Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Conclusion on violence justification
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Conclusion on violence justification
The public’s perception of how necessary police actions are varies. In the book, The Police and the Community (2002) the author discusses the difference between violence and force. When hearing the word force people often think violence, but this is not always the case. Force usually pertains to enforcement of the law; so for example pulling a gun out to show enforcement. Violence is might, and force is having power. Force is pulling out a gun, and the violent part of this scenario would be using the gun to kill someone. Determining whether using deadly physical force is done justifiably has been an ongoing endemic in this country for many decades, and today it is still an unresolved issue. Officers usually make the decision …show more content…
According to an article in the New York Times, “What Happened in Ferguson,” Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson were both at the Ferguson Market and Liquor. Mr. Brown was caught on surveillance stealing cigarillos from the liquor store. Officer Darren Wilson arrived at the liquor store and saw that Mr. Brown had fit the description of a suspect the police were looking for. There was a situation outside the police car between the officer and Mr. Brown that caused the officer to fire shots. The suspect runs, and the officer fires more shots, and Mr. Brown is fatally wounded. In the article on Washington Post, “Current Law Gives Police Wide Latitude to Use Deadly Force,” (2014) is about how the city of St. Louis and the nation are having trouble deciding if the police officer that shot Michael Brown should be charged. The author, Carl D. Leonnig says, “The law that determines when police can use deadly force generally gives officers considerable leeway in making a split-second decision about whether they need to kill to save themselves or others.” Officer Darren Wilson said that he shot to defend his life. He only needed to believe that he was in danger for his actions to be justified whether danger really existed or not. Officer Darren Wilson also said that Mr. Brown was trying to grab his gun when he approached him in his police car. In this case, other factors besides threat from a weapon were looked at like the size of this suspect. To some people, the size of a person could pose a threat especially if they weren’t complying with the law. The actions of Officer Wilson were deemed justifiable because he felt like he was in danger, and that is one of the main reasons why deadly physical force is
Facts: On October 3, 1974, Memphis Police Officers Hymon and Wright were dispatched to answer a “prowler inside call.” When the police arrived at the scene, a neighbor gestured to the house where she had heard glass breaking and that someone was breaking into the house. While one of the officer radioed that they were on the scene, the other officer went to the rear of the house hearing a door slam and saw someone run across the backyard. The suspect, Edward Garner stopped at a 6-feet-high fence at the edge of the yard and proceeded to climb the fence as the police officer called out “police, halt.” The police officer figured that if Garner made it over the fence he would get away and also “figured” that Garner was unarmed. Officer Hymon then shot him, hitting him in the back of the head. In using deadly force to prevent the escape of Garner, Hymon used the argument that actions were made under the authority of the Tennessee statute and pursuant to Police Department policy. Although the department’s policy was slightly more restrictive than the statute it still allowed the use of deadly force in cases of burglary. Garner’s fathers’ argument was made that his son was shot unconstitutionally because he was captured and shot possessing ten dollars that he had stolen and being unarmed showing no threat of danger to the officer. The incident was then reviewed by the Memphis Police Firearm’s Revie...
The Tennessee v. Garner case impacted law enforcement agencies today by utilizing the Fourth Amendment right of not using deadly force to prevent a suspect from fleeing unless the officer is in imminent danger of their life. Consequently, before this was set into place, an officer had the right to use deadly force on a fleeing suspect by all means.” The first time the Court dealt with the use of force was in Tennessee v. Garner, in Garner, a police officer used deadly force despite being "reasonably sure" that the suspect was an unarmed teenager "of slight build" who was running away from him” (Gross,2016). Whereas, with Graham v. Conner case was surrounded around excessive force which also has an impact on law enforcement agencies in today’s society as well. “All claims that law enforcement officers have used excessive force deadly or not in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other “seizure” of s free citizen should be analyzed under the Fourth Amendment and its “reasonableness” standard” (Doerner,2016).
For example, in Jacksonville, Florida, Jordan Davis, another unarmed teenager was killed by Michael Dunn. Davis and other teenagers were riding in a SUV with music blasting from the vehicle, when Dunn pulled up alongside of them and asked them to turn the music down . Words was exchanging between the two parties, and Dunn fired 8 to 9 shots into the SUV where he fatally shot Davis. Dunn was arrested and charged with first degree murder. Dunn claimed he fired in self-defense and invoked the “Stand Your Ground law” as his defense. ...
With the articles and past research that I have collected, studies tell us that less than 3 percent of police-citizen contacts involve the threat of physical force by the police. The percentages are higher when the level of force is below lethal force, for instance 20 percent of arrests may involve some type of special or needed force to obtain and control the suspect in able to put him in custody. In the academy, police officers are taught to use equal or greater force to subdue the suspect and do what is necessary to protect the public and also look out for officer safety. Most incidents of force are low level applications such as using the arms, hands, legs, or their bodies to gain control of the suspect. Every police officer is supposed to be trained to a certain standard, and should be able to use the correct amount of force for the situation at hand. Police officers have situational training in the academy on what level of force to use if necessary. All police officers are equipped to handle most if not all situations or levels of force that is need to
Over the years, our nation has witnessed countless cases of police brutality. It has developed into a controversial topic between communities. For instance, deindustrialization is the removal or reduction of manufacturing capability or activity can lead to more crimes when people are laid off. Police officers are faced with many threatening situations day-to-day gripping them to make split second decisions; either to expect the worst or hope for the best. The police are given the authority to take any citizen away for their action that can ruin their lives. With that kind of power comes great responsibility, which is one main concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force might or
Over the years, this country has witnessed many cases of police brutality. It has become a controversial topic among communities that have seen police brutality take place in front of their homes. Officers are faced with many threatening situations everyday forcing them to make split second decisions and to expect the worst and hope for the best. Police officers are given the power to take any citizens rights away and even their lives. With that kind of power comes responsibility, that’s one major concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use force or when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force may or not be a large predicament but should be viewed by both the police and the community.
Over the years, this country has witnessed many cases of police brutality. It has become a controversial topic among communities that have seen police brutality take place in front of their homes. Officers are faced with many threatening situations everyday forcing them to make split second decisions and to expect the worst and hope for the best. Police officers are given the power to take any citizens rights away and even their lives. With that kind of power comes responsibility, that’s one major concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use force or when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force may or not be a large predicament but should be viewed by both the police and the community.
As a result of the recent rise of the use of excessive force cases against police and law enforcement, I have chosen to research the definition of that excessive force. When is it considered justifiable? What training do officers receive? What liability issues are there? In an ABC news article, Sascha Segan states there is no specific definition of excessive force. A part of everyday police work is to subdue criminal and suspects. Another everyday task of police officers is personal discretion - making the right decision based on the specific situation. It has been documented in multiple viral videos that law enforcement officer’s discretion is not always favorable in the public eye and is quick to be judged. Yet shouldn’t we be asking if the officer’s actions were justifiable within the court system and if
“The police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence,” Robert Peel. The use of force for police officers is something I find to be justified and right, because it can possible help save the officers life and any witnesses lives.
For example, according to Dara lind “Officer’s aren’t supposed to shoot to kill. They’re supposed to do whatever is necessary to disable the threat”(Lind). Whenever an officer gets caught up in a difficult situation where deadly force is needed for the most part officers do shoot to kill because they feel like there life is in danger themselves. Yes like they said they are supposed to do whatever is necessary so therefore if shooting to kill someone is necessary to them then for police officers it is the right thing to do. But in reality in some occasions deadly force by a cop resulting in someone’s death is not needed and there should be other alternatives to handle difficult problems like that. In addition, “Usually, the point from where the officer believes he has to use deadly force to the point where he uses deadly force -- where he pulls
Recently in the United States there has been in increase in deaths that have come from police officers using deadly force. The use of force is inevitable as a police officer, many times their own lives or the life’s civilians are at risk when it comes to determine what type of force a officer should use. There are many incidents where police officer have to react in a matter of seconds and has to choose between his own life or that of the individual causing the disturbance. When a Police Officer uses deadly force has caused outraged with the public, stirring up protests and creating a scandal for the police officer and the Police Department. Many do not know when it is right for an officer to use deadly force and what constitutes it, or what happens when the officer does not use the appropriate amount of force that is required to control the situation. There has been many changes in Police Departments around the country to try to reduce the use of deadly force in response to the issues that have occurred because of it.
When hearing the phrase “police brutality,” many people imagine batons cracking skulls, tasers electrocuting bodies and bullets penetrating innocent teens. While police officers have been known to use violence, police brutality does not occur as often as many believe. In many situations, officers have to act on impulse and curiosity, despite the backlash the media may create.
Discretion is defined as the authority to make a decision between two or more choices (Pollock, 2010). More specifically, it is defined as “the capacity to identify and to document criminal and noncriminal events” (Boivin & Cordeau, 2011). Every police officer has a great deal of discretion concerning when to use their authority, power, persuasion, or force. Depending on how an officer sees their duty to society will determine an officer’s discretion. Discretion leads to selective enforcement practices and may result in discrimination against certain groups of people or select individuals (Young, 2011). Most police officer discretion is exercised in situations with individuals (Sherman, 1984).
Police brutality is an act that often goes unnoticed by the vast majority of white Americans. This is the intentional use of “excessive force by an authority figure, which oftentimes ends with bruises, broken bones, bloodshed, and sometimes even death” (Harmon). While law-abiding citizens worry about protecting themselves from criminals, it has now been revealed that they must also keep an eye on those who are supposed to protect and serve.
Officers of the law have obtained a substantial amount of discretion due to the profession they chose. Police officers are confronted with several situations which can be threatening or potentially lethal to them to which they must react rapidly but suitably. They have also been granted the authority to infringe upon any citizen’s rights and freedoms but with great power comes great responsibilities. The foremost growing concern in today’s society is shown when police officers decide to ‘test their discretion and apply the use of force or lethal force during their encounters. Klahm IV, C., Frank, J., & Liederbach, J., (2014) argue that the defining role of police is to control civilians and to ensure the peoples safety, furthermore