Improper Use of Deadly Force by Police Officers

In July of 2012, police officers were called to a local convenience store in Saginaw, Michigan where a homeless man named Milton Hall was seen carrying a knife and had just stolen a cup of coffee from the store. Frantically, they tried to subdue the man by telling him to place the knife on the ground. But because of his inability to do as they say, forty six shots were taken at him leaving him dead at the scene. This is only one of many tragic stories that continue to occur in society today with Police Officers and their improper use of deadly force. In many situations the lives of others can be taken in an instant because of improper use of force from the officers, but the use of force is inevitable when dealing with their work. Force is

necessary in almost every situation when it comes to any scene they are called to. There is always at least one person that needs to be constrained at any scene including robberies, murders, and even just simple things such as pulling a car over on the side of the road.

In these situations deadly force may be needed to constrain individuals that are threatening another individual or even the officers themselves. Police Officers should be able to use deadly force when they are in a situation that is dangerous. If a person has put them into a position where they they do not feel safe or could be harmed if they don’t take action then deadly force could and should be used if the officer feels it is necessary.

When judging if laws for deadly force should become more strict one may say that if laws do in fact become more aggressive with the matter then more harm could come to the officers or others at the scene. With restrictions coming along with how much force is used officers can be put into an even more harmful situation because they would not be able to protect themselves as much as needed. The use of force can pertain to many different actions a police officer participates in. Force can range from simply verbal commands to the dangerous use of lethal force. Police no doubt need to have discretion to use force to protect themselves as well as community. Guidelines need to be set so that officers continue to incorporate and maintain the

policy of only using force in necessary cases. When dealing with force, they should only use enough to protect themselves or others from harm. Before using force they should try other options such as verbal force or physical restraint. In some cases, less lethal force should be used such as tasers. To keep a scene from getting out of hand police officers should strive to regain control of all situations as soon as they possible can while using the least amount of force and protecting themselves and others around. When deciding if force is necessary it should not be taken lightly; the lives of citizens and officers are at stake. The discretion that police officers should have should be limited. In several cases, officers have used deadly means of force. In every case the officers dealt with ethical issues that put them in highly stressful situations and life altering decisions. By setting laws or guidelines for these officers to follow, possibilities for misuse or abuse may be reduced. When dealing with situations the use of force should always be the last option to resort to with any scenario. Time is very important in determining if an officer should use force or hold off. Because of this this, officers go through an abundant amount of training to learn how to quickly respond to a situation and only apply force if necessary. In this training they also learn about situational awareness and how to judge when force should be required to regain control.
Because of an officer’s role in society people assume that they can use as much force as they want to deal with arrests.

Many guidelines have been set to control this but officers still do not seem to follow all of the rules they are supposed to follow putting them in these situations. The Model Penal Code is an example of this and allows officers to use deadly force “only in situations where the crime that the suspect is arrested for involved the use or threatened use of deadly force or if there is a substantial risk that the suspect would seriously harm or kill someone else if the arrest were delayed”. All officers do have the right in using force when attempting to arrest a citizen but with restrictions. This means if an officer is charged with assault, battery, or murder they have the right to fight for their case and prove that the force was necessary to regain control of the situation and maintain a safe community. To help better understand whether deadly force is warranted in an situation a Police Foundation that is located in Washington, DC created guidelines that are used in any given scenario. They determined that deadly force is weighted solely on the officer’s training and experience that they have received. In an interview a Woodland Hills civil attorney named Dale K. Galipo stated, "The training suggests that deadly force can only be used as a last resort in the direst of circumstances, when no other reasonable options are available. I think the vast majority

of cases are not immediate defense-of-life situations but are overreactions by police officers who are not facing life-threatening circumstances who then embellish a story to try to justify their use of force.” He says that in training they learn to use deadly force last but because of their overreactions under circumstances more deaths occur then there should be. Another guideline the Police Foundation tried to inform others about are the factors that determine if force was reasonable when dealing also with the severity of the crime. If the person posed a threat to the officer, if they resisted arrest or tried to run, if they are mentally ill, and if there is an option to use a less than lethal way to contain the person are all ways to determine if the force used was indeed reasonable.
Every state in the US as of right now fail to comply with National laws set about lethal force. Not only do they not meet the national laws, but many do not even comply with the constitutional laws. According to state laws force may be used to suppress oppositions to arrest, when arresting someone for a felony, suppressing riots, or other situations such as a burglary. In a case that occurred in Saratoga Springs, Utah a mentally ill citizen named Darrien Hunt was seen carrying a sword around the city of Saratoga Springs, Utah an observer called 911 to come scope out the situation for the safety of others. When the police arrived Hunt would not put the sword down but would move closer to them and swipe at them every time they asked him to do so. This led to the officers to shoot at Hunt, who then began to run. As he was running away an officer shot him in the back of the head and killed him. Hunt’s family eventually sued the officers involved in the case and the city of Saratoga Springs. The officers had to fight for the case and provide explanations as to why deadly force was needed to keep the situation from getting out of control. The officers were correct in the use of force and their rights to do that but people might say death was not necessary in this situation and they could have relied on other lethal forces to regain control.
On the other hand of this other people argue that giving the officers too much control in using force can be even more dangerous than giving them restrictions. If there are restrictions officers may not be able to apply enough force on the citizen they are attempting to arrest. Before any officer can administer any force they must configure if they scene and people involved fit the requirements. The two requirements that the officers must follow are the proportionality and necessity requirement. In the proportionality requirement the police must see if the person posed a danger to the force against them or in deadlier cases, the person being arrested must be threatening to cause death or other injuries. With the necessity requirement, police must ensure that when deadly force was used it was truly needed and not just used because they somewhat unsure of how the situation was going to turn out. Before resorting to deadly force and using the requirements that must be met the officers should always try to find less lethal forms of force to subdue the situation. There are many less lethal weapons and other tools available for law enforcement to use such as tasers and physical force that are a less risk of death and injury than them using firearms. In an event that an officer uses a firearm they must follow the twenty one foot rule. Dennis Tueller, an instructor of police training, concluded after multiple tests that an attacker can travel twenty one feet in the time for the officer to pull out, aim, and fire the weapon. This rule is currently being reexamined to see if it is safe and actually works in life threatening situations.Even though the weapons are considered less lethal they still have the likelihood to result in serious injury or in some cases death. Data collected from 2001 to 2012 has shown that 540 people have been killed from the use of tasers. That does not amount to the data that is collected on how many are killed because of the presence of a firearm. From 2003 to 2005 alone in 80% of the 2,002 arrest related deaths the criminal possessed a weapon, mostly firearms, that they used to threaten or assault the officers at the scene.
With many deaths caused by irresponsible police officers using deadly force when it is not necessary the National Association of Police Organizations should intervene and make more aggressive laws for when officers are allowed to use deadly force. Because of the officers high position in society, they sometimes tend to believe they are above the law and these beliefs lead to the irresponsible use of force. If guidelines were set the problems society faces with deadly force resulting in deaths of the innocent people just because of the free range that police have with when they are allowed to use force. If this problem continues to happen in communities not only are there many consequences for the police officers but the people of the community will not see them as people we can look up to and protect us. As officers begin to abuse the power they have more and more people tend to start seeing a negative image of the officer. Laws must be established more aggressively and followed by the officers in order to prevent further tragedies when dealing with police officers and their line of work.