“The legal system gives the police the benefit of the doubt, but doesn’t give it to the average citizen,” ( Jaros para. 17). They are just like an average us if we brutally hurt someone we would surely have charges pressed against us what we did. “justice system designed to insulate police actions resulting in death” (Ali, Samee, Sherman para. one). In addition, the system is protecting them even though it may be obvious that they did the crime.
Deadly force is only justified as a last resort. This is especially, if there is significant threat of death or bodily harm to yourself or the people around you. However this is a question of judgment which is left to the interpretation of the person who feels his or her life is danger. Even with that, the use of force given the circumstances the degree of judgment and subsequent use of force should be reasonable. Note that the use of force is not permitted and thus against the law, but it is justified in some instances.
This means that even the criminals, who are a part of the public, have certain rights, particularly, civil rights. Police brutality causes a major concern in America. These racial prejudices are
Police Body Cameras When I consider the police I think of how they protect people and our city. Some people assume that cops are just trash and they hate them. The topic of police body cameras sounded like a good idea to me because many people are always filming cops at their worst. When they happen to be beating up on someone, but notice it is always only after the police “agonized” the person then the camera turns off. It never shows how this individual may have been acting towards the officers.
The law officers was not charged for the incident, so it created a riot in Los Angeles. (Police Brutality). The final problem is there is not enough of different race working together. There was an investigation that was affected by the police officers, because of their nationality within other officers.
But respectfully, law enforcement’s duty is to protect themselves as well as the citizens. Sometimes, when using a less deadly force, fighting while trying to subdue a suspect may occur and could potentially lead to what some innocent bystanders call police brutality. Depending on the situation, police officers should know when to use force, and if it comes down to excessive force, then they will have to answer for their actions. Police brutality has no set rules or bindings in state policies. In fact, police brutality is wrong and its considered to be misconduct on behalf of the law enforcement
It would be simplistic to pin police brutality and racial violence on racist actors - that would imply that institutional racism could be remedied by removing such officials from the system. However, acknowledging these ingrained biases and understanding their impact is crucial to recognizing that the system is itself inherently biased, and that a neutral and objective institution of law enforcement can only be created when the emphasis is placed not on racists, but on the construct of racism itself. Ingrained racial biases clearly impede rational decision-making
Stop and frisk is a crucial problem that the police department goes through. Stop and frisk is when an officer suspects that someone is carrying a weapon or something illegal and will pat them down it helps the police officers to prevent a crime before it happens. “It offers the potential of reducing crime over the long-term. When crime can be proactively stopped, then, the crime rates in our neighborhoods can be reduced over a more extensive period”( 12 Racial Profiling Pros and Cons). With the police officers stopping more people, they believe individuals are not going to want to carry drugs on them since they know officers can stop them.
The most important weakness of this policy is that it offers grounds for dirty cops to utilize force illegally to pursue selfish personal agendas that are not in the interests of the public. A police officer can use deadly force and allege that the use of force was necessary when indeed it was not and since there are no effective ways to measure such allegations such officers will end up going scot free. The police officers are supposed to be each other’s keepers and prevent their colleagues from misusing the authority given by the policy while officers who break the law can be charged in court. However, this is not guarantee that such authority will not be used illegally. Another weakness is that cases of mistaken identity can lead to harm to innocent civilians who are suspected of being
Police officers should take integrity rests from time to time; this would test if the officer will make honest choices when faced by a situation. This tests would lead to opening of investigations and uprooting corrupt and dishonest officers. Internal affairs model- this would help reduce corruption by investigating the officers from the department and resolve it internally from the
Since both the frisk and search was not reasonable or lawful, under the Fourth Amendment, this would be considered a violation and such evidence seized from Christina should be suppressed. The danger that would result if the court decided against my arguments is that there would be more police brutality. Although the concern that correlates with public safety is that there would be high crime rates, we need to find a way to balance public safety and an individual’s freedom. More often than not in today’s society, police officers are over using their power and often get away with it. As a result, people of color or Latinos are often the ones who suffer, since they are the targets.
The doctrine states that courts are bound by decisions held in earlier cases. However, I agree with the reasoning in Johnson, a court should be allowed to correct the effects of a prior court ruling if the ruling was badly reasoned and has a negative impact on society. The criminal justice system, which includes the courts, was established to control crime and enforce punishments on those who violated the law. Stare decisis should not apply to a court correcting a prior court decision, which consequences resulted in contradicting the establishment of the criminal justice
People pick the side that either defends or criticize police officers use of force. However, the people do not realize that this topic is plainly ridiculous and dangerous. This issue will not only hurt both sides, but also harm innocent civilians as well. Police brutality is a big dispute between different communities; however, there are several solutions that can solve this
However, the public will deem the search excessive use of force on the accused performed by the RCMP officer. This search would increase public outrage regarding excessive use of police powers as they believe the search could have performed in a less intrusive mean. Furthermore, the “throat hold” should not be performed on anyone especially females as it can result in health complications (Atherley & Hickman, 2014). However, it is necessary to note that the “throat hold” is a common practice used by the RCMP drug squad to prevent drug traffickers from destroying evidence. This practice is not illegal as it is used to prevent the swallowing of drugs that may be in the accused mouth that will aid in substantiating the charge.
Stop and should be arrested because it promotes racial profiling, police brutality, and violates person’s rights of the Fourth Amendment. Although it is meant to protect others and keep them out of harm’s way it is not protecting those who are getting frisked because the majority of them are innocent. The people should have their rights protected and abide by no matter what the color of their skin