About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

15 Criminology & Pub. Pol'y 491 (2016)
Deadly Force: To Shoot or Not to Shoot

handle is hein.journals/crpp15 and id is 493 raw text is: POLICY ESSAY THE REVERSE RACISM EFFECT Deadly Force To Shoot or Not to Shoot William Terrill Arizona State University A police officer's decision to use deadly force is one of the most critical and powerful Adecisions of any government official. Reports of questionable police shootings have become part of the U.S. landscape since the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, MO, in the summer of 2014. It is not unusual to turn on the television, or access any other media format, and hear a host of commentators discuss the growing problem of police use of deadly force, irrespective of whether empirical evidence supports such an assertion. Nonetheless, what is clear is that there has been growing public concern with respect to police use of deadly force as more and more video clips emerge of questionable shootings, especially as they relate to race. In fact, it is not a stretch to state that the United States is experiencing the most widespread period of civil unrest since the 1960s. Before delving into this issue more concretely, it is important to provide some legal background. The police possess a legal mandate to use coercive tactics with the primary legal stipulation being that force must be administered in an objectively reasonable manner (Graham v. Connor, 1989). To demonstrate an objectively reasonable action within the confines of a deadly force encounter requires an imminent deadly threat (or the perception of such) to the life of the officer or the life of others with narrow exceptions made for threats that pose substantial risk to others should the police fail to seize a suspected offender (Tennessee v. Garner, 1985). Of course, what constitutes objectively reasonable force almost inherently requires a subjective interpretation (Terrill, 2009), and therein lies the proverbial rub. Hence, two people may view the same incident and come to two different conclusions. As argued elsewhere (Terrill, 2014), the police ultimately draw on their coercion power as a means of control, whether it be for legitimate (e.g., maintain order, ensure safety, or enforce the law) or illegitimate purposes (e.g., to harass, punish, or denigrate). Yet, even when the police are seeking a legitimate end purpose, the application of force may be unlawful. One Direct correspondence to William Terrill, School of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Arizona State University, 411 N. Central Avenue, Suite 600, Phoenix, AZ 85004 (e-mail: Wiliam.Terrill@asu.edu). DOI: 10.1111/ 1745-9133.12193 Q 2016 American Society of Criminology 491 Criminology & Public Policy. Volume 15 * Issue 2

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most