There have been numerous concerns regarding the procedures that emphasize the use of force in the arena of law enforcement in Canada. Favorable thoughts, adverse oppositions, and uncertain feelings regarding the practice of force have differed during the public in addition to inside the criminal justice system when it comes to this rule. For several years, it has been tremendously hard in deciding the correct meaning of what is the use of force or the correct use of force, particularly regarding the law enforcement. Atypically all over the news, there have been tons of reports on law enforcement agency and the application of force. However, the big question here, is what makes it justified and what does not.
On Monday, March 30th, 2018, I was working a day shift, in a police uniform in a marked cruiser. The weather was clear and cloudy, and I had received a call and been dispatched to attend a possible motor vehicle theft at 567 Canyon Road and the major intersection was Canyon and Hwy 80. The incident was reported by the employee at the shell gas station across the street. Upon arrival, I observed two males both were approximately around twenty to thirty years of age and were wearing dark clothing. I noticed that one of the males were attempting to open the car with a screw driver with his friend at which time I was informed that they were attempting to gain access as the keys were inside the car. The vehicle was a brown car parked in handicap and the license plate was CYCA459.
I responded saying not a problem I just need to see your ownership of the vehicle. The males friend started using profane language and stated that we look like preppy guys that’s why you’re here and I replied saying that I am just here to help sir calm down everything is fine. The males friend started recording to prove that I wasn’t doing my job properly and at which point he shortly after pulls out a firearm and points it towards me the male attempts to fire two times and misses during that moment I pull out my fire arm and shoot one bullet in the chest.
In the situation that was dealt with in that manner was due to the male pulling out a firearm that could have been a possible danger to the public and he attempted to shoot a police officer. The male didn’t seem like he was mentally stable based on his actions and the way he was speaking. At first, I had attempted to use communication as the male was passively resisting but after that I had used lethal force when he attempted to cause grievous bodily harm and death. I had reasonable grounds to shoot a bullet in the chest and justify my actions on the basis that he could have been a danger to public and a police officer. I used as much force as was relatively required to deal with the situation. In this circumstance, the use of force was necessary.
The justification of the practice of force is the most significant resolution an officer must make before determining to utilize force on a suspect. Also, the use of force is defensible when it is important to take a person into custody, hinder a suspect, or to shield an officer that might be involved. This is exactly what happened in the scenario. The volume of force used to surpass what a reasonable individual would think essential to make the arrest, hinder the accused, or protect an policeman or third party. In this case, I had to protect myself and those that were around me. I understand that the term reasonable, when exhausted to defend the use of force, is occasionally hard to interpret. However, in this case, I had to act fast before I, or somebody else would have gotten hurt. This was necessary so that the lives of innocent people could be saved.
According to the Criminal Code of Canada the laws that pertain to this situation are Possession of a firearm section 85(1) every single individual who commits a crime using a firearm or not the person causes or means or cause bodily harm to another individual as a result using a gun. Another section that applies is section 239(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada which is attempted murder, the section states that all individual who tries by any way to commit homicide is guilty of a criminal offence and accountable if a confined firearm is utilized in commission of the crime. In this case, clearly it looks as if the suspect could have attempted murder once the gun was pulled out.
To most Canadian police officers, use of force is an essential part of what they do everyday. There is no officer that knows if or when they might have to use force. Or, that it must be related until the circumstances presents themselves, such as in the case of my scenario. The Criminal Code of Canada the laws were rightly applied and as a police officer, had every right to defend, especially since another weapon was pulled out. Getting the police officers ready through training and applied training in the usage of force can lessen this type of activity.
Exploiting performance and applying legal orders can prepare officers to use force right. Having controlled documentation permits a department to settle on if an officer is battling in misbehaviour early so that the conduct can be modified, however, in this case, everything was justified according to the law. As mentioned already, the officer felt threatened once a weapon was pulled out on the officer by the suspect. The police officer did not break one single law in this altercation. Because the officer did a good job in following these principles, the law enforcement agency can protect themselves much better. Not to mention protecting their officers from the many difficulties that can ascend from the use of using this kind of force.
