Use Of Force Policy

“The complaint rate for police use of force was 6.6 complaints per 100 sworn officers” (National Institute of Justice, 2016). This paper will provide an overview of the policies and practices within the New Jersey Attorney General’s Use of Force Policy. This paper will provide an evaluation of the policy with emphasis on the legal sufficiency for the policy and procedures. The paper will identify the strengths and weaknesses of the policy. This paper will display the procedures with suggestions for improvement. This paper will provide examples and the associated issues of less-than-lethal technologies.

An overview of the policies and practices within the New Jersey Attorney General’s Use of Force Policy

The policies and practices within the

New Jersey Attorney General’s Use of Force Policy were issued on April 1985 and it was revised on June 2000 (Use of force, 2001). The review group for New Jersey use of Force offered the improvements in the policy through its difficult labors and rulings (Use of force, 2001). The understanding of review group of the detail that law on its own may not influence the objective of directing the use of force by the police correctly offered the agreement about the serious development (Use of force, 2001). The reviewed rule explains the utilization of the force as and when required to influence the legal ends (Use of force, 2001). The New Jersey Attorney General's use of Force Policy limits the law enforcement officers to completely obey with the rules of State of New Jersey (Use of force, 2001). The laws of New Jersey offer a strong regulation on the use of force acceptable to apply the law appropriately (Use of Force, 2001). Additional, the policy highlights that the officers should take simple and essential steps to stopping the unlawful and wrong use of force by other officers (Use of force, 2001). Each officer is permitted and hounded to take quick activities when he or she understands that the other officer is by some means not satisfying the requirements of state law. Any officer who attempts to disregard the state law is expected to be punished (Use of Force, 2001).
Evaluation of the policy with emphasis on the legal sufficiency for the policy and procedures
The policy is in place to inform officers that they must be able to explain their use of force (Use of force, 2001).

The legal sufficiency of the policy and procedures is obviously apparent from the circumstances that the policy creates each officer limited of using completely other suitable methods acceptable to deal with the offenders before moving on the usage of force (Use of force, 2001). The policy states that the police inside the state of New Jersey determination merely use of force which the police can explain and protect rationally (Use of force, 2001). The explanation of the use of force is the significant willpower an officer should create before determining to use force on the accused (Wittie, n.d.). Overall, the use of force is defensible when it is essential to making an arrest, holding the accused, or to defending an officer or a third party (Wittie, n.d.). The volume of force used cannot surpass what a rational individual would believe required to make the arrest, hold the accused, or defend an officer or third party (Wittie, n.d.). The individuals that decide if the force was rational would be the citizens sitting on the jury will be assigned with deciding the fairness of the force used by the officer (Wittie,

n.d.).
Identification of the strengths and weaknesses of the New Jersey Use of Force Policy
There are several strengths of the New Jersey Use of Force policy. The New Jersey Use of Force contain of a law enforcement officer can use bodily force or powered force when the officer rationally trusts it is directly essential at the time to weakened confrontation focused at the officer or others; or to defend the officer, or a third party, from illegal force; or to defend possessions; or to influence other legal goals, for example, to make an arrest (Use of force, 2001). There are several weaknesses of the New Jersey Use of Force policy. The restriction on the use of deadly force can be a weakness (Use of force, 2001). A law enforcement officer should not practice lethal force to subdue individuals whose conducts are only unhelpful to possessions (Use of force, 2001). Lethal force should not be used alongside individuals whose behavior is harmful only to them (Use of force, 2001). A law enforcement officer should not release a firearm as a gesture for help or as a warning shot (Use of force, 2001).
Procedures with suggestions for improvement
One of the procedures for improvement can be training.

Officers should meet requirements at its full potential. Each law enforcement organization is wanted to handle and record semi-annual training for all officers on the legal and suitable use of force and lethal force (Use of force, 2001). The training should be planned to reveal present values recognized by constitutional and circumstance rule, in additional to statewide, district and different organization policy (Use of force, 2001). Officer use of Force reports to report any incidents can help record data of use of force (Use of force, 2001). When officers complete report the district DA’s offices should directly inform the Division of Criminal Justice when an associate of their organization uses bodily, powered or lethal force which ends in demise or thoughtful physical grievance or when grievance of any amount outcomes from the use of a weapon by organization workers (Use of force,

2001).
Provide examples and the associated issues of less-than-lethal technologies.
There are different kinds of the associated issues of less-than-lethal technologies. Developments in less-than-lethal technology propose the potential of further operational power over defensive of the accused with less severe grievances (Bulman, 2011). The original of these latest less-than-lethal weapons/technologies to accomplish extensive acceptance by police forces was pepper spray (Bulman, 2011). Most recent is the conducted energy devices (CEDs), for instance, the Taser, ensure to the more popular device (Bulman, 2011). Did you know that “more than 11,000 American law enforcement agencies use conducted energy devices, but their use has not been without controversy” (Bulman, 2011)? Agencies such as Amnesty International and the American Civil Liberties Union have suspected whether conducted energy devices must be used carefully, and whether the agencies contribute to neutral grievances and in detention demises (Bulman, 2011). Legislators and law enforcement representatives need to distinguish whether conducted energy devices and other less-than-lethal weapons are harmless and operative and how police should use them (Bulman, 2011).
Conclusion
This paper provided an overview of the policies and practices within the New Jersey Attorney General’s Use of Force Policy. This paper provided an evaluation of the policy with emphasis on the legal sufficiency for the policy and procedures. The paper identified the strengths and weaknesses of the policy. This paper displayed the procedures with suggestions for improvement. This paper provided examples and the associated issues of less-than-lethal technologies.