Although some police officers use deadly force way to frequently, police officers should still be able to carry guns. Because of dangerous people in the united states pose a threat and they may have a weapon like a gun or a knife. So with the guns the police officers have they may scare the suspect into surrendering or shoot them if they fight, either killing or injuring justice will be serve. Most people want to get rid of police holding guns because they are scared of police officers turning bad or using brutal force. “Most of the 422 police shootings examined by an internal police review board from 1993 to early 1998 were ruled to be justified, and only two cases resulted in criminal charges against police officers.” (Gerdes).
There's a line that an officer can't cross and that's when they use excessive force, any amount of force by a law enforcement officer that is beyond the minimum necessary to achieve legitimate law enforcement objectives. A type of force that rarely an officer uses is deadly force, the use of lethal force by an officer. The court will only consider the use of deadly force responsible only when it is an absolute last resort. That is why the Supreme Court invalidated the fleeing-felon rule, which they rule that it was acceptable practice in many jurisdictions to use deadly force when a felon fled from an officer regardless of the immediacy of threat involved in the situation. An example of when an officer can use deadly force is when the officer reasonably believes there is a substantial imminent risk that the person to be arrested will cause death or serious bodily harm to the officer or to another person in the
What did the Police Officer I do wrong, if anything? If applicable what did the Police Officer III (the FTO) do wrong? Do you feel the actions and/or statements of the Police Officer I during the felony stop were justifiable in any way? Additionally, describe what you would have done differently if you were the Police Officer I in this situation. Note: If you 're unable to meet the word requirement initially you may state what what the P-III should 've done differently if you 're having trouble meeting the word count however you must answer the question fully and clearly state as much as you can for the aforementioned questions.
1 Kurt was arrested for the noise ordinance and possession of illegal and drug paraphernalia. Any search needs to be with a warrant. The fourth Amendment “the right of the people to be secure in their person against unreasonable searches and seizures…. but upon probable issue.” The Ex Post Facto “is kind law that is used after an act is committed to make it illegal even it was legal when done.” In the case of Weeks V US 232 U.S. 383 the supreme court addressed this issue. The Fourth Amendment “…protect citizens against warrantless searches of homes and papers and effects.” The officer Vidal has all right to arrest Kurt since he got the warrant, at same time when no one is presented or o one home the officer needs to wait or came back in other time, but he got in and found the marijuana and other drug.
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.
What if the suspect is cuffed and thrashing, but the cop is lax and don’t “blade” himself and the suspect grab his gun? For one, bladed from a suspect means to stand across or parallel from the target so that way the gun or anything isn’t easily accessible. Force can literally save lives in that very situation, but it can take a split second for something to happen that you or someone else wasn’t expecting. On the flip side of that situation, if there wasn’t any force applied to that situation? The police officer and probably other people at the scene of the crime could be killed in a matter of seconds.
Police officers should be well equipped and have the best resources to combat crime. However, the defense equippements given by the state to the police officers should be aligned to the risks that they will face during their work routine. In this vein, not every police officer should carry all sorts of weapon, depending on the cirscumstances of their work, some would have to use weapons that are more or less lethal. Firstly, if every police officer carries a gun in every situation the risk for society can be greater than the benefits. Having more guns circulating in cities would increase chances for silly fights or disputes ending tragically increases exponentially.
However, there are those who feel that just as the principle states, one is, and should be taken as a victim and the outcome could be either way: guilty or not guilty. In fact, this argument is supported by the many cases of malicious prosecutions and mistaken identities. The differences The due process model is pegged on the belief that it would be better if a criminal found innocent goes free rather than have one innocent person in jail. On the other hand, the crime control model argues that it is better to have a innocent person detained, questioned, tried and found innocent then let free than have a society full of criminals roaming
Police officers should under no circumstances physically harm anyone for any reason. Officers have also in the past used informants as bait and put their lives in danger just to try and catch a criminal. We as citizens should be able to put our trust in these officer, but sadly that trust has been broken too many times. Officers that misuse informants can also with-hold evidence such as drugs or money for themselves and just continue this cycle and then put the blame on the informant that is more than likely already facing jail time. We should all make sure that police officers remain in check and that they do not receive too much power, because things like this happen.
Police should consider the same fact that they could go to jail too, police are not above the law. Police are there to enforce laws when it comes to murder police officers need to be held to the same standards and not feel that they are above the law. Police officers usually get misconduct and when killing a
Many think otherwise, but in reality and fairness, anyone, especially with proven murder should certainly be tried as an adult. The quote “if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime” plays a decent role in this specific case. It’s simple, if you can’t bare being confined in prison, don’t do the causing action. Additionally, the fact stated “If juvenile
RACE IN AMERICA By YOUSUR AL-HLOU and JOHN WOO 3:03 How the Dallas Shooting Unfolded Video How the Dallas Shooting Unfolded The attack was the deadliest against law enforcement officers in the United States since Sept. 11, 2001. By YOUSUR AL-HLOU and JOHN WOO on Publish Date July 8, 2016. Photo by William Widmer for The New York Times. Watch in Times Video » Embed ShareTweet Three other people were arrested in connection with the shooting, but the police would not name them or say why they were being held. In addition to the five officers who died, seven officers and two civilians were wounded.