Deadly Force And The Officer example essay topic

The use of deadly force is used throughout the U.S., and the definition of deadly force is best described by the FBI which states that: deadly force is the intentional use of a firearm or other instrument resulting in a high probability of death. But who determines when it's okay for a police officer to use deadly force? When does deadly force cross the line and when does officer feels his / her life is grave danger and to escape has to use deadly force? What circumstances will justify the use of deadly force? Deadly Force depends on the officer discretion, when the officer makes the decision to investigate suspects. Also it depends on the how strongly the officers follow the Code of Ethics.

In the Code of Ethics in paragraph 3 it reads "I will enforce the law courteously and appropriately without fear or favor, malice or ill will, never employing force or violence and never accepting gratuities". So an officer who truly follows the Code of Ethics I think would be less likely to use deadly force, and the officer probably has a higher tolerance than a officer who doesn't follow the Code of Ethics so closely. The Bureau of Justice statistics in 2001 reported nearly 400 felons died from use of deadly force. But also when an officer decides to use deadly force they must be thinking if their actions are going to be justifiable through the publics eye and their police department and so forth. So many things come into play in deciding to use deadly force, even civil liability. Deadly force is always going to be a in some ways biased because the officer might think its necessary but when the court finds out they might find it unreasonable.

In Tennessee vs. Garner a 15 year old boy was shot to death because he refused to obey the officers orders and tried jumping over a chain link fence. So in return Garners father filed a case against the officer saying that his sons constitutional rights were violated. The court said it would be only justifiable if the officer could of proven that the kid running away was going to be a threat or serious injury to the public or officer and in that case it was reasonable to use deadly force to arrest the suspect. In using deadly force there are 5 elements. The first is defense of life - when the officer feels in imminent danger, 2nd Fleeing Subject - when they are posing imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the agents or others, 3rd Verbal Warnings- to submit to the authority of the agent should be given prior to the use of deadly force.

4th Warning Shots - agents may not fire warning shots, and 5th Vehicles - Agents may not just shoot to stop the car, they can shoot the driver and or passenger, whatever is helping the car get away. I agree mostly with the officers policy except my policy would have some moderate adjustments. The first element would state Defense of Life - the officer must feel physically in imminent danger for his life, 2nd Fleeing subject - must have some sort of weapon, gun, knife etc. to pose a threat on somebody, 3rd Verbal Warnings - the officer must give a warning before he shoots, 4th Warnings Shots- must be also given before they shoot the suspect, and the last element in deciding the use of deadly force would be Vehicles- they should only shoot what is helping the vehicle escape not the driver. As you might see I don't want to intentionally kill the suspects.

I'd rather bring them into custody to get the suspect a sentence in jail because life in jail is far worse than just dying. At least in jail they " ll deal with hardships. My policy compared to the officers policy is that mine is more lenient and more tolerant. The reason is that I really based iy on the Code Of Ethics, and I stood by it very strictly and religiously..