PHILADELPHIA POLICE SHOOTINGS ANALYSIS

PHILADELPHIA POLICE SHOOTINGS ANALYSIS

Introduction.

Cases of police shootings have become a significant concern in the united stated. Some examples are usually attributed to disparities among various races where most incidences reported show a wide gap between black Americans and whites (Asaro, 2016). In the past, coming across data about the police shooting was quite challenging; thus, a clear picture of what transpired between officers and offenders was not easily formed. However, recently most police departments have provided information about various killings and use of force to the public. The data can be accessed from the websites online or by request in the department by any law-abiding citizen. A good example is the Philadelphia police department in the united states which has provided information on police shootings dating from 2007 to 2019 showing the status of the officer involved, state of the offender, the action taken by the district attorney and a review pertaining the use of force. In this essay, we shall analyze 50 incidences of police shootings to detect patterns in the occurrences according to the summaries provided. In the analysis, we shall consider aspects such as the language used in the reviews and officer’s action before and after shooting

The language used in the incidences

In most of the occurrences sampled out, the offenders are shown to be rough while using offensive language. For instance, in the police shooting number 19-21, the offenders approached a personal car and said to the driver “Get out of the car *igger, or I’ll shoot you!” while tapping the driver’s window with the muzzle of a gun (“Officer-Involved Shootings,” n.d.). On other incidences, when the police officer orders the suspect to drop the weapon or show their hands, they do not oblige. The result is that the officer in the incidence reciprocates by drawing their gun as well and discharging it when they feel threatened. Most commands which are given in the summaries by the officers are legal. For example, in police shooting incidence number 17-36, the male operator refused commands and instead reached out for his waistbands where most probably a weapon could have been.

According to the summaries analyzed, the officers are depicted to use proper language. The language is as per the law of the United States. As per the reviews observed, there is no incidence where an officer is reported to have used vulgar language while addressing the offender. For instance, in the police shooting summary 16-33, the officer ordered the offender to drop the weapon. However, the offender did not comply according to the review, thus forcing the officer to discharge his firearm. Most incidences in the summaries follow a trend where the officer first orders the offender to drop the weapon and fails to comply, thus forcing retaliation by the officer.

Action before and after the police shootings

In the police shootings observed, offenders are depicted to be people who do break the laws of the state before the shots. The requirements entail either compliance with the officers on intact such as failing to obey police commands despite there being evidence which could prove their guilt. For instance, in IOS# 17-37, the male operator who had his hand concealed in his jacket failed to comply verbal commands of the officer thus the officer in plain clothes discharged one round on him. On the officer’s side, there does not seem to be a motive for the shootings since in most cases, the officers in the summaries are just responders of a radio call. Also in the briefs, the wounded person in incidences where they are alive, they are transported to a medical facility which declares their state. Furthermore, after the shootings, it’s not the officers involved in the shootings who determine whether the offender is deceased.

Conclusion.

In the essay, we have used data from the Philadelphia police department to analyze the cases of police shootings. We have discussed the language and actions taken before and after the police shooting incidences. The strength of the research is that the source is considered to be among the credible ones in the state; therefore, chances of bias are lower. The weakness of the quantitative analysis is that the data was taken from one side provided by the police department. In future use of data from both the survivor of the police shootings should also be collected and considered in the analysis.

References

Asaro, P. (2016). “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot!” HRI and the Automation of Police Use of Force. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 5(3), 55. doi:10.5898/jhri.5.3.asaro

Officer-Involved Shootings. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.phillypolice.com/ois/index.html