Use of deadly force and reasonableness are two concepts that are very common in court cases on the subject of police power. Deadly force refers to the implication of force beyond which a rational and a discreet law enforcement agent would imply within certain settings. Reasonableness, on the other hand, is customary that associates an individual in question to a theoretical one who implies typical skill, care as well as judgment in behavior that culture requires of its affiliates for the safety of their interests. These aspects of law enforcement are very significant in a court of law and case interpretation. This is evident in the court cases of Graham v Connor regarding Graham’s brutal treatment at the hands of five police officers and the case of Tennessee v Garner in which the court stated that the Tennessee decree was undemocratic to imply the use of deadly force to stop Garner from fleeing ( Webb, 2017) . This research paper examines the effects of a proposal by Maryland Assemblyman Smith to change the language that set parameters for the police in regards to these two cases.
In the case of Tennessee v Garner, the court stated that deadly force is consummate and went ahead that it is of no benefit when felony suspects end up dead than when they escape. Garner was fleeing and trying to climb over a fence during an attempted arrest ; the police officer had two options which were either to let Garner escape or imply deadly force to stop him. However, regarding a Tennessee decree which allowed the police officers to subject all the needful force to arrest of an escaping felon effectively , the police did what he thought was reasonable by shooting Garner in the back of the head ( Terrill, 2016) . From this case, the police officer is supposed to be judged from a reasonable office of the site .
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In the light of the case of Graham v Connor, it reiterates the rights of citizens enshrined in the fourth amendment. Conversely, this case aids in the clarification of the unbiased reasonableness customary to be utilized in circumstances of pursuit and confiscation which does not imply that the standard has been regularly functional. The reasonableness standard is often left uncluttered to interpretation by courts and equally by the police officers. However, the Graham v Connor case verdict did not address the matters of police profiling and enhanced marginalization resultant of an individual’s membership to a marginal group ( Obasogie and Newman, 2017) .
Given the fact that the problem of reasonableness has continued and evident not just with these cases, but also with the jagged solicitation of the fourth amendment and the impartial reasonableness customary, the effects of the proposal by the Maryland Assemblyman are very significant in regards to the police policy of reasonableness. The proposal intends to change the language that sets parameters to the police from ‘when reasonable’ to ‘when necessary’ an aspect that would limit the manner in which the police use deadly force. In the case of Tennessee v Garner, the police shot Garner at the back of the head when it was reasonable however there was another option that could have implied, and the use of such deadly force would be only if it were necessary. E ven the court stated that there is no benefit with a suspect ending up dead that fleeing away ( Webb, 2017) . Similarly, in the case of Graham v Connor, it is evident that the fact of ‘when reasonable’ exemplify grant for the fact that police officers are frequently obligatory to make instantaneous decisions in very tense situations regarding the amount of force necessary.
Therefore, in conclusion, the proposed bill by the Assemblymen regarding the change in language parameters for the police officers would help regulate the manner in which the police become compromised to make sudden decisions regarding the usage of deadly force to effect the arrest of a felony suspect. Hence, the use of deadly force by the police would be only when necessary other than when it is reasonable to apply excessive force.
References
Obasogie, O. K., & Newman, Z. (2017). The Futile Fourth Amendment: Understanding Police Excessive Force Doctrine Through an Empirical Assessment of Graham v. Connor. Nw. UL Rev. , 112 , 1465.
Terrill, W. (2016). Deadly force: To shoot or not to shoot. Criminology & Public Policy , 15 (2), 491-496.
Webb, L. (2017). Legal Consciousness as Race Consciousness: Expansion of the Fourth Amendment Seizure Analysis Through Objective Knowledge of Police Impunity. Seton Hall L. Rev. , 48 , 403.
