'd
like
to
respond
to
very
briefly
with
what
they've
heard.
P
P
A
particular
concern
of
mine
was
how
superintendent
bridge
continued
to
refer
to
this
as
a
riot,
which
is
very
inflammatory
language,
and
I
just
questioned
whether
or
not
there
is
some
discernible
metric
as
to
what
makes
a
riot
as
opposed
to
a
group
of
individuals
who
are
engaged
in
disturbing
activity
when
the
overwhelming
majority
of
the
people
there
are
engaged
in
peaceful
protest,
albeit
boisterous.
P
So
so
that's
one
thing
like
that
needs
to
be
distilled
what
constitutes
a
riot
as
opposed
to
several
individuals
being
disruptive
and
engaged
in
quote-unquote,
violent
activity
or
destruction
to
property,
and
then,
secondly,
to
the
extent
that
there
is
some
sort
of
metric
and-
and
I
also
appreciate
counselor
campbell's
point
that
you
know
for
as
much
as
folks
want
to
celebrate
what
bpd
is
currently
doing.
P
Well,
this
current
command
structure
is
not
always
going
to
be
in
place,
and
so
we
won't
want
to
be
able
to
lock,
in
the
protections
for
first
amendment,
protected
activity
to
peacefully
protest
and
demand
a
redress.
But
you
know
what
are
the
protocols
that
get
put
into
place
to
determine
what
escalates
something
to
a
riot
the
fbi,
besides
someone's
kind
of
gut
feeling
that
this
is
a
riot,
particularly
in
light
of
how
provocative
that
language
is.
O
Thank
you.
A
number
of
the
counselors
have
talked
about
the
need
for
balance.
The
the
superintendent
and
the
deputy
superintendent
have
talked
about
that
as
well
that
they
need
the
ability
to
use
these
weapons.
They
don't
want
to
use
them
regularly.
They
only
need
to
use
them
in
extraordinary
circumstances,
and
there
has
to
be
a
balance,
then,
on
the
other
side
as
well,
so
we
cannot
count
on
the
police
to
always
behave
reasonably
consistent
with
their
rules.
There
are
police
officers
who
behave
badly,
we've
seen
that
throughout
the
country.
O
That's
what
the
entire
movement
is
recently
about
this,
and
we
cannot
always
count,
as
as
mr
hall
just
said,
we
cannot
always
count
on
the
police
to
behave
reasonably
and
carefully
in
every
situation.
So
when
there's
a
riot,
the
police
want
the
ability
to
use
this.
The
public
needs
protection
against
the
police
misusing
these
weapons
and
that's
what
this
ordinance
is
about,
placing
reasonable
restrictions
on
it,
and
I
want
to
remind
you
again
that
these
protections
already
exist
in
massachusetts.
O
These
restrictions
already
exist,
but
they're
only
for
prisoners.
People
in
our
prisons,
the
public,
the
general
public,
our
ordinary
citizens,
do
not
have
the
same
protections
against
the
use
of
these
weapons
that
prisoners
in
massachusetts
do
and
that's
what
this
ordinance
addresses.
It
places
reasonable
restrictions.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
I
don't
unless
superintendent
ridge
or
deputy
superintendent
would
like
to
say
anything,
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
go
through
the
colleagues
for
concluding
remarks.
N
N
It's
not
as
problematic
for
the
police
to
try
to
hold
back
for
two
minutes
before,
using
whether
it's
oc
spray
or
or
other
tactics,
but
I
think
there's
going
to
be
some
some
unhappiness
of
the
police
response
if
we
allow
or
if
we
don't
effectively
control
violence
for
the
two
minutes,
while
we
wait,
so
I
think
to
make
that
a
hard
and
fast
rule
is
a
little
problematic
again,
so
not
even
be
abused,
pepper
spray,
while
this
act
of
assault's
going
on,
I
think,
is,
I
think,
presents
challenges
that
people
may
find
unacceptable
that
are
that
are
both
trying
to
present
their
view
exercise
their
first
amendment
rights
with
two
different
opposing
groups
so
that
we
both
have
an
obligation
to
protect.
A
N
A
Superintendent,
so
with
that,
I'm
going
to
go
through
my
colleagues
for
kind
of
remarks:
continuation
whatever
and
I
I
will
start
at
the
beginning
with
the
two
lead
sponsors,
counselor
royo,.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
I
just
want
to
be
clear
again
as
to
what
we've
heard
and
what
we
didn't
see
or
didn't
hear.
I
heard
some
reference
to
what
I
guess
can
best
be
summarized
as
general
practices.
The
protocols
may
be
secret
may
be
released
or
may
not
be
released.
C
C
I
agree
if
people
throwing
dynamite,
I
probably
wouldn't
want
to
be
there,
but
the
reality
is
if
somebody
threw
a
stick
of
dynamite-
and
I
was
next
to
them-
and
I
had
no
ability
to
leave
because
the
response
was
immediate
and
I
get
hit
with
pepper
spray
or
a
rubber
bullet-
that's
not
acceptable
either,
and
so
we
have
to
have
a
real
common
understanding
that
you
know
this.
Isn't
a
ban
we're
not
taking
the
tools
away
from
bpd?
You
still
have
them.
There's
a
bid
currently
out
for
1500
canisters
of
pepper
spray.
C
You'll
still
get
that
the
question
is
about
how
it's
implemented
and
how
it's
used.
That
best
protects
civilians
and
boston
police
officers.
The
thing
on
the
table
is
a
two-minute
warning.
I
haven't
heard
anything
about
crack
protocols.
I
I've
heard
differing
accounts
that,
in
order
for
tear
gas
to
get
dispersed
or
kinetic
impact
projectiles,
the
commissioner
himself
has
to
sign
off.
This
doesn't
change
that
it
actually
allows
for
deputy
superintendents
and
above
so,
if.
C
B
Thank
you
because
my
mother-in-law,
who
just
literally
smiled
as
she
walked
by
I'm
you're
on
camera,
I
just
wanted
to
quickly
you're
on
camera.
B
So
I
just
quickly
want
to
thank
council
roy.
I
think
you
summed
it
up
well,
along
with
many
others,
that
you
know
based
on
what
we're
what
we
heard
today,
it's
not
an
absolute
band.
I
think
we
all
agree
to
that.
We
we,
you
know.
We
talked
for
a
long
period
of
time
before
putting
this
ordinance
forward,
because
we
were
mindful
of
the
fact
that
the
department
wanted
to.
B
We
wanted
to
have
a
robust
conversation,
but
we
also
were
mindful
of
the
fact
that
an
absolute
ban
probably
wouldn't
go
anywhere,
and
so
we
were
starting
from
a
place.
That
was,
we
think,
extremely
reasonable.
B
Given
what
we've
heard
from
our
department
today,
we
obviously
want
to
protect
our
residents,
and
we
have
to
strike
that
balance
with
protecting
our
residents
and,
of
course,
protecting
our
public
servants,
our
police
officers
and
right
now,
based
on
what
I've
heard,
what
I've
heard
today,
I'm
still
confused
as
to
what
the
specific
protocol
and
practices
are
with
respect
to
using
these
weapons,
and
I
do
think
this
ordinance
allows
us
to
codify
and
all
get
on
the
same
page
as
to
what
that
is,
which
is
incredibly
important.
B
I
think
the
public
has
a
right
to
know
every
practice
or
protocol
that
we
use
in
any
department
should
be
public
information.
I'm
a
strong
believer
in
doing
away
with
keeping
things
under
wrap
or
even
having
people
have
to
request
what
these
protocols
are.
They
should
be
on
a
website
somewhere,
they
should
be
listed
somewhere
and
in
this
particular
instance,
I
think
they
should
be
codified,
given
the
fact
that
we
are
talking
about
lethal
lethal
weapons
and
severe
injury
to
folks
from
the
public.
B
I
want
to
thank
those
who
actually
had
the
courage
to
come
forward
and
share
what
happened
to
them.
On
some
in
some
of
these
incidents,
I
think
it's
extremely
courageous
to
do
that.
It
is
not
easy
to
get
in
a
public
platform
and
share
what
happened
to
you
with
respect
to
our
police
department.
I
also
want
to
follow
up
through
the
chair.
There
is
a
lot
of
my
questions
around.
Do
we
track
this
information?
Is
there
something
in
writing
or
more
in
writing
with
respect
to
this?
B
Any
of
those
updates
would
be
extremely
helpful,
but
I
do
not
think
this
should
be
a
long
drawn
out
conversation
in
terms
of
passing
this
ordinance.
I
think
it's
extremely
reasonable.
I
think
we've
created
a
space
where,
if
the
two
minutes
is
too
long,
given
the
expertise
of
our
police
department
and
police
officers
who
are
out
there
on
the
front
lines,
what
is
more
reasonable?
B
Is
it
a
minute?
Is
it
shorter?
What
does
that
look
like
if
there
are
other
provisions
in
the
ordinance
that
are
unreasonable?
Let
us
know,
but
it's
hard
to
make
edits
or
changes
if
we
do
not
have
specifics
as
to
what
the
police
department
thinks
is
in
the
best
interest
of
our
officers,
and,
of
course,
you
know,
deputy
and
superintendent,
you
guys
have
a
difficult
job,
you've
been
doing
it
for
decades.
B
We
want
to
defer
to
your
expertise
in
many
ways,
but
we
need
specifics
as
to
how
to
make
this
better,
and
I
think
we,
both
council,
roy
and
I've,
gone
on
the
record
that
we
think
these
tools
are
are
dangerous
and
at
some
point,
really
need
to
have
a
robust
conversation
around
a
ban
of
some
sort.
B
But
right
now
we're
talking
about
a
reasonable
restriction,
codifying
a
practice
and
protocol
with
respect
to
when
we
use
these.
So
it's
not
ad
hoc,
it's
not
random
and
and
lastly,
offering
some
enforcement
for
when
officers
do
actually
make
mistakes
in
using
pepper
spray
and
other
tools
available
to
them.
B
What
we
have
not
talked
about
as
much
during
this
hearing
is
what
came
up
during
the
public
testimony
part,
which
is
some
bystander
or
someone
who
is
not
doing
anything,
illegal,
being
pepper,
sprayed
or
something
happening
to
them,
and
there's
no
accountability
with
respect
to
those
incidents.
That's
a
major
issue,
too,
with
respect
to
this.
This
conversation
so
again,
looking
forward
to
chair
to
working
through
you
to
get
this
done
in
short
order
and
whether
it's
another
working
session
or
another
hearing
defer
to
you.
B
But
again,
thank
you
to
council
royal
for
the
partnership.
Thank
you
to
all
of
our
panelists.
I
know
how
busy
you
all
are
for
participating
in
this
conversation
and
thank
you
to
those
who
offered
a
public
testimony
as
well
as
my
colleagues
for
the
questions
they
asked,
which
were
very
helpful.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
so
much
counselor
campbell.
I
believe
some
of
my
colleagues
had
to
step
away,
but
I
do
want
to
thank
councillor
flynn.
I
want
to
thank
councillor
asabi
george.
I
want
to
thank,
I
think
councillor
brayden
also
had
to
step
away.
I
want
to
thank
councillor
mejia
and
councillor
o'malley
and
well
counselor
flaherty.
If
you're
still
with
us,
did
you
have
any
yes
counselor
flaherty.
K
Yes,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Just
wanted
to
again
it's
about
striking
a
balance,
so
I
guess
if
this,
if
the
opportunity
presents
itself
to
I
guess,
issue,
a
warning
that
say:
tear
gas,
for
example,
is
to
be
deployed.
Obviously
you
know
it's
in
the
best
interest
of
of
public
safety
and
community
and
safety
and
obviously,
and
to
protect
people's
property.
K
That's
one
thing
we
just
don't
want
to
be
in
a
situation
where
we're
telegraphing
our
punches,
to
borrow
a
phrase
when
I
boxed
as
a
kid,
so
we
obviously
want
to
again
strike
that
balance.
Some
of
the
some
of
the
folks
that
we're
seeing
that
are
part
of
these
process
that
they're
not
there
to
be
peaceful,
they're,
pretty
sophisticated,
they're
financed
they've
got
you
know
their
own
technology
and
weaponry
itself.
K
I
guess
the
time
to
do
that,
but
in
general
I
always
want
to
make
sure
that
the
tactics
that
we're
taking
is
in
the
best
interest
of
public
safety
and
we're
you
know,
and
protecting
residents
and
the
visitors,
property
owners
and
obviously
the
men
and
women
of
the
police
fund,
so
that
they
get
again
as
I
referenced
earlier,
it's
important
that
they
get
to
go
home
safely
to
their
families
as
well.
So,
where
appropriate
strike
that
balance
things
start
to
get
a
little
crazy.
K
Maybe
you
issue
a
warning,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
it's
it's
it's
it's
tight-ended,
because
you
don't
want
to
make
sure
that
you
don't
give
any
advance
to
those
that
are
not
here
to
be
peaceful,
that
are
not
looking
to
to
to
be
lara
abiding
and
that
and
that
they
have
the
resources
and
you've.
You
guys
are
seeing
it
we're
seeing
it
across
the
country
again
pretty
sophisticated
group
that
are
hell
bent
on
wreaking
havoc
and
being
destructive
and
I'm
not
quite
sure.
K
A
Thank
you
very
much,
counselor
flaherty.
I
will
just
simply
conclude
by
saying
this
conversation
will
continue
in
a
working
session,
unlike
with
the
surveillance
ordinance
where
there
was
an
understood
on
all
sides
of
the
technology
was
not
sufficient
or
was
it
reliable.
We
do
have
a
difference
and
a
real
concern
about
the
use
and
and
banning
or
these
restricting
of
the
use
of
these
tear
gas
and
these
and
rubber
bullets.
A
If
you
will,
I,
I
do
think
that
to
echo
counselor
flaherty
what
he
just
said
and
to
echo
counselor
campbell,
there's
a
there's
not
only
a
balance
to
be
struck,
but
but
a
warning,
I
think,
is
the
most
reasonable
and
low-hanging
fruit
that
we
could
at
least
start
from
there,
and
I
hope
the
police
would
agree
to
some
form
of
warning,
because
at
that
point,
if
you
are
there
protesting-
and
you
are
warned-
listen
in
a
certain
amount
of
time-
we're
going
to
deploy,
tear
gas.
A
If
you
start
to
see
people
move
and
then
you
start
to
see
people
advance
towards
you,
I
think
you'll
be
able
to
discern
very
quickly
who's
there
just
to
prote
or
to
protest
and
who's
there
to
cause
some
trouble.
So
I
think
it
actually
might
be
helping
you
to
shrink
the
haystack
if
you're,
giving
opportunity
for
a
good
abiding
protesting
people
to
leave
and
move
on
about
their
bit
move
on
about
their
way,
and
so
I
I
do
agree.
I
do.
A
I
do
understand
that
that
the
folks
who
are
on
the
ground,
who
are
facing
the
the
back
and
forth
again,
we
ask
our
police
officers
to
have
the
coolest
head
and
to
rise
to
the
occasion
when
everybody
around
them
is
falling
apart
rapidly.
A
And
so
I
I
just
wanted
to
echo
that
I
that
I
understand
your
service
and
decades
of
it
and
also
the
fact
that
we
are
talking
about
pretty
much
2004
may
29th
of
2020
and
may
31st
of
2020
also
speaks
to
the
fact
that
we
we
have
good.
We
have
in
some
cases
many
cases
majority
of
the
cases,
good
police
work
happening
here.
So
I
do
want
to
acknowledge
that,
but
should
it
be
there
be
codified
standards
that
all
are
aware
of?
A
I
absolutely
think
that
makes
sense,
so
I
look
forward
to
having
a
working
session
and
working
with
the
police
to
get
to
that
balance
with
that,
unless
anyone
has
anything
else
to
say,
I'm
going
to
conclude
the
the
hearing
and
we'll
be
scheduling
a
working
session.
Thank
you
very,
very
much
to
all
the
participants.