Deadly Force In Law Enforcement

This Ultimately authorized officers to apply deadly force as a legitimate means of apprehending individuals who were fleeing from suspected felonies. This doctrine stemmed from traditions traced back to the Middle Ages when most committed felonies were punishable by death. Since then, many police departments have prescribed the circumstances under which deadly force could be used and today modern agencies follow a “Defense of Life Doctrine” where the use of deadly force is mainly authorized in situations where its application will defend and preserve the arresting officer’s life, a citizen’s life, or another officer’s life while in imminent life-threatening danger (Chambliss, 200). Today Police Officers abide by a Use of Force continuum that essentially requires Officers to meet force with force within the scope of reason based off of the totality of circumstances presented in a situation. Of course, deadly force rests at the end of the continuum being the highest level of force

The principle explains that police should use only the amount of physical force necessary to restore order and protect public if using warning or persuasion is not working on an individual. This is important because it is not ok for anyone to use physical force in not completely necessary. If using physical force is not required, then it should always be avoided. Although, if an officer must use physical force than it should be the least amount necessary to protect the individual and surrounding public. For modern police officers this an important principle, this is not always followed and not following this principle causes many unnecessary tragedies and conflicts.

If the law enforcement were to reduce the amount of force the officers are allowed to use, crime would simply be even more out of control. I say because if the officer can 't get control the suspect will easily take advantage of the officer. The current amount of force an officer can use is efficient, for the this reason the police officers have to right to protect themselves along with the community. The law allows police officers to use deadly force if

Non-registration of FIR is an offence and can be a ground for disciplinary action against the concerned police officer. A cognizable offence is one in which the police may arrest a person without warrant. They are authorized to start investigation into a cognizable case on their own and do not require any orders from the court to do so. A non-cognizable offence is an offence in which a police officer has no authority to arrest without warrant. The police cannot investigate such an offence without the court’s

They would probably be more lenient when it came down to using to use excessive force. Instead of automatically reaching for their gun, the officer would try to talk to the person, only taking out their firearm if the other person had one or they feel threatened. You can’t feel threatened by a person with no weapon. The way excessive force is measure is through three questions: “First, what was the severity of the crime that the officer believed the suspect to have committed or be committing? Second, did the suspect present an immediate threat to the safety of officers or the public?

When a person thinks of a police officer, what should come to mind is a protector. Cops should be a sign of safety, honesty, and protection. Many years ago it was that way, now cops are seen as people you want to stay away from. Cops are abusing, assaulting, framing, and killing innocent people. Police brutality can be described as the misconduct of police officers such as police corruption, harassment and discrimination.

Along with this, police use of deadly force is conducted with the daily work environment for police officers put them on the front line for potential harm and vulnerable situations (Ross, 2015, p. 244). Violence which is sometimes the only necessary means for police, is said to be “situational in nature” (Parent, 1998). This violence which is situational in nature can be revolved around the personality, stress and danger that a policeman are put into. With this in mind, it can be a controversial topic when it comes to explaining that police officers are put into certain situations needing them to act within seconds. During this alteration, it can change the outcome of the situation and transform the aftermath of the

One could be lying, but make it believable. The other could be telling the truth, but does not have enough evidence. The same for police officers, they all aren't honest or trustworthy. Although police should wear body camera while they are on duty, this is also invading people's privacy.

Certain citizens may feel the need to stand up to law enforcement and protest by means of violence or peace. A protest can put civilian and police officer’s lives in danger and at times cause both parties to engage in combat. Police force then becomes necessary because the officers are exercising self-defense (Harmon). The civilians will then be apprehended and face full responsibility for their illegal actions. The civilians may feel that the law is unfair because they are the one who is sitting in the jail cell.

Without the the Second Amendment, citizens would be without the basic tools needed to protect themselves, their family, and property. The legal use of firearms is the constant factor that holds violent criminals in check. If law abiding citizens did not have the tools necessary to prevent criminals them from committing terrible acts, criminals would be more open and bold in their actions. Self-defense through the Second Amendment, along with its original intent to defend the populace from a tyrannical government, are an important deterrent against crime and tyranny for every citizen of the United

Police are taught to shoot for the body’s centre mass and this brings a high likelihood that the person will be killed. A ‘shoot to disable’ doctrine is technically impracticable (Force Science Institute, 2010). So the use of firearms must always be considered as the application of lethal force. Police are also taught a continuous, rapid shooting technique rather than shoot once and observe, because a large percentage of people with life-threatening chest, abdomen and head wounds from a single round are “able to perform strenuous activity and to continue to physically fight” (Lewinski & Hudson, 2014, p. 1), including to kill or wound police officers and others (Lewinski & Hudson, 2014). This is especially the case with persons affected by excitatory substances who exhibit “great strength and resistance to pain” (Dolinak, Lew & Matshes, 2005, p. 307), combined with a propensity to extreme violence (American Council for Drug Education, 1999).

Introduction: The use of Tasers Conducted Electrical Weapons (CEWs), by police department agencies and police officers in particular, is becoming a disputable and controversial issue in policing, The criminal Justice System and Policies. This paper will explore alternatives from the history of Tasers, Human Health, Police Protection/Liability, Current Problem, and the Solution to minimize deadly force with the effect of Tasers. Most people would consider that the use of force (Tasers) would be a no-brainer, that its morally practical and ethical to minimize excessive force or deadly force. Second the use of Tasers protects police officers and it minimize the physical pain and injury to the suspects.

The fleeing felon rule is when the police are chasing a felony suspect and he or she is fleeing from the scene. The officers are allowed to use force to stop the fleeing suspect, that includes the use of deadly force. However, deadly force can only be used if the officer has probable cause to believe that suspect would be a threat to the community. Force can be used by the victim, bystanders, and officers, but, deadly force can only be used by the officers.

1. One influence that is situational when being arrested lawfully is using holds and tying methods to prevent running, only if both lives are in danger. However, policies do not give instructions on how to use force but, leave judgement up to officers in certain cases how to use it. The judgement calls are now based on training techniques offered through the academy 's renewal programs for guns, emergency and off duty standards.

Don’t get me wrong I understand that in certain situations where there’s no other option. But under legal requirements deadly force is only to be used when there’s reasonable belief that the suspect will possibly harm an officer or others in the community. In a situation, such as A shootout with a suspect or a hostage situation I would be understanding of the use of Deadly force and it is justified on the part of the officers. Another situation I feel it would be necessary is when A suspect is seen brandishing a weapon or if you’re in pursuit of a reckless runaway driver that is exhibiting actions to make you believe that they have a disregard for the safety and lives of others. That’s another situation where the officer either has no choice or the decision they make will prevent any senseless