Deadly force Essays

shootings involving police. Police use of deadly force is the amount of force that could cause injury or bodily harm to a person. Police use of deadly force is a controversial topic that has been towering over the news stations and radios lately with different shooting insistences. Many concerns have been brought up as to why this topic is controversial and problematic. In result, many court cases have addressed this issue. The issue of police use of deadly force shares the characteristics to capital

also defines deadly force by the definition given by the Minnesota Statute 609.066. This definition suggests deadly force is when the officer knows the force will either result in death or great harm to the person. This statute also adds the factor of discharging a firearm in the direction of where a person might be, including a vehicle, as deadly force. Use of force on the other hand, is defined as the use of command presence, verbalization, and other means (including physical force and more) as

Use of Deadly Force Use of deadly force has been utilized by police officers all over the United States, misconceptions from our society is that the use of deadly force automatically equates to excessive force. “The law does not require police officers to utilize the absolute minimum force necessary in a threat, only that the level of force be reasonable to control a deadly threat” (Miller, 2015). This in itself is very true, this kind of information needs to be conveyed to our communities as it

experience as a police officer, and the last thing an officer wants to do is use deadly force. Using deadly force is the nature of the occupation in law enforcement, conversely, it is a split second decision that’s not a routine one, but we receive training so we can recognize situations and when to properly deploy deadly force. However, the United States Supreme Court very seldom get involved in police use of force cases, except for the Tennessee vs Garner case was the first time. In the past

Department: The DPD suggests that use of deadly force is justified in the following scenarios: to keep peace officers or others, safe from death or great bodily harm, to make an arrest of someone who is believed to have committed a felony and use or threatened deadly force, or to make an arrest of someone who is attempting to commit a felony and the officer believes the person may use deadly force if he/she is not captured. Furthermore, use of deathly force towards a moving vehicle is only reasonably

limited to the least amount of force possible. More so, officers are taught in to use only that force that falls within the spectrum of what might be

Among the various levels of force used in modern law enforcement, for the sake of the research to follow, these various types can be simply broken down into two categories: non-deadly force and deadly force. The difference between the two is distinguished by the likelihood of its use to gain compliance or to cause great bodily harm or death. So, simply stated the use of deadly force refers to the application of force that is likely to result in lethal consequence. To understand

How do police decide how much force should be used in a situation and how has that changed throughout the year? Has Tennessee v. Garner been effective in protecting individuals against excessive force? Before the case Tennessee v Garner in 1985, how to police decided if they should use deadly force determined by one of four groups; these four groups were The Any-felon Rule; The defense-of-life Rule; The Forcible Felony Rule, and The Model Penal Code. The extreme one was the Any-Felony Rule which

use of police force. The use of force is strictly a part of the job requirement of protecting and serving our community. It is the everyday battles that force police to make decisions that may seem a bit harsh at times. The use of force is only acceptable under certain circumstances and should only be used when absolutely needed. There are cases when civilians are saved by the use of police force, and there are cases when innocent people are hurt or even killed by the use of police force. One advantage

that dictated lawful deadly force by an officer on a suspect. The Any Felony Rule, The Defense of Life Rule, The Model Penal Code, The Forcible Felony Rule. The Any Felony Rule gave officers the authorization to use any and all means necessary to arrest a felon suspect or prevent them from fleeing. It was interpreted as giving law enforcement the legal permission to shoot an unarmed fleeing felony suspect. The defense of life rule states that police officers can use deadly force only in situations

“after notice of the intention to arrest the defendant, he either flee or forcibly resist, the officer may use all the necessary means to effect the arrest.” The Memphis Police Department’s policy had similar limits, however still allowed the use of deadly force in burglary situations. There was no action taken by the Memphis Police Firearm’s Review Board or the grand jury (Tennessee v. Garner,

facts of this case, the amount of force used against Garner constituted an unreasonable seizure in violation of Garner’s fourth amendment rights. The Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court and deemed that the Tennessee statute, at the time, that authorized police use of deadly force against fleeing felons was unconstitutional. The justification for the courts finding of the unconstitutionality of the Tennessee statute was that it allowed officers to use deadly force against a person who was deemed

whether the use of deadly force to capture no dangerous fleeing felons was constitutionally permissible. On remand, the district court found that the Tennessee deadly force statute was neither unconstitutional on its face nor as applied. Because the district court found that Garner had not been deprived of any constitutional right, it did not reach the immunity issue. An appeal again was taken to the Sixth Circuit. The appellate court determined that the Tennessee deadly force statute violated the

officers should only use the necessary force to mitigate a situation appropriately that ensures everyone’s safety. Officers should first have the appropriate training from the police academy. Having better officer training, would prevent excessive use of force. Every enforcement agency has some type of guide in which force should be used. The levels of force should be used in order of verbal, physical restraints, less lethal force and only use lethal force if threatened with a gun. Acknowledging

Excessive Use of Force Excessive force is when the force exceeds the required amount of force to de-escalate a situation or to safeguard law enforcement or others from any hurt, harm, or danger from an individual. The United States criminal justice system has handled several cases involving the use of excessive force by law enforcement officers, especially during apprehension. The increasing number of such cases creates the necessity to train enforcement officials on how to handle suspects without

Essay Justified/Unjustified Use of Force Ferguson Case The death of Michael Brown at the hands of an armed law enforcement officer Darren Wilson with Michael being unarmed in the whole case presents an opportunity for the analysts and students to understand and study the use of force. There are different schools of thought in this case whether this was a justified use of force by the police officer or not, but all of this needs to be set aside when the verdict of grand jury comes in the favor of

Mclean Police force is sufficient or should use more Police officers are only supposed to use the amount of force necessary to prevent any accidents. According to the National Institute of Justice ,"the use of force by law enforcement officers becomes necessary and is permitted under specific circumstances, such as in self-defense or in defense of another individual or group." The law enforcement are allowed to use lethal, non-lethal force, physical, and verbal restraints. The amount of force used by the

In my opinion and going based off some of the things that have transpired due to some deadly interactions with law enforcement I feel that discretionary powers should be in full effect in all situations excluding ones where a life can potentially be taken by an officer. I’m all for police discretion in areas in which you deal with juveniles, traffic stops, domestic situations, drug related offenses and any offenses of that nature due to the fact most of these situations and offenses aren’t usually

“Deadly force is generally defines as any force that can reasonably be expected to cause death or serious bodily injury (Petrocelli, 2005).”It is to be utilized by law enforcement as a last resort, therefore, before a police officer goes the route of using deadly force, they must use all non-deadly force strategies unless they feel imminent danger is going to take place. There is no doubt that law enforcement officers will be faced with multiple challenges that put their lives on the line. Law enforcement

constitutional rule is—and so in Gamer’s lawsuit, the Court had to say what amount of force counted as “reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment.* However, deciding the constitutional standard for Garner's civil rights suit did not disturb what the standard had to be for state criminal law prosecutions. States still have the authority to dictate under what circumstances police could justifiably use deadly force, and so avoid punishment under state law (Flanders and Welling,