In today’s world, all over the news, stories about unlawful killings, bombings and the use of deadly physical force are being portrayed as just, while a handful of those cases are viewed as unjustified. Police and other officials need to understand the definition of deadly force and the differences between justifiable and excessive. The public needs someone they can depend on and if the police are using deadly force in harmful ways, that trust is lost. However, police should be prepared to “shoot-to-kill” in any situation because the outcomes cannot always be pre-determined. Police should use deadly physical force in only necessary situations to protect the public.

An opposing argument to the use of deadly force is that it is not necessary because there are numerous other actions police can take to protect the public. Their mere presence can be used as a force to change the course of a situation. Officers use words, hand motions, pepper spray, tasers and batons to limit the situation and control their surroundings. However, do these forces really stop vigilantes and protect the public? No. They immobilize the attacker, but these defense mechanisms do not stop the “bad guy” from future actions against the law. Police need to protect the public and if called for, they may need to use deadly force.

In law enforcement, it is important for police to use deadly force in only certain situations and this is defined by the terms excessive versus justified. In New York State, the use of deadly force is outlined in Penal Law 35. From an interview by retired police lieutenant, Louis Capri, he was quoted saying, “In New York to be justifiable, any force needs to be authorized, necessary, reasonable and without recklessness.” Every time an officer commits a deadly act, the case has to go to the grand jury to determine if the force was justified or excessive. “Deadly physical force is only justifiable in defense of deadly physical force towards the officer or a third person. However, if an officer can articulate that they were fearful of losing their life then sometimes it may be justifiable,” (Capri). Often times, through the media there are always officers who try to defend their deadly physical force cases by claiming that they were in fear for their own lives. But is this frequently the case? No, there are biases and falsified evidence that favor the shooter and not the victim. The force can be deemed excessive by the district attorney, officer’s supervisors, the department’s internal affairs, the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). In the article, Police Use of Force, the National Institute of Justice says, “The frequency of police use-of-force events that may be defined as justified or excessive is difficult to estimate [2]...NIJ is currently funding a study of the validity and reliability of the BJS (Bureau of Justice Statistics) data.” Currently, as the news is getting more destructive and negative, police officers and higher authorities are justifying their actions instead of calling them excessive. The average amount of time annually, that law enforcement uses lethal attacks is 360. That’s about one a day! The exact percentage of that 360 which are justified versus excessive is currently unknown. Each situation has different evidence to prove whether or not police officers were using deadly violence appropriately. Although, knowing the difference between excessive vs. justified is important, it is also imperative to realize what the “shoot-to-kill” mindset is and why it is only used in specific situations.

Police must always be prepared to “shoot-to-kill” if necessary. The mindset of “shoot-to-kill” implies that an officer should be ready to use their gun, to kill if the situation gets out of hand. “[Officers have] to always be prepared to take a life if necessary. They should not want to, but they need to be prepared to do it. Deadly physical force is our last option...” (Capri). An example of when the “shoot-to-kill” mindset could be used might be when a citizen tries to gain access to an officer’s holster and tries to take out the gun. In that instance, the officer would be permitted to take his weapon and shoot the perpetrator even if they were not necessarily in possession of the gun. The officer’s life would be in danger in that moment and if the officer did not quickly react to the situation, he/she would be in fear for their lives and the lives of others involved. Although nowadays, so much is projected about police use of force, it often seems that officers are too prepared and constantly ready to shoot. Police are taught to shoot center mass. “Center mass. It’s ‘operations central’ for your body, houses your heart...lungs…[and] nerves. The vagus nerve is the master switch for heart rate and blood pressure. Turn off that switch, empty the pump of blood or puncture a lung and a person is likely to die-quickly...” (Bedard). When something similar to the above example happens, police are likely to protect themselves and the public and will do anything they have to do to make sure the situation does not persist. “Shoot-to-kill” is necessary for the officer’s protection as well as protecting the public from dangerous weapons and people. 

Furthermore, relating the use of deadly force to modern-day situations proves that police use deadly force when needed. On June 6, 2015 in Dannemora, New York, two prisoners by the names of Richard Matt and David Sweat escaped Clinton Correctional Facility with the help of the prison tailor, Joyce Mitchell. When Matt and Sweat split up, Matt was killed by law enforcement with three shots to the head. Although, this was not a center mass shot, the enforcement still “shot-to-kill.” He was a fugitive carrying a gun. “State and federal law allows the use of deadly force to prevent an escape if the officer believes the suspect poses a significant threat,” (CBC News). When Sweat was found by Sergeant Jay Cook, he had no weapon, yet he posed a strong threat because unlike Matt, Sweat was in jail because he killed an officer. Sweat did not die from the shots, but under law Sgt. Cook had the authoritative signal and the law on his side. Even Governor Andrew Cuomo vocalized his gratitude by telling Cook he did “great police work.” In this current example, deathly physical force was necessary because if the fugitive had not been killed, the nation could have been at risk.

Deadly physical force is utilized by police officers when the public is at risk and no other solution prevails. When police are put in the situation of whether to use deadly force or not, they will try to use other means to stop the increasing issue. If their actions are not effective, they will resort to violence in order to keep the public safe. Knowing when deadly force is justified and when it is not is important for the officer as well as the citizens. Officers should always be prepared to “shoot-to-kill” because they never know what is going to happen. It is also essential to learn from current events about when and where is it not okay to use necessary actions. Now and in the future police need to be aware and understand that deadly force can only be used in specific situations.