Alternatives to Deadly Force: A Look at Tasers, Pepper Spray, Bean Bag Guns and Batons

In our research study we hope to show that the goal to Tasers it to provide law enforcement with alternatives to deadly force in order to minimize harm to both community members and police. We also want to show that no use of devices or techniques may be safe to everyone, but that we can't look just

Often times while attempting to make an arrest, a law enforcement officer will have to use the appropriate use of force to make the arrest. In some instances the appropriate use of force for some officers will be as simple as the

Sometimes, it really depends on the officer’s mood and mentality toward his or her job. Some officers may never have to use deadly force, while others use it daily.

The use of force is without a doubt an important aspect in policing. The decision to utilize any type of force comes from a multitude of recourses; department policies, training, situational variables and ethical systems. There are three major categories in which an officers use of force is categorized under; justifiable, excessive and deadly; with a thin line between justifiable and excessive. Cases where excessive force has been used, has lead to injuries, deaths, civil damages, officers convicted and sentenced to jail and police chiefs and elected officials being removed from office (Fyfe, 1988). It is an officer`s discretion in determining when the use of force is justifiable.

There are two types of force in police work. One is non deadly force and the other is deadly force. Non deadly force is force that, when used, is not likely to result in serious bodily injury or death. Now just because it is not deadly does not mean you can run around and be using non deadly force because you feel like it.

Use of force is the effort used by a police officer to force compliance of a suspect who is not willing to submit. The basic presumption is that police officers should not use force that is more than necessary to make an arrest or protect themselves and the public from danger. There a several factor to take into consideration in determining if the use of force is necessary. Some of these factors are the location of the encounter and the mental capabilities of the subject. Although there is an established guidelines for officers to determine whether it is necessary to use force and the amount that is appropriate, there are situations

In order to get all of the answers to these questions, we must first define deadly force. According to the Legal Dictionary "Use of deadly force" is often granted to police forces when the person or persons in question are believed to be an immediate danger to people around them. For example,

In light of the recent spate of police-involved homicides of suspects who may or may not have put the lives of the police involved in fear for their safety and well-being, this paper seeks to examine the use of deadly force by police officers in the line of duty. The training involved in using one’s service weapon in situations that call for a determination of the use of force will be explored, as will the rules, regulations, and extenuating circumstances that lead to the firing of a service weapon in the line of duty, resulting in the death of a suspect. The Supreme Court cases that have led to and/or upheld laws allowing a broader interpretation of what is considered justifiable use of deadly force will be briefly examined. Additionally, the use of non-lethal weapons, such as Tasers, by police forces and how the availability of these weapons influences the rate of deadly force will be inspected. Finally, an elucidation of the various perceptions of the general public of the police after use of deadly force is used within their communities will be addressed.

The Supreme Court has stated that the calculus of the propriety of an officer’s use of force must include the fact that officers are often forced to make split-second decisions in circumstances that are tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving. Officers who use force in the street are judged under the Objective Reasonableness

The legal sufficiency of the policy can be called into question anytime force is used. This was first demonstrated in 2000. The state’s policy was revised to explicitly address two subjects. The first issue addressed the act of officers shooting at moving vehicles. This was in response to two controversial shootings that occurred in 1998. Both incidents involved officers firing on moving vehicles after they engaged in high-speed chases for traffic violations. Use of force is not authorized for moving vehicles unless the officer ''reasonably believes: (1) there exists an imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or another person; and (2) no other means are available at that time to avert or eliminate the danger'' (Halbfinger, 2000).

the use of excessive force. Many people have witnessed or have become victims of police brutality. In their line of duty, police officers are sometimes faced with threatening circumstances that enable them to make haste decisions when expecting the worst at the same time hope for the best outcome. A police officer is given the power to maintain law and order as well as to take away any right of a citizen when a situation permits (Heydon, 2005). Thus, they have the responsibility to apply the forces in a recommended way. Therefore, police are trained to use the least amount of force necessary to make an arrest by using escalations of force. However, sometimes police exceed the minimum amount required to diffuse an incident or protect them, which leads to misconduct or undue violence when not warranted.

This use of force matrix utilizes a graded approach whereas an officer will use only the force necessary to exercise and arrest. Law enforcement officers may use that amount of force necessary to effect the lawful purpose intended, provided that no reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appears to exist at the time the force is used. The privilege to use force is not limited to the amount of force necessary to protect themselves or others, but extends to that amount reasonably necessary to enable officers to effect the arrest or otherwise neutralize the resistance of a subject. If a suspect refuses to be arrested the officer will have to utilize a higher level of force dependent upon the suspects actions. For example, if a suspect is resisting arrest, the officer may use a taser or other force methods to arrest the individual. An officer cannot simple resort to higher levels of force without proper justification. Officers must utilize only the force which is necessary and justified. There are times when an armed suspect may prompt an officer to use the highest level of force, deadly force, if he feels him or another person’s life is in jeopardy. The result of not going utilizing his weapon on this use of force scenario could mean death to the officer or the public.

Police officers are given a significant amount of discretion simply due to the nature of the job. Officers are faced with many threatening situations forcing them to react quickly, yet appropriately. They have the power to infringe upon any citizen’s rights to freedom and therefore they must use this power effectively. One major concern with the amount of discretion officers have is their power to decide when to use force or when to use lethal force. Manning (1997) argues that it is generally accepted that police should be allowed to use force. He also explains that there are an uncertain amount people who agree on as to what constitutes excessive force. The line

The use of force, with regards to law enforcements use of it, is a complex topic that should be looked at in all perspectives. There is tension between the police and the community they work for, on whether this is a power that the officers should have or not. There are ambiguous laws that do not give law enforcement offices much guidelines on what is exactly permissible when it comes to force, and all the different situations it could occur. The line that the use of force leis on is often a fine one. It is teetering between excessive force and never being able to enforce the laws. The use of forces is a conversation that is worth having with all the pros and cons that it brings to the discussion board.

careers when use of force is appropriate—for example, in making some arrests, restraining unruly combatants, or controlling a disruptive demonstration. When the level of force exceeds the level considered justifiable under the circumstances, however, the activities of the police come under public scrutiny (Adams, 1999).