You are a police officer on a call to a domestic dispute. Upon arrival at the scene at nighttime—the front porch you hear a woman screaming and you can barely make out an unconscious man lying on the ground. Knowing this is a perilous circumstance you immediately call for backup, unstrap and draw your sidearm.
Suddenly the back door forcefully swings open and a woman whom you can barely catch sight of runs towards you… despite identifying yourself as a police officer and verbal commands to stop you are now forced to use your sidearm? Even though you called for backup it is unless now as you now have to focus on this woman who refuses to follow verbal commands.
2007-02-15 22:06:50 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
We don't shoot people running toward us that are unarmed. It is not unusual for a victim to run toward police at these kinds of incidents and not listen to a word you say. They are so wrapped up in their fear and distress that they just don't hear you.
As well, we generally will wait for backup at a distance from the house and then come in together on these kinds of calls.
2007-02-15 22:19:44 · answer #1 · answered by joeanonymous 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
First, I must offer the reply to your "what if" question that a drill sergeant of mine at MP AIT did to a fellow soldier:
"What if earthworms, had machines guns? Do you think birds would still f**k with them?"
Sorry, but what ifs are just too "iffy". Anyhow, depending upon many many untold [by your description] factors, the offcier's actions can vary many many ways.
Is the female armed with some sort of weapon? If so, is she rushing at the officer with intent to hurt the officer or running to someone that can offer her a safe place to be after leaving what was a very unsafe place--which is why she is still carrying the weapon she just used to defend herself?
Refusing to follow an officer's command does not necessarily mean that the person is combative. They could just be in shock over some traumatic, recently experienced situation.
Even if the female is armed with aggtressive intentions, the officer SHOULD first try to subdue her without resorting immediately to deadly force. Even though most agencies now don't like for officers to fire "warning" shots, the officer could loudly yell for the female to halt or stop or whatever and fire off a round into the lawn.
Bottom line, it's a tough call to make in a split second and that is why everyone should still appreciate that officer that may one day say to them, "Press hard, there are five copies [to the ticket]. Signing is not an admission of guilt, you are simply acknowledging that you understand the charges against you. Etc."
2007-02-16 03:55:44 · answer #2 · answered by quntmphys238 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
why would you draw your weapon in the first place(dont get me wrong I know I was not there I will never second guess a cop who was there) As many domestics do turn bad I have never skinned the old smoke wagon unless I knew there was other issues I.E known weapons and that awful cop feeling. But this one did have a man down Well any way just by the sound of it deadly force was not the first option. There was not any meantion af a weapon. I hate to tell you but people dont alway follow verbal commands well most dont so I hope there was more to this
2007-02-16 01:18:35 · answer #3 · answered by common sense 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Weapon? the first thing you should do is fine cover I don't care if your in the middle of a football field. there is always some kind of cover or evasive maneuver. I instructed officer safety and survival. Shining your flashlight in her eyes is a form of distraction.Use of deadly force is the last resort, You have to take the whole situation into consideration It is not TV when you shot somebody and ten minutes later you back on the street. You better be a damn good report writer is you shoot an unarmed civilian
2007-02-15 23:30:42 · answer #4 · answered by watchman_1900 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you did not mention a weapon in her hand. At this moment, there are too many things lef out to make a snap decisions, things that you as the person in the story would know.
Does she have a weapon in her hands, is she pointing it to you or is it loose in her hands pointing to the ground. She may be refusing to follow verbal commands because you have identified yourself. She may very well be running to you seeking your protections from what is inside. No, with the information given, deadly force is not justified.
If however she has a weapon pointed to you, it may be justified, again, there are still too few details-details the officer would have already processed mentally
2007-02-15 22:16:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Way too many unknowns at this point to make a decision. Can I see her hands? Is she covered in blood? Is she carting a weapon of some sort? Anything from a wooden spoon to a bazooka?
Using your circumstances and assuming no weapons are mentioned I'd take her to the ground and cuff her without gun play.
2007-02-15 22:30:14 · answer #6 · answered by dude0795 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Unless she has a weapon, deadly force is not called for and would not be used. A police officer would defend a bodily attack with his baton or restraint. Only in the presence of a weapon is deadly force to be used.
2007-02-15 22:17:55 · answer #7 · answered by nesmith52 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Way too many variables left out
2007-02-16 15:59:07 · answer #8 · answered by Leigh P 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If she is unarmed, tackle her....................once she is down on the ground
you can stop her from panicking or arrest her whichever is called for......
2007-02-16 00:32:23 · answer #9 · answered by gorglin 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
These are all great answers - very impressive !
2007-02-15 23:09:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋