Introduction
People have always criticized the use of deadly weapons ever since police started carrying guns. In order to apprehend fleeing, the Supreme Court in Tennesse v. Garner passed laws for the use of deadly force for the non-violent felony to violate the Fourth Amendment. This decision has influenced a number of homicides by police officers nationwide. This investigation has reduced a significant percentage in the homicides before and after the decision. Under such decision, there is a reduction not only in shooting fleeing felons, but also in police shooting. In 1858, a newspaper of New York Time had discussed a case in which a police officer got shot and killed a suspect.
Origin of Incident
In 1858, a police officer shot a fleeing suspect. According to the people critics, the pistols should not be used in self-defense, and a policeman has no right to shoot a man who is running. Such arguments had persisted the public. People accused such police officers who had denounced homicides. Later in March, the Supreme Court of the United States held the laws to authorize police for the use of weapons to apprehend the non-violent felony.
Garner stated the law controlling police to use the deadly weapons. There were four groups of police; The Model Penal Code. The Forcible Felony Rule, The Defense-of-Life Rule and the Any-Felony Rule. The officers of the Any-Felony Rule were authorized to use the weapons for arresting the suspects and prevent them from fleeing (Hall). The Supreme Court interpreted this rule as legal permission to kill an unarmed felony suspect during the flight. For the group, the Defense-of-Life Rule, the Supreme Court allowed only for the protection of human life, either for a civilian's life or police officer's own life. The two policies i.e. the Forcible-Felony Rule and the Model Penal Code were introduced to balance the two extremes, but they had the same result. A draft was sent by the American Law Institute to guide the states for the modification in the criminal procedures and statutes (Morrison and Garner). On this behalf, two conditions were identified for the use of deadly force: when the criminal is involved or threats and when there is a substantial risk of death or serious bodily harm. The Any-Felony Rule seemed to be unconstitutional and the people of the United States claimed that this rule is violating the Fourth Amendment's Protection against illegal seizure. Despite this criticism, the Any-Felony Rule was prior among all the rules in twenty-five states.
Action Taken by the Supreme Court
Before any decision of the Supreme Court, most jurisdictions thought the use of deadly force should be legitimate. In this case, Garner suggested a wrongful death action under the civil rights against a police officer. His son was unarmed at the scene of burglary. The Supreme Court decided that such force may not be used unless it is really necessary, and the suspect can pose a threat of death to the others. On this decision, the Supreme Court equivocated and restricted the Any-Felony Rule (Morrison). According to this decision, Garner could not affect the police conduct due to modified police behavior. During this decision, some policy-makers examined the legislative changes, the state attorneys general and the subsequent federal case law.
Important Facts and After Effects on the Society
Three important facts came out which seem to be self-evident. The first one is that Garner had justified police homicides. The second was that Garner had influenced both the constitutional and unconstitutional states. The unconstitutional states had the magnitude of reduction in the number of police shootings. A recent study conducted by the Memphis Police Department has explained that the shootings took place in three different periods. The police restricted this policy after the decision. The police departments are forced to follow the guidelines beyond the legal requirements. This self-restrictions on the police will become a political necessity. Huge social costs are involved in the police shooting of civilians. The use of deadly force often spawns civil law suits. The decision of Garner has restricted practices and have created more frustration for the police. The Garner decision has reduced the police homicides and as a result, protecting life seems to be declining. In 1960s, the United States had very stable number of homicides. The justifiable homicides had compromised to one-third of the total number. The more police are evolved; the more homicides will be justifiable.
Conclusion
The Garner decision has made a strong effect on police behavior. . This decision has influenced a number of homicides by police officers nationwide. The crime rates of non-homicide are inversely proportional to the lethal response rate of police. With the use of deadly force, the police has a deterrent effect on the crime in the society. Such restrictive practices are creating more frustration and increasing the risk level among the police. This decision requires more empirical support for the society in the future regarding the behavior of police.
References
Hall, Matthew Eric Kane. The Nature Of Supreme Court Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Print.
Morrison, G. B. 'Deadly Force Programs Among Larger U.S. Police Departments'. Police Quarterly 9.3 (2006): 331-360. Web.
Morrison, Gregory B., and Timothy K. Garner. 'Latitude In Deadly Force Training: Progress Or Problem?'. Police Practice and Research 12.4 (2011): 341-361. Web.
