1

The Use of Lethal Force by Police during Crisis Response

Chasity Dukes

Helms School of Government

May 27, 2021

 2

The Use of Lethal Force by Police During Crisis Response

Introduction

The use of lethal force by police and other law enforcement agencies has attracted a lot of

attention from different quarters, including the media, government actors, investigators, and

protestors. There has been continuous public outcry about this issue resulting in the formation of

movements such as Blacks Lives Matter, championing for systematic changes in the police

agencies to curb the number of deadly incidents as a result of the use of lethal force by the police

on citizens. According to Mappingpoliceviolenc.org (2021), the police have killed about 414

people so far in the year 2021. This is a clear indication that we urgently need to find a solution

to this problem. The current research on this issue focuses on identifying racial disparity in the

number of deaths resulting from excessive application of force by the police.

Police agencies need a specialized crisis response when dealing with vulnerable

individuals based on their expressive, psychological or bodily state. In their period of

predicament, such persons may be unreasonable and even vehement because of influences that

may include desperate ideation, obsession, expressive disorder, and substance impact. In many of

these circumstances, the police reaction has led to the harming and even demise of susceptible

individuals. Therefore, police officers need to have a comprehensive strategy to give an

emotionally charged person a chance to be composed or a person in a drug-induced situation to

reclaim consciousness and thought. Through specialized preparation, strategies, and less-deadly

artillery, the forces can successfully intervene in an otherwise tragic event. Additionally, more

research has shown that black American men are at a greater risk of being victims of police

brutality than any other race. The most popular proposal to dealing with this problem is to reduce

the funding for police agencies. Those who advocate for this solution expect that it will force
 3

agencies to employ the right expertise when there is a crisis. However, efforts to reduce these

fatalities have not received the attention it deserves.

Therefore, this research will seek to describe the best policy changes that will help reduce

and eventually eliminate the use of force by police during crisis response. Developing and

changing agency policies would be an appropriate method to deal with this problem since past

studies have proved that agencies with strict rules have low cases of inappropriate behavior

(Jennings and Rubado, 2017). Such policies are meant to restrict law enforcement personnel

from using excessive and unnecessary lethal force when dealing with a crisis. Instead, they

should use de-escalation tactics when possible.

Police Response to Crisis and Vulnerable Individuals

According to Lee et al. (2010), the use of deadly force is an aspect of police work made

up of a dangerous potential for lawlessness by those entrusted with the law and have been sworn

to protect it. In many instances, officers of the law have taken it upon themselves to use lethal

force, which has stripped their departments and themselves of the people's trust in the eyes of the

citizens. The number of such cases is not, as some people might think, small and insignificant;

rather, the number is numbing. Many communities may not know them, having passed them off

one by one or even never encountering them in totality. However, these incidents are well known

in the minority communities, numbered and remembered. If investigating bodies investigated the

killing of citizens by police as they did with police deaths under any condition, the numbers

would be worrying. The lawlessness in the police department is not exclusive since there is a

collaboration between different parts of the criminal justice systems entrusted with enforcing the

law. For instance, when prosecutors with enough proof on police exploitation decline to take

legal action, they become accomplices of lawlessness. Or when grand juries listen to testimonies
 4

of unnecessary application of power by the forces and decline to charge, they become part of the

whole lawless system. When juries and judges ignore proof and testament and decline to indict

just because the perpetrator is a member of the forces, they become unruly. This is the disorder

that worry the public, which focuses on both the forces and other wings of the lawless scheme

and the public together. The majority of the public has readily assumed its backing and easily

approved the use of lethal power.

There is a concern about the lawlessness that accompanies the use of dangerous force by

police. The wider community, especially the white society, tends to approve and accept the use

of force. They have been offering the strongest support for the minimal regulation of lethal force

by the police since they experience the least threat and have the greatest influence. Therefore, if

we want the police to change and adopt new policies, it is important first to change the pressures

that are mounted on the police to use their weapons when dealing with crime and disorder issues

(Klahm & Tillyer, 2010). A democratic society should uphold its responsibility for the bullets

fired from the pistols of its police. Society is responsible for the policies under which the police

apply lethal force, and most of them should be assisted to take that responsibility. Police, on the

other side, instead of taking care of the excessive desire of the majority of the community for the

use of force, must advise the community that force is only used in cases where it is necessary and

only to the extent required for the execution of a lawful duty. A greater part of society might

seem to sanction the amount of force any police might use. Still, when police employ that kind of

approval, they begin to victimize innocent people and endanger the whole society (Klahm &

Tillyer, 2010).

Another concern about lethal force is the efforts made to change the cycle of fear within

society. The growth in fear of crime is more than the actual increase in crime since the fear of
 5

crime has been politically used during times of rapid social change. In our current society, fear

has become one of the main motivators of governmental action. Some people believe that only

fear can restore order and create respect for the law (Worden, 2015). Sometimes the fear that a

police officer might shoot you motivates good deeds. However, real security can only be

experienced only when citizens voluntarily accept and support the law. Such acceptance and

support will succeed widely between those who legitimately enjoy the benefits and privileges of

life they believe they deserve. Reliance upon the threat of violence will not offer any security

and stability within the society. Therefore, the use of lethal force, or the dependence on deadly

force as the source of citizen's support of the law, only tightens and increases the cycle of fear,

leading to hate and subsequently resulting in fear.

Research has established that police are most likely to use deadly force in situations

marked with ambiguity and surprise (Bolger, 2015). Police will use lethal force when they don't

know the victim personally and are less likely to know the real emotional situation of the victim.

Most importantly, the exchange of information between the police and the victim is vital if lethal

force is applied or averted. This case emphasizes the need for internal and external working

circumstances and situational variables that determine if the police killing was non-compulsory

or compulsory. A compulsory use of lethal force is where a police officer uses force to protect

themselves or another person from an imminent threat of physical hurt. In non-compulsory cases,

situational influences are the main factors that determine the police officers' decision to use lethal

force. Nevertheless, as the supposed possibility of threat reduces, the choice to use lethal force

converts to be more non-compulsory, with the operational setting taking a bigger effect.

Throughout their study of the use of lethal force by police during crisis response,
 6

Jennings and Rubado (2017) found out that administrative policies and organizational culture

played a major role in determining police shootings. The authors added that available

mechanisms aimed at controlling the discretion of each police officer, like departmental policies,

are important in reducing the total of police killings. They suggested that formalized guidelines

and operative exercise are essential means of governing police discretion about the use of deadly

force in elective encounters. Factors such as training, strategies, and policy dictate the behaviour

of an officer in the initial phases of possibly intense meetings. Therefore, they might reduce the

possibility of a compulsory lethal force choice. Due to this, it is a must for police bosses to come

up with working strategies and formalized strategies that will deal with people who are

susceptible based on their expressive, psychological, and bodily conditions. The means of police

reaction is mainly founded on the officer's evaluation of the danger coming from the people who

are frequently seen as suspects, felons, or assailants.

Consequently, police officers who think that they are not defenceless might not possibly

spontaneously choose to use lethal force. Such less threatened officers might most likely choose

to use other tactics such as detachment and repression. Physical space, interval, discourse, and

strategies might lead to a non-violent agreement to an else lethal situation. These issues too give

police bosses an extra chance of using a reserve response unit. This is usually a highly-trained

entity that can lead to more instances of a non-lethal result using expert mediators and extremely

skilled psychological people who can use less-lethal weapons in a skilful and lengthy way.

Police Training and Tactical Implications

Brandl & Stroshine (2013) says that there is a necessity for police agencies to put a better

stress on preparing both police staffs and in-services workers on how to use oral and strategic

abilities related to perversity involvement and serving the mentally ill. On top of this preparation,
 7

police staffs should be conscious of the undercurrents related to victim-precipitated use of force,

with a special focus on the issue of suicide-by-cop. They should focus mainly on training the

police on the best intervention measures when dealing with illogical persons who are susceptible

based on suicidal ideas, psychosis, emotional problems, and drug influence. Police officers need

to be trained to an extent where they can identify suicidal and psychotic signs when dealing with

vehement and perilous individuals. By recognizing these signs, the police officers can determine

the right force option that can be used in the situation at hand.

Under this agenda, police supports should also talk about the big differences between

separate law enforcers in age, social experience, development, knowledge, and approach. Such

wide personal differences usually define how an officer will respond to the sad, irrational, and

those who have mental problems. Due to this, there is a need to keep the police workforces

informed and trained to appreciate the insights of the unreasonable person when meeting them.

Moreover, these people most likely have diverse abilities to appreciate and integrate police

orders and carry themselves under self-discipline, hence the necessity for an expert reaction to

illogical behavior.

Finally, police preparation should also emphasize the significance of gathering evidence

before a police officer visits a call for service. In numerous cases, members of the community

call police to report substance use issues, mental illnesses, or those expressing suicidal thoughts.

Call-takers and report teams within police organizations should know the subtleties related to a

victim-precipitated police shooting. Therefore, this person needs to be aware of the relevant info

from the associates of the community who call the police. Response peoples are then supposed to

communicate this information to the attending units before they arrive at the scene to give them a

chance to plan and organize a response. Police agencies should develop a specialized response
 8

team for incidents that involve individuals who are known to be suicidal, mentally ill, or are

irrational. For instance, they can develop a crisis intervention team composed of police officers

who have undergone some training on dealing with people with mental illness and suicidal ideas.

These police officers can be trained to slow down and reduce crisis cases using negotiation and

flexible tactics (Ross, Winterhalder & McElreath, 2018).

Additionally, Jennings & Rubado (2017) say that other than using crisis mediation

squads, the agency can use control and strategic removal methods in their responses. If

promising, police officers are supposed to stay away physically and protect themselves from

people who might incite a victim-precipitated shooting. A planned removal and control by police

workforces might help neutralize the activities and suicidal intents of a psychologically

challenged person. The police strategy of interval and detachment may also give an expressively

excited person a chance to cool down or a person in a state induced by drugs to recover

perception. Control can also give the police a chance to develop a plot for act based on a

intended and protracted reaction, which might involve the use of non-lethal force.

Synthesis of Christian Worldview

The religious community seeks to enhance the basic respect for human life. As stated

earlier, the police should employ lethal force in specific instances where there is an apparent risk

to life, either of an officer or other individual. The religious community holds that lethal force

should only be used when necessary, and it's the last resort when every other option has been

exhausted. When no actual need for killing someone exists, the overriding requirement is to

protect life, even for those violating the law. This principle is very difficult to execute, but it is

the one that should guide the government and their agents if they seek to respect the lives of each

other, including the police. This is a big burden for the government to carry and which it has the
 9

power to ignore. The risks involved for the government agents who practically apply such

principles are very big. However, they should be taken in favor of life if the right to life is

protected fully across society. Bolger (2015) says that a police officer may not choose to believe

in such philosophical ideas or consider such theological ideas, some of which could be

dangerous. However, in a stable democracy, a police officer is supposed to defend the essential

principle of society: the basic respect for human life.

Officers have devoted their lives to protect themselves and to defend the sacredness of

human life, as indicated in John chapter fifteen verse thirteen that there is no greater love than

this: that a person would lay down his life for the sake of his friends (Nelson, 2013). The greatest

way to show love for friends is to die for them. Although there are people who might accuse the

religious community of playing bleeding hearts, this is more of a beating hearts situation. The

religious community talk of a heart that is sensitive, compassionate, and responsive to all people

in the community with a determination to advance human respect, aimed at developing and

preserving the dignity of human life. It is a life that employs reason to uphold life in its entirety.

Although many people might argue that the church is offering criminal protection by

jeopardizing those who are tasked with enforcement of the law, it is important to note that one of

the concerns for using lethal force by the religious community is about police themselves.

Finally, it should be our goal to bring up a society where police don't have to be armed.

For this to happen, society must develop policies that restrict the possession of firearms. The

police should also be considered an integral part of society and not an entity by itself. The police

will understand that their main role is to serve the people; hence they will be responsive and

responsible to civilian control. Additionally, the police is the only government entity allowed to

use lethal force to compel individuals to obey the law. This is a strong power and responsibility
 10

delegated to them and has the potential for abuse. Therefore it should be controlled by the use of

different methods, including policies.

References

Bolger, P. C. (2015). Just following orders: A meta-analysis of the correlates of American police

officer use of force decisions. American journal of criminal justice, 40(3), 466-492.

Brandl, S. G., & Stroshine, M. S. (2013). The role of officer attributes, job characteristics, and

arrest activity in explaining police use of force. Criminal justice policy review, 24(5),

551-572.
 11

Jennings, J. T., & Rubado, M. E. (2017). Preventing the use of deadly force: The relationship

between police agency policies and rates of officer-involved gun deaths. Public

Administration Review, 77(2), 217-226. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12738

Klahm, C. F., & Tillyer, R. (2010). Understanding police use of force: A review of the evidence.

Southwest Journal of criminal justice, 7(2), 214-239.

Lee, H., Jang, H., Yun, I., Lim, H., & Tushaus, D. W. (2010). An examination of police use of

force utilizing police training and neighborhood contextual factors: A multilevel

analysis. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management.

Mappingpoliceviolence.org. (2021). National police violence map. Mapping Police

Violence. https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/

Nelson, T. (2013). NKJV, The NKJV Study Bible. Thomas Nelson.

Ross, C. T., Winterhalder, B., & McElreath, R. (2018). Resolution of apparent paradoxes in the

race-specific frequency of use-of-force by police. Palgrave Communications, 4(1), 1-9.

Worden, R. E. (2015). The causes of police brutality: Theory and evidence on police use of

force (Vol. 2, pp. 149-204). Routledge, New York, NY, ed.