Use of Force 9police officer, fearing that the suspect would get away if he made it over the fence,
fired at the back of Garner's head and killed him.
The decision to use force in the apprehension of a citizen, whether it be excessive
or deadly, ultimately lies in the hands of the police officer at the moment of conflict.
Although the goal of the officer is always to resolve a conflict in the most peaceful
manner, it is understood that there are situations in which a peaceful resolution is
not possible. Guidelines are established to assist the officer, who at times must make
a "split-second" decision as to the type of force necessary. In order to set these
guidelines behind the use offeree, it is first necessary to understand how dangerous
situations in need offeree unfold and the decisions that follow:
Literature Review
The history behind the police officer's right to use force dates back to common
law under English rule. Known as the "fleeing felon" law, common law states that
a police officer could use deadly force in situations that must protect the life of the
officer or an innocent third party, to overcome resistance to arrest, or to prevent the
escape of any felony suspect (Inciardi, 1993; Pursley, 1994). The loose generalization
of the "fleeing felon" law leaves a series of questionable circumstances and issues that
remain unaddressed due to the changing criminal activities of our present day. Our
current legal system now classifies more crimes as felonies, which in turn allows for
more felony-related crimes that are not necessarily dangerous nor life- threatening.
Furthermore, technology provides more effective means of communication and
organization within police forces that can aid in the apprehension of criminals
(Pursley, 1994).
Such unspecified circumstances established by the "fleeing felon" law were left
to the discretion of the police jurisdiction. Many jurisdictions continued to use the
common law guidelines until the landmark decision in Tennessee v. Gamer (1985) that
sought to outline the qualifications of the use offeree in a constitutional frame. It was
argued that the level of force the officer used against Edward Garner was extreme
and unnecessary given the circumstances of the crime. Following Tennessee v. Garner,
the use offeree was restricted to circumstances where it is necessary to prevent the
escape of a suspect who is believed to be a significant threat to the officer or others
(Inciardi, 1993).
Within the creation of more defined standards of the use of force lies the explo-
ration of the motives, behavior, and decision-making process that underlie such an
action. Many social scientists have researched these aspects and have offered some
insights that can serve as an aid in organizing such standards of force. In the past,
the problems associated with the use of force were seen as the result of "a few
bad apples" within the police community. Such an explanation is weighted in the
view that many police officers possess a stereotypical aggressive and authoritative
nature. This concept has received a great deal of attention within the public due to