# Criteria for US Police Shooting at a Suspect? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 1, 2008, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683 "2008-05-01T23:08:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![rocksolid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@rocksolid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocksolid)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2008, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/1 "2008-05-01T23:08:49Z")
Often wondered about this and never really been sure of the answer. Here in the UK (as i understand it) police are only permitted to open fire where there is an immediate threat to human life. There are probably pages and pages of guidelines but i think the principle is pretty simple and clear cut. Also, in my view, pretty sensible. Watching various US TV shows it seems like police can open fire if a suspect is just trying to escape, where there is certainly no threat to life nor even any suggestion of it. Is this the case? If so, what’s the justification? If not, what is the criteria? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2008, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/2 "2008-05-01T23:14:56Z")
Each state (maybe each municipality) is gong to have a different criteria, but from what I’ve seen, they’re not too different from what you describe in the UK. Typically, an investigation is triggered (no pun intended) every time a policeman discharges a firearm, so it’s always a big deal. Also, don’t believe what you see on TV shows. If \*CSI \*were to be believed, the Crime Lab guys spend lots of time chasing down subjects and interrogating them. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2008, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/3 "2008-05-01T23:26:58Z")
[QUOTE=rocksolid] Here in the UK (as i understand it) police are only permitted to open fire where there is an immediate threat to human life. There are probably pages and pages of guidelines but i think the principle is pretty simple and clear cut. Also, in my view, pretty sensible. [/quote] The same standard applies in every US jurisdiction, barring minimal subtleties in departmental regulations and whatnot. For a shooting to be justified, there must be a legitimate, immediate threat to the officer’s (or someone else’s) life, or a reasonable perception of same. > [@](#): > > Watching various US TV shows it seems like police can open fire if a suspect is just trying to escape, where there is certainly no threat to life nor even any suggestion of it. Don’t believe everything you see on TV. ---
**Author:** ![jnglmassiv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f07891/32.png) [@jnglmassiv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jnglmassiv)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2008, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/4 "2008-05-01T23:44:12Z")
[QUOTE=rocksolid] Is this the case? If so, what’s the justification? If not, what is the criteria? [/QUOTE] You pretty much have it. Police are authorized to shoot if there’s an immediate threat to ‘public safety’ and no other reasonable action will stop that threat. For example, a man waving a gun and not responding to orders to drop it can be shot as soon as the gun is pointed at a person. ---
**Author:** ![jimpatro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@jimpatro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jimpatro)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2008, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/5 "2008-05-01T23:56:55Z")
Actually, a person waving a gun can be shot. If he points that gun at someone he may very well pull the trigger in the same instant. Then it would be too late for the police to shoot. Seems like it’s only the older cop shows (70s, 80s) where the cops shoot someone fleeing. ---
**Author:** ![mks57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9bd4f/32.png) [@mks57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mks57)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/6 "2008-05-02T00:18:04Z")
[QUOTE=jimpatro] Actually, a person waving a gun can be shot. If he points that gun at someone he may very well pull the trigger in the same instant. Then it would be too late for the police to shoot. Seems like it’s only the older cop shows (70s, 80s) where the cops shoot someone fleeing. [/QUOTE] I believe a fleeing felon can be shot in many jurisdictions if there is good reason to believe that the felon is an immediate danger to the community. See the link below for a good overview of the subject. [http://www.laaw.com/uodfs.htm](http://www.laaw.com/uodfs.htm) ---
**Author:** ![LiveOnAPlane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3d9bf3/32.png) [@LiveOnAPlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LiveOnAPlane)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/7 "2008-05-02T00:20:05Z")
[QUOTE=jimpatro] …Seems like it’s only the older cop shows (70s, 80s) where the cops shoot someone fleeing. [/QUOTE] Yes I think you may be on to something here. It may be a holdover paradigm from the 40s-70s or whatever. I’ve never been a cop of any sort, but in 1975 I did take an advanced firearms course at my local junior college. It was taught by a police officer and not only covered shooting, but also the legal aspects of such. One thing in Florida at that time was the “Fleeing Felon” rule if I remember correctly. A police officer could shoot a fleeing person if he directly observed that person committing a felony. Things are different, today. Since this is GQ I won’t offer an opinion as to why, but I will paraphrase one thing that Officer Smith said about the Fleeing Felon rule. It was something like this: “Remember that in the case of a shooting, the judge, the alleged perp and/or his/her relatives, maybe a jury, your supervisor, maybe the D.A., the newspapers, and a lot others might spend months going over your split-second decision. My advice is, unless there is a clear threat of severe injury or death to you or others, DO NOT SHOOT.” So, even then, if this is any indication, it may have been allowed to shoot at someone trying to get away, but in the 70s in my locale anyway, it was discouraged. Heavily discouraged. And yeah, don’t believe evrything you see on TV or the movies. ---
**Author:** ![St.Urho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e7dd6/32.png) [@St.Urho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/St.Urho)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/8 "2008-05-02T00:48:57Z")
Here’s some examples of what happened from a recent case in Boulder, CO. > **[Officer who shot standoff suspect ID’d](https://www.dailycamera.com/2009/08/16/officer-who-shot-standoff-suspect-idd/)** > > A University of Colorado police officer and member of Boulder’s SWAT team has been placed on paid administrative leave until prosecutors determine whether he was justified in fatally shooting a man who threatened to detonate a bomb at… > [@](#): > > A University of Colorado police officer and member of Boulder’s SWAT team has been placed on paid administrative leave until prosecutors determine whether he was justified in fatally shooting a man who threatened to detonate a bomb at Boulder Community Hospital. > [@](#): > > The District Attorney’s Office will determine whether DeLaria should face any criminal charges, and the police chiefs will decide whether he violated policy, Pelle said. > > “Any time an officer shoots and kills someone, it’s a homicide,” Pelle said. “So they have to make sure that the use of force was justified under the circumstances.” Also, > **[Officer cleared in BCH shooting](https://www.dailycamera.com/2009/08/16/officer-cleared-in-bch-shooting/)** > > SWAT team members were told a man threatening to detonate a bomb inside Boulder Community Hospital last month had the mental capability and requisite sociopathy to follow through on his threats, according to a report released Wednesday.The… ---
**Author:** ![appleciders](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85f322/32.png) [@appleciders](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/appleciders)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/9 "2008-05-02T00:58:30Z")
That last cite makes it sound as if in many jurisdictions, police officers have exactly the same rights to shoot a criminal as private citizens; that is, almost none. Interesting. I think I agree with that, but it’s still interesting. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/10 "2008-05-02T01:14:03Z")
[QUOTE=appleciders] That last cite makes it sound as if in many jurisdictions, police officers have exactly the same rights to shoot a criminal as private citizens; that is, almost none. Interesting. I think I agree with that, but it’s still interesting. [/QUOTE] That might be true in theory, but in practice you can safely assume the officers will be cleared of any wrongdoing, unless it’s really obvious that the shooting was unjustified. The cop will get the benefit of the doubt. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/11 "2008-05-02T02:03:20Z")
[Here](http://www.nj.gov/oag/dcj/agguide/useofforce2001.pdf) is the New Jersey Attorney General’s guideline on the use of force, including deadly force (warning PDF). Most states have the same or similar. Use of Deadly Force 1. A law enforcement officer may use deadly force when the officer reasonably believes such action is immediately necessary to protect the officer or another person from imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. 2. A law enforcement officer may use deadly force to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect a. whom the officer has probable cause to believe has committed an offense in which the suspect caused or attempted to cause death or serious bodily harm; and b. who will pose an imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm should the escape succeed; and c. when the use of deadly force presents no substantial risk of injury to innocent persons. 3. If feasible, a law enforcement officer should identify himself/herself and state his/her intention to shoot before using a firearm. C. Restrictions On The Use of Deadly Force 4. A law enforcement officer is under no obligation to retreat or desist when resistance is encountered or threatened. However, a law enforcement officer shall not resort to the use of deadly force if the officer reasonably believes that an alternative to the use of deadly force will avert or eliminate an imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm, and achieve the law enforcement purpose at no increased risk to the officer or another person. 5. A law enforcement officer shall not use deadly force to subdue Attorney General’s Use of Force Policy (6/00) persons whose actions are only destructive to property. 6. Deadly force shall not be used against persons whose conduct is injurious only to themselves. 7. Under current state statutes the discharge of any projectile from a firearm is considered to be deadly force, including less lethal means such as bean bag ammunition or rubber bullets. For that reason, these and similar less lethal means of deadly force can only be used when an officer reasonably believes such action is immediately necessary to protect the officer or another person from imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. 8. A law enforcement officer shall not discharge a weapon as a signal for help or as a warning shot. 9. While any discharge of a firearm entails some risk, discharging a firearm at or from a moving vehicle entails an even greater risk of death or serious injury to innocent persons. The safety of innocent people is jeopardized when a fleeing suspect is disabled and loses control of his or her vehicle. There is also a substantial risk of harm to occupants of the suspect vehicle who may not be involved, or involved to a lesser extent, in the actions which necessitated the use of deadly force. a. Due to this greater risk, and considering that firearms are not generally effective in bringing moving vehicles to a rapid halt, officers shall not fire from a moving vehicle, or at the driver or occupant of a moving vehicle unless the officer reasonably believes: (1) there exists an imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or another person; and (2) no other means are available at that time to avert or eliminate the danger. b. A law enforcement officer shall not fire a weapon solely to disable moving vehicles. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/12 "2008-05-02T02:12:37Z")
[QUOTE=LiveOnAPlane] Yes I think you may be on to something here. It may be a holdover paradigm from the 40s-70s or whatever. [/QUOTE] I’ve often wondered when it changed. In the ‘30s Bonnie and Clyde were ambushed and killed. I can see the cops’ side of it: Why give them a chance to get to their guns? Given a chance to surrender, they would likely have replied with bullets. But ambush is no longer within the Rules of Engagement. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/13 "2008-05-02T02:51:48Z")
[QUOTE=rocksolid] Is this the case? If so, what’s the justification? If not, what is the criteria? [/QUOTE] Lately, the criteria seems to be: Is the subject black or an immigrant? If yes, then shoot. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/14 "2008-05-02T02:59:47Z")
[QUOTE=silenus] Lately, the criteria seems to be: Is the subject black or an immigrant? If yes, then shoot. [/QUOTE] Very nice GQ answer. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/15 "2008-05-02T03:09:54Z")
[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.] I’ve often wondered when it changed. In the ‘30s Bonnie and Clyde were ambushed and killed. I can see the cops’ side of it: Why give them a chance to get to their guns? Given a chance to surrender, they would likely have replied with bullets. But ambush is no longer within the Rules of Engagement. [/QUOTE] It hasn’t changed totally. If you read my link or quote you will see there is still allowances for fleeing suspects. > [@](#): > > 1. A law enforcement officer may use deadly force to prevent the > escape of a fleeing suspect > > a. whom the officer has probable cause to believe has > committed an offense in which the suspect caused or > attempted to cause death or serious bodily harm; and > > b. who will pose an imminent danger of death or serious bodily > harm should the escape succeed; and > > c. when the use of deadly force presents no substantial risk of > injury to innocent persons. So in the case of Bonnie and Clyde (not an expert but saw the movie) they were murderers who could reasonably be seen as being a threat to commit more murders if they got away. It would still be justified. It used to be that the criteria was a “fleeing felon”. That was struck down in Tennesee v Garner. Now the fleeing felon must be a murderer for deadly force to be justified. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/16 "2008-05-02T03:20:47Z")
Only they weren’t fleeing. They were ambushed. Certainly (a) fits. (b) does too. There was a decoy known to Bonnie & Clyde who was put there by the lawmen to distract them. That seems to put an ‘innocent’ person at substantial risk. But I still think B&C weren’t ‘fleeing’. In any case, an ambush – opening fire without warning – seemed to be an acceptable tactic at the time. I haven’t heard of such a thing happening in my lifetime. So when did it change? ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/17 "2008-05-02T03:22:42Z")
Oops forgot to put in the link. The quote in the above post is just a requote from my states guidelines. The fleeing suspect portion is shaped by [Tennesee v Garner.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner) ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/18 "2008-05-02T03:24:33Z")
[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.] Only they weren’t fleeing. They were ambushed. Certainly (a) fits. (b) does too. There was a decoy known to Bonnie & Clyde who was put there by the lawmen to distract them. That seems to put an ‘innocent’ person at substantial risk. But I still think B&C weren’t ‘fleeing’. In any case, an ambush – opening fire without warning – seemed to be an acceptable tactic at the time. I haven’t heard of such a thing happening in my lifetime. So when did it change? [/QUOTE] Like I said all I saw was the movie. Not sure how it really went down. ---
**Author:** ![mks57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9bd4f/32.png) [@mks57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mks57)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/19 "2008-05-02T03:28:28Z")
[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.] In any case, an ambush – opening fire without warning – seemed to be an acceptable tactic at the time. I haven’t heard of such a thing happening in my lifetime. So when did it change? [/QUOTE] I can remember a controversy over police stake-out teams that were deployed in liquor stores in an attempt to reduce the rate of armed robbery. I’m not sure how much, if any, warning they gave the robbers, but there was much whining about “death squads” from certain segments of the community. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2008, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683/20 "2008-05-02T03:28:55Z")
[QUOTE=Loach] Like I said all I saw was the movie. Not sure how it really went down. [/QUOTE] [I found this](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonnie_and_Clyde#Death): > [@](#): > > At approximately 9:00 a.m. on May 23 the posse, concealed in the bushes… The posse’s official report has Clyde stopping to speak with Henry Methvin’s father — planted there with his truck that morning to distract Clyde and force him into the lane closest to the posse — the lawmen opened fire, killing Bonnie and Clyde… [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/criteria-for-us-police-shooting-at-a-suspect/447683.md?page=2)