Word on the street is that by Protocol, the FBI, as well as the police in general, do not fire warning shots.
The US military, in contrast, does fire warning shots in its current Iraq theatre.
Why don’t law enforcement agencies use warning shots?
You don’t know where the bullet will end up resulting in civil liabilities.
Iraq is a war zone plus you can’t sue the US Army.
runner pat is correct, one of the main reasons that we don’t fire warning shots is because of the risk of hitting someone or something else.
Also, in the time you take to fire a warning shot, the bad guy may have a chance to shoot the officer. Trust me, they will never fire a warning shot!
I don’t know what the military rules of engagement are for warning shots, but I’m certain that these are only used in situations where the soldier has significant cover and support.
The vast majority of law enforcement shootings occur when the officer is one-on-one with the suspect and they are only a few feet apart. There’s no chance to use a warning shot, even if you wanted to do so. Thus, we don’t train for such an incredibly rare circumstance where a warning shot might even be considered.
Nor would need to, but it’s not true the Army can’t be sued. However, the DD has people who handle claims of wrongful death for cases where “My son was run over by your tank while herding his goats yesterday.”
It’s a bit weird to consider, but even in war-zones the Military Police Traffic Accident Investigation Units investigate them.
The police don’t fire warning shots simply because of the liability to the individual police officer.
Bear in mind that soldiers will fire warning shots in circumstances a cop wouldn’t even draw his weapon. Basically, soldiers only fire warning shots if the suspect is acting in an *nonthreatening *manner - if he’s approaching a sentry post at night and won’t stop, or is running away. If the suspect is armed or acting aggressively, they don’t fire warning shots. They just fire.
Police have their own rules of engagement that is very different than the military. By the time the police have their guns drawn they most likely have already given several warnings. At the very least its “Police. Freeze.” You dont get that from an Apache helicopter flying overhead or from a sniper.
And similarly, shooting-to-wound is rare to virtually nonexistent outside of fiction.
<– This. The warning that is conveyed in warning shots is that if the subjects don’t stop what they are doing that lethal force will be used to stop them. I can’t think of many situations where this would be useful in law enforcement, where lethal force is only supposed to be used if the officer feels thier own or someone else’s life is in immidiate danger. Firing warning shots at a fleeing suspect runs the risk of accidentally hitting someone, and is ultimately pointless as well. What’s the warning being conveyed in it - stop what you’re doing or I’ll fire another warning shot?
Because it will be used against you later in court.
Prosecutor: According to the record, Mr. Smith, you shot my client in the chest because you felt your life was in danger. Is that correct?
You: Yes, that’s correct.
Prosecutor: But *before *you shot him in the chest, you fired a warning shot. Is that correct?
You: Yes, that’s correct.
Prosecutor: Why did you fire a warning shot? If a person *really *feels his/her life is in danger, they would *not *fire a warning shot - they would shoot with the goal of immediately stopping the threat. But because you fired a warning shot, I am getting the impression that, perhaps, you did not really feel your life was in danger.
You: Um, um, but my I felt my life was in danger!!
Prosecutor: Then why did you fire a warning shot?? Why wasn’t a chest shot your first shot?
You: Um, um…
I wonder if the OP’s assumption about what police do is in fact true.
Obviously the OP implicitly refers to US local police practice but police procedure will probably not be that different from othern Western countries. I recently researched weapons use by German police and the latest statistics I found on a short search (PDF, 43k, German language) said that in 2004 police forces in Germany fired warning shots in 72 cases and non-warning shots at persons in 63 cases (killing 9 and wounding 23 people). So, warning shots do not seem to be out of the question in police practice.