Deadly Force

Force that police tend to use on subjects that pose a threat has become an escalating issue in society today as we know it. Sometimes the public gets the notion that the police abuse their authority and use dangerous

Law enforcement officers are given much power and authority over one’s civil liberties. Not only do they have a duty but also a responsibility to enforce laws and ordinances in their jurisdiction, maintain order and protect its people. In some cases, the only way to accomplish this is through legitimized use of force. Use of force can best be described as "the amount of effort required by a law enforcement officer to induce compliance of an unwilling subject" (nij.gov, 2012). With that said, law enforcement officers have been given the right to apply only enough force necessary to control a situation, while defending others, preventing escape, during self-defense and while a subject is resisting arrest (Pollock, pp. 234). It is not until that force becomes excessive that it becomes say an issue.

When local police departments receive the new military gear, the tendency of them relying on it even in situations that do not have any real threat to the officer or their safety increases. This has been called "the rise of the warrior cop" (Balko). Social psychological research and anecdotal evidence from law enforcement specialists suggest that militarized policing can escalate situations that could have ended peacefully (Singal). There are already a lot of cases of police violence all around the country and not all of the country’s police forces have received military weaponry. There would be more cases like Michael Brown, Laquan McDonald, and Ronald Johnson, where it could have ended peacefully with the person in custody. Instead, they are dead and their deaths have fueled riots and protests all across the nation. These events bring with a lot of negative media for police departments and for the ones in charge of them. If officers were to carry more advanced and deadly weaponry, it will lead to more cases as these. This would be due to the "weapons effect" which states that the presence of weapons fuel more aggressive behavior (Singal). By having the local police carrying these heavy duty weapons, they will be more prone to exhibiting aggressive behavior and lead to more cases like the ones previously mentioned. Bruce Bartholow, a social psychologist at the

As of September 1, 2015, in the United States police officers have killed 776 people and 161 of those people were unarmed at the time of their death (MintPress). There have been too many incidents where police officers have injured or killed someone that could have been prevented. Using maximum force with a suspect has become a routine in many confrontations. Officers have not been given the proper training to deal with individuals and how to handle them without using a weapon. If they were given more training on how to deal with situations resulting in using a weapon to stop an individual during certain scenarios police brutality situations would decrease, lives would be saved, and police would get their good reputation back. However, police departments would have to spend more money on re-training. Some people agree with police brutality and think that a civilian deserved their punishment, which is not right because no one deserves to be beaten or killed. Situations involving police brutality have been increasing throughout the years, which is a problem that must to be solved.

The use of deadly force by police officers is a very important subject in today’s society. Many consider the use of deadly force excessive in most cases. However, there are many aspects to look at when considering this topic, such as: Why was deadly force required? When did the officer feel it necessary to apply deadly force? What will be the implications for the officer after the fact? How does the use of deadly force affect society as a whole?

Have you ever asked yourself what it would be like to become a police officer. Becoming a police officer isn’t an easy take because they have to risk their life everyday to protect and serve the community. They have to go through the dangers of arresting criminals when there is a chance that they could die. However, in today’s society only a small amount of the police officers actually serves their community and protect citizens from danger. Right now, most police officers abuse their power to the point where they don’t seem to care for the safety of the community. They would usually arrest innocent people, make accusations, and even use their power as a source to show their dominance. If you think about, whenever you are stuck in traffic

First and foremost I’d like to say that I am against police using their force so willingly. In the New York Times article “Police Shouldn’t Ask If a Shooting Is Justified, But If It’s Avoidable” by the University of South Carolina School of Law professor Seth Stoughton. Stoughton points out that he suggests that there is a difference in attitudes between civilians and law enforcement when it comes to the use of force. He goes onto say that law enforcement looks at it from the standpoint of is the force justifiable while civilians look at it as is the force avoidable. In the Supreme Court case of 1989 Graham v. Connor, the supreme court said that the police could use force as long as it is objectively reasonable. Why does force only have to be reasonable to be used, shouldn’t force be used only out of necessity? In another article in the Los Angeles Times by Kate Mather an interview was conducted with Mac Shorty, chairman of the Watts Neighborhood Council. In the interview Shorty says, the people in his neighborhood lost their trust in the Los Angeles Police Department after their recent shootings, saying he even questions calling the police. He goes on to say, that the police can’t be the guardians of the community with all the distrust, whenever the people of the community start to trust the police they shoot someone else.

When the shootings were questioned as “…civil rights violations…” the investigation known as the “DOJ Resolution” was put into motion (Mckay and Proctor A1). Supporters that are against the shootings voice their own ways of fixing this problem. One supporter suggests that APD should change their use of deadly ballistics and commit to the use of “bean bag” guns because they are less than lethal and that they have great stopping power. Another supporter thinks all APD officers should be trained in “CIT” (crisis intervention training), which would support a passive and non-deadly approach to de-escalating a problem before it gets out of hand (Heinz C2). I personally think these suggestions may be the best way to come to a mutual agreement between those against police shootings and the police department.

I personally support United States law enforcement agencies and believe that they make our country a better place. Currently a lot of controversy surrounds America's police force with cases of excessive force coming to light through social media. In these cases, I think both sides are to blame for the violence that ensues. In defense of police officers, they were attempting to apprehend a suspect that was in the process of breaking the law. However, this does not exempt them of their use excessive force or the cases where the suspect is killed. A change that can be made to help calm the situation is harsher punishment for officers caught using excessive force. While these changes are an important step in preventing police brutality, it

Should police be able to use deadly force? Deadly force is used by an officer, to defend themselves from life threatening assault against other people. Police must protect themselves and others as a citizen they serve. It may not happen as much as we think, but in certain incidents, there are times it is used (Williams, 1999). My opinion about deadly force is there is a right time to use it and a wrong way.

Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, La.; Philando Castile in Falcon Heights, Minn.; and police officers Patrick Zamarripa, Michael Smith, Michael Krol, Lorne Ahrens and Brent Thompson in Dallas.(Armstrong.how to fix American policing.newslea) these are a list of names of officers and black men that was killed. Should police have guidelines that they need to follow on how much force they should use? The nation never really thought about a stander to used force, because when an officer is in a situation they don't know thats going to happen they used their best judgement in order to make them safe. The officer is train to shoot to kill, in that moment they think its either them or me and they know that they don't want it to be themselves.

Everyday police officers have the chance of being shot or having to take someone else’s life. Police action shooting has become a common thing so they have to take extra precaution to keep themselves safe. If they do not then their life could be at stake, a lot of people have started to ambush and shoot officers so your awareness needs to be on top of its game. Police officers have to go through training for shooting so they are able to be accurate in stressful situations. I don’t think the standards are not high enough because police typically miss most of their shots at police action shootings, they should be trained to be able to accurately hit targets while running, walking, crawling, and crouching with added stress.

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

Police shootings have always brought about controversy. There is much debate about the subject more so in today’s society. Most of the concerns people have are centered around errors in judgment and dismal handgun hit ratios. The expectation for police handgun hit probabilities is greatly judged and based off of historical data, and whether the way in which the police officers were trained plays a big factor. In my opinion, you cannot succeed in one without the other, meaning the two coincide. You cannot be a good shot without training, and not being a good shot can lead to untimely deaths, meaning the job of serving and protecting is not getting done, but over the years police agencies have worked to try and better their handgun hit ratios.

Use of Force is taken over by law enforcement in a horrible way. Many police officers are not getting trained properly. They are not given enough time in training to understand the concepts of dealing with the public and how they should act with their actions. It is currently under the most public scrutiny today. Police officers are taking it beyond their power of authority and using it against the public. This is causing the public to have riots, protests, assault on law enforcement, damage to property, retaliation, and more due to the police using excessive force on people. Also, the use of force could be overused based on race/ethnicity. The police officers can do whatever they want based on what you look like. Then, the police officers are causing unnecessary force on suspects with serious injury and sometimes death. This topic of discussion is relevant because this is going on today with law enforcement vs. the public. Finally, it is important because the use of force is only getting worse with police officers and citizens. Therefore, people are having this situation occur to them every day by law enforcement. The Use of Force by police must be looked over to prevent more crime from spreading because police are improperly misusing their power of authority over citizens.