The citizens of the United States are usually sensitive when it comes to the issue of coercive power from the government as well as a semblance of despotism. Power in addition to authority is considered crucial concepts when it comes political order and given the fact that the police are the custodians of political power, they at times use force as a way of controlling behavior injurious to society. Even though the use of force is regularly considered ethically neutral, under particular conditions, it can result in abuse of power. Considering situations such as the brutal death of Rodney King in the year 1991 whereby he died as a result of police brutality, the excessive application of force by police is normally rare (Collins, 33).
However, cases that involve police hostility like misuse of the shooting policy often distort the relationship that exists between police and the citizens. Furthermore, the law enforcement agency is questioned on whether the officers act ethically in the name of curtailing crime. Occasions that have involved police officers shooting at people are normally faced with sheer criticism like in the situation whereby Timothy Thomas a 19-year-old Cincinnati resident in Ohio was shot dead in the year 2001. This resulted in massive riots whereby more than $8million worth property was destroyed. The police normally uses lethal force when they are presented with a threat that calls for such measures (Collins, 52).
The question that most people ask is whether the police are really trained to kill or they are supposed to shoot at less fatal parts of the body like the hands and the legs. This was the disturbing question among residents in Cleveland, Ohio after a 12 year old lad who was armed with a gun was shot dead by the police. However, it is at times possible to aim at the hands or legs upon dangerous encounter for instance a case whereby a police officer who had served in the police force for seven years shot at an assailer who was holding a knife to the throat of a woman. It is vital to realize that in most cases police are mainly trained to counter dangerous situations and upon encountering dangerous situations, they respond by using maximum force. Police officers exercise incredible discretion in selecting where and when to exercise force. Consequently, before umpiring a particular solicitation of force as rational or unreasonable, it is imperative to explore the policy making process cast-off by officers that eventually led to a certain use of force (Kuhns and Knutsson 83).
With regard to the shooting of the young boy in Cleveland, the police department in that region was found to have numerous faults whereby they were involved in the use of lethal force unnecessarily. Justice officials from the U.S Department of Justice found out that the police in that area were involved in shooting at individuals who had already surrendered or at times victims of a delinquency who were running away. It is thus not in order for police officers to use fatal force as the first response to a crime rather than it being the last resort. Moreover, academies that are meant to offer training for law enforcement purposes, usually provide police with a rudimentary knowledge as well as awareness on issues such as defensive tactics, weapons and physical fitness (Kuhns and Knutsson 83). Despite the exertions put in place to professionalize policing, the training they normally undergo through reinforced the notion that coercive power is a key element of policing.
Police officers are in some way trained to shoot to kill despite the fact that death should not necessarily be the last goal. Killing should always be regarded as a consequence of the deadly exchange of firearms and not an objective. The objective should basically get rid of the threat at hand with minimum casualties. The police department normally affirms that the most effective tactic of ensuring that a person is not killed is by aiming at the torso since it is the most likely part to incapacitate a person in case they pose a threat. In the training fields, the police normally aim at the chest of paper targets shaped as human beings. However, officers who normally shoot at the upper part of an individual’s body are subjected to criticism for failing to target the leg or an arm (Hess and Wrobleski 65).
What most people fail to understand, according to police officers, is that it is difficult to take a clear shot at a moving target. Moreover, shooting at the hand to fire a gun from a criminal is in most cases not a conceivable scenario. Police officers find themselves in the kill zone, mostly if their lives are at risk and thus they normally shoot to kill as a counter measure. It is thus justifiable for police officers to shoot at a person who poses a fatal risk. Legislating the perception of jeopardy is normally a tough thing to validate and officers may interpret innocent people to being dangerous (Fitzgerald, 21). Shooting to kill is the only plausible technique for self-defense and no one is ever trained to shoot to wound when they are fighting for their lives or defending themselves.
The policy governing deadly force has undergone through alterations in the past 30 years as a result of three breakthrough U.S Supreme Court cases. In the year 1958, policies that allowed police officers to shoot a fleeing suspect were nixed. It was declared by the court that it was only in the event that a suspect was posing a serious physical jeopardy that an officer would be permitted to shoot them defensibly. In the year 1989, the court went ahead and affirmed the use of deadly force by officers in case it was verified to be coherent in regard to the exceptional conditions of a situation. Later on in the year 1994, the court asserted that it was not in order for the police to use less deadly force such as the use of pepper spray in case there was a threat to a person’s life (Rostker, 45).
Finally, in the modern day, it is not easy to confirm that the policy on shoot-to-kill will ever undergo transformation. At center mass shooting is a long-lasting protocol that is usually backed by the law. In 2010, the pushing of the “minimum force” bill by lawmakers in New York was abortive. The bill necessitated police officers to only shoot at suspects with an intention of wounding them (Hess and Wrobleski 65).
Despite the fact that the police department is satisfied by the protocol governing the use of deadly force, activists as well as legislators are relentlessly trying to review the manner by which officers use the policy. The Justice Department is at the forefront in campaigning for ease of tension that exist between communities and the police who serve them. Furthermore, several states in U.S for instance Ohio with the aid of the American Civil Liberties Union, are recommending latent reforms to the Justice Department (Fitzgerald, 21).
Works Cited
Collins, Allyson. Shielded from Justice: Police Brutality and Accountability in the United States. New York: Human Rights Watch, 2011. Print.
Fitzgerald, Sheila. Police Brutality. Detroit: Greenhaven Press/Thomson Gale, 2013. Print.
Hess, Kären M, and Henry M. Wrobleski. Police Operations: Theory and Practice. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth, 2011. Print.
Kuhns, Joseph B, and Johannes Knutsson. Police Use of Force: A Global Perspective. Santa Barbara, Calif: Praeger, 2010. Internet resource.
Rostker, Bernard. Evaluation of the New York City Police Department Firearm Training and Firearm-Discharge Review Process. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2012. Internet resource.
