Why We Didn 't They Shoot?

Each year law enforcement officers throughout the county are involved in shootings, some of them fatal. Frequently the shootings are reported by the media, which exploits the feelings of the victim while ignoring the effect of the shooting on the police officer. It is “estimated that approximately 87 percent of all emergency service personnel will experience a critical incident at least once in their career, which include officer-involved shootings” (Kureczka, 2002, p. 18). Officer-involved shootings have a profound effect on not only the officer involved but also their spouses, families, and the departments they serve. Law enforcement officers that are involved in officer-involved shootings need support and assistance such as critical incident stress debriefing and sometimes long-term trauma recover therapy in order to cope and live successful lives beyond the critical incident of the shooting.

In his article The Paranoid Style of American Policing, Ta-Nehisi Coates suggests that police officers in the United States are too quick to use lethal force as a resolution to de-escalate a potentially dangerous situation. He believes they should be held accountable for their actions, the same way every day civilians are.

In certain situations, the police may have to act quickly on their instincts. Sometimes, a situation is unpredictable and a decision needs to be made in a split second. The quick decision may to be to take a person down physically with the officer’s own hands, or to use deadly force, unfortunately. Anything can happen and the officer needs to be ready for every scenario. The different levels of force can be anywhere from just a police officer being present, to having to kill someone to prevent him or her from hurting anyone else. It’s a harsh reality, but sometimes the officer needs to make the decision to die or to protect him and do what he needs to do.

There are many areas in the fire service where potential lawsuits and liability can arise; some of these areas include, but are most definitely not limited to negligence, hazing, and not following the fire department’s SOPs/SOGs. As our society has changed, so has its expectations of those in emergency services—while many in the community may think of firefighters as the pinnacle of what an upstanding citizen must look like, there are countless moral and ethical pitfalls that firefighters can fall prey to and diminish the reputation of the fire service.

It appears as though the repetitive and unfortunate tragedies of mass shootings have become incorporated into the everyday life of American culture. We are forced to live in a heightened degree of fear, skepticism, and hesitation concerning our public safety. This phenomenon could reasonably occur in response to the vast ineffectiveness of the country’s current gun laws. Time after time similar misfortunes arise, yet few major changes are implemented to prevent them from reoccurring in the future. We cannot let this trend continue any further. Though some claim that increased gun control is useless and infringes upon the Second Amendment, it limits civilians’ weapons grade, obstructs those deemed unfit to wield such lethal weapons, and insures a greater level of security, thus it should be executed.

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?

Through history it has been shown countless time, the results of poor preparation is the ultimate demise of the people. In 1999, four non-uniformed, New York City Police officers approached a suspect whom they believed was the suspect of a reported rapist. The man was no other than Amadou Diallo, a West African immigrant. The confrontation occurred in low visibility conditions, meaning at night, as Diallo “retreated into the vestibule and reached for an object in his pocket. Believing that Diallo was pulling out a weapon, one officer shouted, ‘Gun!’ and the four officers began to shoot into the vestibule. One officer tripped, and believing their fellow officer had been shot, the other officers emptied 41 bullets into the vestibule, nineteen of which hit Diallo, killing him” (Gerdes, 2004). The direct result of poorly trained police was the death of a foreign national. In this encounter, the officers made poor decisions. The first mistake was approaching a suspect without proper identification. Since it was stated that they were not in uniforms, it can be assumed these officers were either off duty, or did not properly wear their identification tags. In such situations, being a foreign immigrant, even if Diallo reached for a weapon it would have been justified

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.

Each year citizens die in encounters with law enforcement officers. It is reported that “Americans are eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist” (Rucke, 2013). Although there is no official data base tracking these occurrences it is estimated that between 500 and a 1,000 people are killed by police officers each year. To put this in greater perspective this number equals approximately 5,000 since the 9/11 terror attack which is roughly the same number as U.S. soldiers who have been killed in the line of duty in Iraq (Rucke, 2013). This statistic is justifiably concerning. The cause of police related killings are multifold and cannot be attributed to only one factor. Many deaths may be unavoidable and perhaps, dependent on the situation, necessary. I contend, however, that many of these deaths may very well be preventable.

Washington State University conducted a study using a high-definition video and attempted to create varies scenarios that an officer would have to choose on rather or not to use deadly force. The officer was given a real gun and simulation rounds. The video can be manipulated at any time to change between the officer using deadly force or non-deadly force. There were several surprising facts that came from this study. Officers took

In a matter of 630ms an officer is confronted with the decision to open fire on a suspect or proceed with caution. Police officers are trained to deal with a broad range of circumstances, including minor traffic violations to hostile shoot outs. Additionally, they are trained to deal with a wide range of people from compliant to aggressive and to act accordingly in each condition. The decision to use lethal force is supposed to be restricted to situations in which an officer feels threatened. However, in light of recent officer involved shootings, civilians have begun to think

The use of excessive force by police officers is a topic that continues to make headlines and a study that needs to be done. Although much research has gone into this topic there still is no consensus on why the use of excessive force occurs. Some studies suggest lack of training and/or problems with organization policy/procedures. Law enforcement officers are authorized to use force when necessary, but when the level of force is excessive, however, the actions of the police come under scrutiny. The resulting effects can include; public outrage, scandal, negative reputation for not only the officer but the law enforcement community, and criminal considerations. Although there’s is no concrete definition of excessive force, police

This journal article discusses data on various types of less then lethal use of force weapon systems and the effect they have on the suspect and the officer who was forced to use it. It examines the future of police action and new advances in suspect restraint systems (Albert, 1999).

Armed police are required to become skilled at responding to events that demand the use of firearms (Fyfe, 1981). Arguments arise from the public's failure to recognise the police’s difficulty in making a straightforward judgment as to whether coercive force or the use of guns is required in events (Dick, 2005). When police do use guns, there is a risk that police may misfire and consequently cause more victims as a result (McCulloch, 1989). Furthermore, in circumstances that require force, natural biological impulses kick in; informally known as the fight or

Allegations of police brutality by the U.S. police departments have been on the rise for the past two decades. The use of excessive force by police officers beyond what is considered necessary is not a new fact to the world. Many of these encounters with civilians have been unjustified because the majority ultimately ends in death. The police involve the use of weapons such as batons, Tasers, pepper spray, or guns. This may also include false arrests, psychological trauma, and verbal abuse. Some individuals will state they are just doing their job, but others argue these cases can be traced back to poor training and policies. Every police officer has the right to protect himself and the community, but they should be able to discern when to use reasonable or excessive force on the civilian depending on the situation at hand.