The newest trend in law enforcement technology concerns the use and deployment of "less lethal" impact munitions and weaponry. Although any use-of force involves the risk of liability, it appears that there are serious legal issues surrounding less lethal impact munitions, and weaponry. Although there are numerous issues, the purpose of this article is to identify two of those legal concerns. Many of the yet unaddressed legal points will be raised in lawsuits. Does law enforcement have legally defensible answers? The term "deadly force" is frequently mentioned. However, mentioning a word is substantially different than actually defining it. For example, in Tennessee v. Garner, the US Supreme Court held that the use of deadly force to apprehend a fleeing felon is a "seizure subject to the reasonableness requirement of the Fourth Amendment." The Court also concluded that the use of "deadly force" to apprehend or prevent the escape of an "unarmed, non dangerous" felony suspect was not constitutionally reasonable. However, the Supreme Court in Garner did not expressly define the term "deadly force."
展开▼
