Police Use Of Force

Police use of force has been in question since the police force was established. People always debate whether the police have too much power or to little power to enforce the law and protect life. It has never been in doubt that law enforcement officers should carry firearms but the provisions of what constitutes the use and towards who has been. Police rarely have to use force or feel the need to use force. Of all civilian encounters, only about one and half percent require the use of force. But of those one and half percent, seventy-five percent felt that the force used against them was excessive. Subjects to such force are more than likely not reliable sources for the data collected. They are more likely to have a prejudice or a bias to …show more content…
They explained the use of force continuum to me and how to use it. The stages in lowest to highest order are presence, verbal commands, soft techniques, hard techniques, and lethal force. Presence is fairly self-explanatory. Just having the officer’s presence is a form of controlling the situation. Verbal commands are also self-explanatory. When just being present isn’t enough to diffuse a situation the officer will begin to use verbal commands. The officers are taught to be clear, direct and stern in their commands. Soft techniques involve physical contact and OC spray. If the perpetrator isn’t listening to the officer’s verbal commands then the officer can put the person in handcuffs or spray them with OC spray. If the Perpetrator decides to resist then the officer will then go to hard techniques such as strikes with their baton or fists and attempt to take the person down to the ground. Many if not all officers have had to go to this level of the continuum. Not many have had to use deadly or lethal force so most officers don’t have experience in the best way to deal with a situation that may require …show more content…
Garner case found that laws that authorize police use lethal force to apprehend fleeing, non-violent felony suspects was a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Before this case made this ruling there were may use of force policies that aloud a lot more things to constitute the use of lethal force. There was once an extreme policy that was called the Any-Felony Rule. This policy authorized police to use deadly force to apprehend a felon or prevent any felon. There for if a person that just committed a motor vehicle theft where no one was injured, an officer would be able to shoot the criminal to stop him. The other end of the spectrum was the Defense of Life Rule. This policy stated that the only justifiable reason to use lethal force was to prevent the loss of a life. This policy sounds wonderful and can subtract the amount of civilian deaths caused by police ten-fold. What this policy lacks is the past and future