Non-Lethal Options
Police Using Deadly Force
By Daniel Muniz

The above comments are in response to an article published in National Summary, My Son is Not an Animal – Despite Beating Up his Girlfriend, in which a mother laments the death of her son by the police.

John Henry Cervantes was beating up his girlfriend, who was also the mother of their son, when police officers showed up. Cervantes lunged at the cops who in turn shot him dead. They assumed that he must have had a knife since there was blood splattered throughout the house. The officers at the scene didn’t know that the boyfriend had just shattered a car window with his fist before he started physically abusing his girlfriend inside their house.

The commenter admits that this guy is not a model citizen but his concern is about people dying at the hands of the police even if they are thugs. And he raises the point that hasn’t technology improved enough that there are already other options available for law enforcement instead of using deadly force.

Plenty of populists (which can include Liberals and Conservatives) and ordinary law abiding citizens don’t mind one bit if a hoodlum is shot dead, especially during a violent crime. Even certain Liberals do not necessarily want to be associated with other Liberals who coddle vicious criminals regardless of how brutal and ruthless their crimes are. This commenter may or may not be a “hug-a-thug” coddling Left Winger but in all fairness, these comments do have validity because times and technology has changed.

In the past couple of decades, a plethora of non-lethal weapons have been developed from concussion grenades to rubber bullets to noxious gasses and to the ever increasing popularity of electric stun guns. And for the most part, these non-fatal alternatives are effective although some of them are only useful up to a certain point.

A concussion grenade will knock anybody to the ground. How long someone stays down depends on a variety of factors but police departments do attest to its potency, particularly when the element of surprise is needed.

The same goes for pepper spray and tear gas. Pepper spray became popular since it is more effective in rendering someone senseless because of the powerful ingredients used to manufacture it. With tear gas, people still have the use of certain physical abilities while there are others who are almost immune to it. And there are also ways to mitigate its effect by not inhaling the gas or not letting it get it into your eyes. Pepper spray is different because it can be absorbed through the skin and it is painful upon contact even if someone is high on drugs (that is why certain police forces like it).

However, the increasingly favorite choice of law enforcement has to be electric stun guns, especially the Taser. Every year, more police departments have begun to acquire stun guns.

Although tranquilizer darts have been discussed before, the idea has never really been taken all that seriously because of the potential liability involved with physiological reactions to drugs. And rubber bullets are used mostly in prisons instead of on the general. That is more for prison riots and crowd control.

But for the most part, segments of the general public have an erroneous Hollywood perception to these alternatives. Some people imagine non-lethal force being like an episode of the TV series Star Trek in which Captain Kirk sets his phaser on stun and then zaps the bad guy who harmlessly falls to the ground.

It doesn’t work that way.

Some of these hoods who are committing a violent crime are either drunk or are high on drugs so that in their mind altering stupor, non-lethal weapons do not have the same impact as they would on someone who is stone-cold sober. Then there are other thugs who are emotionally enraged so that their fury may actually negate some of the debilitating effects of these non-fatal alternatives. Quite a number of police officers have seen these hoodlums fall to the ground after being shot by a non-lethal weapon and then rise right back up again.

The normal ordinary person will more than likely be rendered incapacitated while a hood that is high on dope may only be dazed by it. Overall, law enforcement usually deals with the most unsavory characters of our society who are capable of doing extraordinary physical feats when they are on drugs or have nothing to lose.

But even with all the alternatives that have been developed and utilized across the country, an abundance of lawsuits have been filed against law enforcement agencies and municipalities about their use. Liberals clamor for the police to use non-lethal weapons but then another group of angry Liberals will protest and file lawsuits against their use. So about the only way to make such non-fatal alternatives more commonplace and more accepted is to limit their litigious product liability which is not going to happen courtesy of trial lawyers.

So what exactly are the police supposed to do during a violent crime or a vicious assault?

That is a question that the Left Wing tends to never have a practical solution for.

In the incident that this commenter is referring to, are the police supposed to leave the premise when they see blood splattered everywhere and a guy beating the crap out of his girlfriend? Are they supposed to wait for this boyfriend to finish beating up the mother of his child and then allow him to cool off before they talk to him?

Walking away is the best way to avoid a physical confrontation because a hoodlum might get hurt.

Trying to reason with a thug may not work either because in this situation, this guy was in the middle of his rage and attacked the police. And the cop’s assumption was correct in that if the assailant did have a knife, the officer could have been slashed or even killed. But what exactly are the police supposed to do when somebody tries to jump them, stab them, or point a gun in their direction?

I do agree that law enforcement agencies all across the country should be equipped with more non-lethal weapons and that there should be more training involved on how to use them in appropriate situations. However, there are many times that such alternatives only have a limited impact on deranged or drug-induced criminals. And most importantly, they are only effective in a very controlled environment which is often not the case in incidents that police are sometimes involved in.

For instance, a naked man sitting by himself on a lawn chair in the middle of a residential street is a good example in which a non-lethal weapon can be used if an altercation occurs. But a gang-banger sticking an AK-47 in the face of a hostage while his buddy is shooting at police is not the time or place to use pepper spray.

But there is a bigger issue involved here.

What kind of rights does a hoodlum have especially when he is in the process of a violent assault or is going to commit one? Does a violent criminal truly have the right “not” to be killed by police while he is committing a brutal crime?

Perhaps this is something that ought to be explicitly taught in our high schools. That is if you attack a police officer then you are going to be arrested and a lot of force is going to be used to accomplish that. And if the cop feels that his or her life is legitimately in danger, especially when it is derived from their training, then you are going to die, period.

A criminal does not have a valid expectation to be unharmed while he is assaulting a police officer. In fact, that is something that will get you killed. That is simply cause and effect and it should not come to any surprise to anyone.

Proportional force should be appropriately used when the situation warrants it and there must varying degrees to which the police should be trained in. Deadly force should only be used as a last resort and nearly all law enforcement agencies understand that so it is not really much of an issue. Of course mistakes do happen and there are some officers that use poor judgment which is why good training ought to be paramount.

It is tragic that people die but it will continue to happen when hoodlums attack police officers. Overall, cops have a very dangerous job when it comes to dealing with people who are confused, deranged, or are high on drugs. And they have every right to appropriately defend themselves even if it includes using deadly force.

Any opinions or views expressed herein belong solely to the author and does not represent any employer, organization, political party, governmental agency, or any other entity and do not necessarily reflect the views of the site owner or its participants.