Every modern law enforcement ex. ecutive knows well his duty to insure efficient and effective firearms train. ing before an officer is assigned a weapon. Yet, the executive's responsibility does not rest there. He real izes, in addition, that the officers under his command are entitled to clear and specific instruction on the circumstances under which the use of a firearm is permissible. This takes form in written departmental policy.

One law enforcement executive has remarked that "a policy without teeth is just about as effective as a patrol car with four flat tires." Policy must be reinforced by effective instruction from recruit training at the academy through advanced inservice or firearms training throughout an officer's

career.

Notwithstanding departmental poli⚫ cy and excellent instruction in both the skill and proper use of a sidearm, the final decision to use it must rest with the individual officer. That decision will be formed in some meas. ure by his own moral and ethical judgment concerning the use of deadly force. The administrator should be as concerned with an officer who is afraid to use his sidearm when the situation requires its use as he is with the officer's reckless and unjusti fied use. He fulfills his administrative duty when he addresses both issues.

54

A recent Police Foundation report makes the point that many departments lack adequate recordkeeping procedures designed to identify and monitor officers' conduct involving the use of excessive force and repeated involvement in shooting incidents. The authors point out ". . . the lack of systematic centralized data collection in many departments inhibits the rational development of new policies, training programs, and enforce. ment procedures." 55

One important misconception about deadly force that became evident in the several cases reviewed in this ar ticle is that officers think they have the ability to shoot to wound when the person shot at is fleeing the scene. In case after case, the testimony of the officer was to the effect that he actually shot at an arm or leg, but the bullet struck the head, the neck, or the back. One coroner's report stated: "Given a moving target, in a range of seventy-five yards, or less, the target will probably be hit, but not where the gun was aimed. Therefore, the police officer should not think he is going to inflict a nonfatal wound by shooting at an arm or leg. He should fully expect the shot to be fatal.” 56

Contrary to the popular image of police work, a decision to use deadly force against a fleeing suspect is a rare one for most law enforcement officers. Yet, of all the decisions an officer is called upon to make in emergency arrest situations, whether to use deadly force can turn out to be the most agonizing and tormenting of all. Officer Marshall's testimony about his decision to shoot at a fleeing felon,

which led to the Connecticut case of Jones v. Marshall, is a powerful example of the conflicting emotions affecting an officer faced with a decision whether to use deadly force.57 In another case, the permanent paralysis of a 15-year-old boy who was caught with a stolen car and the distressed emotions of the defendant police officer following the shooting emphasize the tragedy of the legal, but unwise, use of deadly force.58

Law enforcement personnel every. where have a vital interest in what constitutes the legal use of deadly force. Especially is this true of administrators. They should follow any effort to restrict its legal use, whether that restriction comes through legislative reform, their own State court decisions, or continued constitutional attack in Federal courts. Beyond this, the administrator has a more difficult responsibility. He must decide when the use of deadly force is wise and prudent and support that decision with clear policy and effective training.

FOOTNOTES

42 Paul v. Davis, 47 L. Ed. 2d 405 (1976).

43 Jenkins v. Averett, 424 F. 2d 1228, 1232 (4th Cir. 1970). See also Reed v. Philadelphia Housing Authority, 372 F. Supp. 686 (E.D. Pa. 1974).

44 Cunningham v. Ellington, supra note 39.

45 Jones v. Marshall, supra note 10; Mattis v. Schnarr, supra note 6.

46 Conn. Gen. Stat., § 53a-22.

47 Mo. Rev. Stat., supra note 18.

48 Jones v. Marshall, supra note 10, at 142. See also Wiley v. Memphis Police Department, 548 F. 2d 1247 (6th Cir. 1977); Wolfer v. Thaler, 525 F. 2d 977 (5th Cir. 1976), cert. denied 425 U.S. 975 (1976); Hilton v. State, 348 A. 2d 242 (Me. 1975).

49 Mattis v. Schnarr, supra note 6, at 1020.

50 Mattis v. Schnarr, 404 F. Supp. 643, 651 (E.D.) Mo. 1975).

51 Mattis v. Schnarr, supra note 6, at 1020. 52 Ashcroft v. Mattis, supra note 7.

53 Jones v. Marshall, supra note 10, at 140. 54 Police Foundation, "Police Use of Deadly Force" (1977).

55 Id. at 141.

Coroner's Report in Jones v. Marshall, 383 F. Supp. 358 (D. Conn. 1974), aff'd 528 F. 2d 132 (2nd Cir. 1975), reported in Goldstein, Dershowitz. & Schwartz, Criminal Law: Theory and Process 331 (1974).

57 Goldstein, Dershowitz, & Schwartz, Criminal Law: Theory and Process 327-30 (1974).

58 Schumann v. McGinn, supra note 2, at 541.

English-speaking murder suspect; three young Illinois women who helped locate the body of a murder victim; a Long Island Explorer working a police switchboard who helped detectives track down a very successful antique thief; an Arkansas youth who chased, caught, and subdued an offender who had assaulted two police officers and committed several crimes; and a California Explorer on a ridealong detail who made a timely assist call when the officer and an off-duty patrolman went in foot pursuit of an armed prowler. (The prowler, a prison escapee convicted of several motel burglaries and wanted by the FBI in New York for bank robbery, seriously wounded the off-duty officer.)

Exploring is the young adult division of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA). Tracing its roots back 65 years to the early days of the Sea Scout program, Exploring has continued to evolve and mature to serve the changing needs of American youths. Today, it is a nationwide movement of 350,000 young men and women between the ages of 15 and 21 participating in career exploration programs designed and administered by Exploring, BSA, with the coopera

tion and support of business, industry, and service organizations.

As a service to high schools, the Exploring Division conducts careerinterest surveys in schools across the Nation each spring. Law enforcement perennially scores high on the list of career interests among these surveyed teenagers. Exploring addresses itself to the acute need of young people for solid hands-on career experience. Law Enforcement Exploring assists police and sheriff departments, State police and highway patrol agencies, and private, industrial, and military security facilities in providing these young adults with an introduction to the rewarding careers available in law enforcement.

At present, over 30,000 young men and women are actively enrolled in 1,400 law enforcement posts from Alaska to Florida in communities of every size from megalopolitan cities to the smallest hamlets. Of the 80 different interest areas that posts explore nationwide, the number involved in law enforcement ranks second only to those pursuing interests in medicine and the allied health fields.

Though Exploring's objectives are those of the Boy Scouts of Americacharacter building, citizenship train

ing, and mental and physical fitnessExploring departs significantly from traditional scouting. Law Enforcement Explorers wear uniforms similar to those of the agencies that sponsor them. While a prodigious wealth of program support and resources is available from the Exploring Division and local BSA councils, Law Enforcement Exploring does not have an operating manual like the "Scout Handbook," nor does it have an advancement program by levels of skill.

Flexibility is one of the keys to the success of Law Enforcement Exploring, as it operates in a wide variety of law enforcement agencies and environments. Working closely with the local BSA council, the sponsoring law enforcement agency tailors the program to its own needs, plus those of the local community. The agency has the responsibility of providing a meeting place, adequate adult leadership, and program facilities and resources. The result: everyone benefits-the Explorers, the agency, and the public.