Every state in the US fails to comply with international standards on the lethal use of force by law enforcement officers, according to a report by Amnesty International USA, which also says 13 US states fall beneath even lower legal standards enshrined in US constitutional law and that nine states currently have no laws at all to deal with the issue.

The stinging review comes amid a national debate over police violence and widespread protest following the high-profile deaths of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri; 43-year-old Eric Garner in New York; 50-year-old Walter Scott in South Carolina; and 25-year-old Freddie Gray in Baltimore – all unarmed black men killed by police within the past 11 months.

Amnesty USA’s executive director, Steven Hawkins, told the Guardian the findings represented a “shocking lack of fundamental respect for the sanctity of human life”.

“While law enforcement in the United States is given the authority to use lethal force, there is no equal obligation to respect and preserve human life. It’s shocking that while we give law enforcement this extraordinary power, so many states either have no regulation on their books or nothing that complies with international standards,” Hawkins said.

The Counted: people killed by police in the United States in 2015 – interactive
The Guardian is counting the people killed by US law enforcement agencies this year. Read their stories and contribute to our ongoing, crowdsourced project
Read more
The analysis, which Hawkins said he believed was the first of its kind, compared state statutes on law enforcement’s use of lethal force with international legislation, including the enshrinement of the right to life, as well as United Nations principles limiting lethal use of force to “unavoidable” instances “in order to protect life” after “less extreme means” have failed. Further UN guidelines state that officers should attempt to identify themselves and give warning of intent to use lethal force.

Amnesty found that in all 50 states and Washington DC, written statutes were too broad to fit these international standards, concluding: “None of the laws establish the requirement that lethal force may only be used as a last resort with non-violent means and less harmful means to be tried first. The vast majority of laws do not require officers to give a warning of their intent to use firearms.”

The report arrived just weeks after the recommendations of Barack Obama’s police taskforce were made public and his executive actions on police reform criticized for not going far enough to curtail police violence. The presidential commission stated that “not only should there be policies for deadly and non-deadly uses of force”, but that a “clearly stated ‘sanctity of life’ philosophy must also be in the forefront of every officer’s mind”.

The Amnesty review found that only eight states require a verbal warning to be given before an officer engages in lethal force. In nine states, law enforcement officers are legally allowed to use lethal force during riot. In Pennsylvania, for instance, the use of force statute mandates that deadly force is justifiable if it is “necessary to suppress a riot or mutiny after the rioters or mutineers have been ordered to disperse”.

Further, Amnesty found that in 20 states it is legally permissible for law enforcement officers to employ lethal force against an individual attempting to escape prison or jail, even if they pose no threat. In Mississippi, for instance, law declares “the killing of a human being … justifiable … [w]hen necessarily committed by public officers, or those acting by their command in their aid and assistance, in retaking any felon who has been rescued or has escaped”.

Amnesty’s report also charges that the laws on lethal force in 13 states do not even meet the less stringent constitutional standard set by the 1985 US supreme court case Tennessee v Garner. The case was centered on the death of an unarmed black 15-year-old, Edward Garner, a suspect in a home burglary. He was shot in the back of the head as he fled by officers acting under a Tennessee state statute which permitted “use all the necessary means” to make an arrest of a fleeing subject.

The 6-3 majority decision declared that police may not use deadly force to prevent a suspect from escaping unless “the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others”.

The states whose laws do not meet this constitutional standard, according to Amnesty, tend to include permissive or vague language around the use of force. North Dakota’s statute, for example, permits deadly force against “an individual who has committed or attempted to commit a felony involving violence”, without defining the level of violence that might warrant deadly force.

Amnesty identifies nine states – Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming – alongside Washington DC where no law enforcement officer lethal force statutes exist.

“Those states can of course argue that they follow common law or supreme court standards, but is that good enough?” Hawkins said. “Certainly we would expect that international human rights standards are what should govern and our fear is that, unless these are clearly quantified, a citizen in any state can’t look at what the law is. That’s critically important to ensuring accountability.”

Amnesty’s report contends that the international standards laid out in the UN basic principles dictate all fatal incidents involving law enforcement officials should be mandatorily reported and well as impartially investigated.

The federal government does not collect a comprehensive record of people killed by police forces throughout the US. Instead, the FBI runs a voluntary program where law enforcement can choose to submit a number of “justifiable homicides” each year.

A Guardian investigation into deaths at the hands of law enforcement officers in the US has so far documented 515 people killed by police this year. The statistics reveal that black people are more than twice as likely as white people to be unarmed during fatal encounters with police, and show that black Americans are killed by police at more than twice the rate as white Americans.

The introduction of mandatory reporting to federal government for all deaths at the hands of law enforcement is a central recommendation of the Amnesty report.

The report also suggests taking action at all levels of government, making recommendations to the president, Congress and the US justice department, along with state legislatures and individual law enforcement departments. Amnesty suggests that laws be brought into compliance with international standards at every level, and that the justice department oversee a national commission “to examine and produce recommendations on policing issues, including a nationwide review of police use of lethal force laws … as well as a thorough review and reform of oversight and accountability mechanisms”.

Hawkins told the Guardian he expected some resistance to the recommendations from police unions and other agencies but added his hope that “with so much attention on law enforcement and its use of lethal force within the US, in the next legislative session this report will produce some energy for change”.

 MrDwhitey wrote:

I'm of the opinion that reviews into shootings by police should be external.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Either way, the police forces in the US need a revamping on training. At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

 MrDwhitey wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Either way, the police forces in the US need a revamping on training. At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

Is it wrong I can't disagree with this.

 Jihadin wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Either way, the police forces in the US need a revamping on training. At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

Is it wrong I can't disagree with this.

No you can't
Even I can't get a counter point to that

 MrDwhitey wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Either way, the police forces in the US need a revamping on training. At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

Is it wrong I can't disagree with this.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Either way, the police forces in the US need a revamping on training. At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

Is it wrong I can't disagree with this.

No you can't
Even I can't get a counter point to that

Prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Sharpton and Jackson have in fact, caused race riots??? Just playin' devils advocate here...

I mean, yeah, they are slimey sleazeballs who show up in time to make a quick mill or 2, and are conspicuously quiet when things are reversed. Frankly, I'd be much happier if we threw the good "Reverend" in jail, because I cannot begin to fathom how he's maintained a "reverend" status with all the crap he's been involved with.


As for revamping on training, I dunno... I've seen numerous articles that point out that if active duty police had any more "mandatory training" they would be in the field less than 20 hours per week. Personally, I think the State needs to find a better revenue stream, make police cars look more closely to their European counterparts (as in, bright flashy colors, easy to see and get out of the way of), which would neccessitate the removal of all "unmarked cars" from traffic duties.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I would also like to see what countries do meet the "international standard". I would further love to know who wrote the standard.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Having been in the military and having had to "Complete" Mandatory training i can honestly say it is useless. I specifically remember one course called "SERE" where you had to go through about 4-6 hours (depending on your knowledge level) of quiz's, tests, knowledge tests and reading. The majority of the Marines I knew were aware of a little trick where instead of actually bothering wasting 4-6 hours of your life learning about SERE you just clicked on a specific corner of the test like a crazed maniac and the course would complete itself in less then a minute.

And thats not even counting the Mando training that involved sitting and being lectured to for 4-6 hours at a time. Also known as "Safety Stand downs". The training itself needs to be fixed so that the people are actively involved in it instead of just going through the motions

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Having been in the military and having had to "Complete" Mandatory training i can honestly say it is useless. I specifically remember one course called "SERE" where you had to go through about 4-6 hours (depending on your knowledge level) of quiz's, tests, knowledge tests and reading. The majority of the Marines I knew were aware of a little trick where instead of actually bothering wasting 4-6 hours of your life learning about SERE you just clicked on a specific corner of the test like a crazed maniac and the course would complete itself in less then a minute.

And thats not even counting the Mando training that involved sitting and being lectured to for 4-6 hours at a time. Also known as "Safety Stand downs". The training itself needs to be fixed so that the people are actively involved in it instead of just going through the motions

You forget that I was in a different branch and Trust me, if your SERE training only consisted of quizzes and reading, count yourself lucky.... the army's version was a "video game" where you had no choice but to get captured, and watch a horrendous (quality-wise, not content) interactive video of you getting beat around. To top it all off, it ALWAYS came down as a "no one goes home until we're 100% done on this" type order, so you'd get stuck at the library, or education center, where you were lucky if you got a 56k speed connection.


No, I have not been pulled over by an unmarked car, they are quite obvious if you know what to look for. I still have an issue with them.

And the type of training I'm referring to, would be state/county mandated training, such as annual or quarterly "Radar gun operations" or "steps to use a taser" (incidentally, in many places, police have to get "taser certified" in order to use them in the field, but many say that officers cannot be in the field without a taser....) or "procedural paperwork training" I've heard from family and friends who are close to police (as in, have regular dealings with them due to being nurses, firefighters, etc.) that much of the training, particularly the quarterly stuff could be done annually, or semi-annually. It's very rare that someone will forget the entirety of the training in a year, if they are actually out using that training, particularly if it's a skill like, say... dealing with a domestic disturbance/ domestic violence call.

It's obvious to me that this type of training will not go away, because today's lawyers will use that against the cops in a courtroom, and so the departments feel that they need to cover their bases as much as possible, and "train" everyone probably more often than needed.

 Jihadin wrote:

You all had some weak SERE training

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:

I'm of the opinion that reviews into shootings by police should be external.

In some places they are.


Also, I feel I must ask, what "international standards" are we talking about? Who enforces those standards? Clearly, if we're not up to snuff, the standards seem fairly unenforceable, so, who is supposed to ensure standards are brought up?

 Alex C wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I would also like to see what countries do meet the "international standard". I would further love to know who wrote the standard.

I would also like to know why exactly the US is beholden to such standards.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

Agreed.

 Jihadin wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Having been in the military and having had to "Complete" Mandatory training i can honestly say it is useless. I specifically remember one course called "SERE" where you had to go through about 4-6 hours (depending on your knowledge level) of quiz's, tests, knowledge tests and reading. The majority of the Marines I knew were aware of a little trick where instead of actually bothering wasting 4-6 hours of your life learning about SERE you just clicked on a specific corner of the test like a crazed maniac and the course would complete itself in less then a minute.

And thats not even counting the Mando training that involved sitting and being lectured to for 4-6 hours at a time. Also known as "Safety Stand downs". The training itself needs to be fixed so that the people are actively involved in it instead of just going through the motions

You forget that I was in a different branch and Trust me, if your SERE training only consisted of quizzes and reading, count yourself lucky.... the army's version was a "video game" where you had no choice but to get captured, and watch a horrendous (quality-wise, not content) interactive video of you getting beat around. To top it all off, it ALWAYS came down as a "no one goes home until we're 100% done on this" type order, so you'd get stuck at the library, or education center, where you were lucky if you got a 56k speed connection.


No, I have not been pulled over by an unmarked car, they are quite obvious if you know what to look for. I still have an issue with them.

And the type of training I'm referring to, would be state/county mandated training, such as annual or quarterly "Radar gun operations" or "steps to use a taser" (incidentally, in many places, police have to get "taser certified" in order to use them in the field, but many say that officers cannot be in the field without a taser....) or "procedural paperwork training" I've heard from family and friends who are close to police (as in, have regular dealings with them due to being nurses, firefighters, etc.) that much of the training, particularly the quarterly stuff could be done annually, or semi-annually. It's very rare that someone will forget the entirety of the training in a year, if they are actually out using that training, particularly if it's a skill like, say... dealing with a domestic disturbance/ domestic violence call.

It's obvious to me that this type of training will not go away, because today's lawyers will use that against the cops in a courtroom, and so the departments feel that they need to cover their bases as much as possible, and "train" everyone probably more often than needed.

You all had some weak SERE training

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Police in nearly all countries are armed, yet it is only the USA, China, Russia, Iran and so on that have difficulties in complying with the standards.

 djones520 wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Having been in the military and having had to "Complete" Mandatory training i can honestly say it is useless. I specifically remember one course called "SERE" where you had to go through about 4-6 hours (depending on your knowledge level) of quiz's, tests, knowledge tests and reading. The majority of the Marines I knew were aware of a little trick where instead of actually bothering wasting 4-6 hours of your life learning about SERE you just clicked on a specific corner of the test like a crazed maniac and the course would complete itself in less then a minute.

And thats not even counting the Mando training that involved sitting and being lectured to for 4-6 hours at a time. Also known as "Safety Stand downs". The training itself needs to be fixed so that the people are actively involved in it instead of just going through the motions

You forget that I was in a different branch and Trust me, if your SERE training only consisted of quizzes and reading, count yourself lucky.... the army's version was a "video game" where you had no choice but to get captured, and watch a horrendous (quality-wise, not content) interactive video of you getting beat around. To top it all off, it ALWAYS came down as a "no one goes home until we're 100% done on this" type order, so you'd get stuck at the library, or education center, where you were lucky if you got a 56k speed connection.


No, I have not been pulled over by an unmarked car, they are quite obvious if you know what to look for. I still have an issue with them.

And the type of training I'm referring to, would be state/county mandated training, such as annual or quarterly "Radar gun operations" or "steps to use a taser" (incidentally, in many places, police have to get "taser certified" in order to use them in the field, but many say that officers cannot be in the field without a taser....) or "procedural paperwork training" I've heard from family and friends who are close to police (as in, have regular dealings with them due to being nurses, firefighters, etc.) that much of the training, particularly the quarterly stuff could be done annually, or semi-annually. It's very rare that someone will forget the entirety of the training in a year, if they are actually out using that training, particularly if it's a skill like, say... dealing with a domestic disturbance/ domestic violence call.

It's obvious to me that this type of training will not go away, because today's lawyers will use that against the cops in a courtroom, and so the departments feel that they need to cover their bases as much as possible, and "train" everyone probably more often than needed.

You all had some weak SERE training

He's talking about SERE 101.b. It's pretty worthless training. I've been to a 4 day school, and that was some of the best training I hope I never have to use. I really don't want to go to the full school.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, reading through this story, some of those requirements are just stupid.

Must provide a warning of the intent to use lethal force. Well sometime there just is not time for a warning bucko. Sometimes you're scrambling for your life because some donkey-cave is smashing your face while reaching for your weapon.

Police in the US are armed. All of them. If you don't know that they are capable of using lethal force, well you're a fething idiot.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Alex C wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I would also like to see what countries do meet the "international standard". I would further love to know who wrote the standard.

I would also like to know why exactly the US is beholden to such standards.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

Agreed.

The international standards were developed by the United Nations.

As to why the USA should be beholden, there are various reasons:

1. The USA helped invent the UN and contributed a lot of its constitution, bill of rights and so on to the UN convention on human rights that is the basis of these international standards. You should be proud to have made such a contribution and want to ensure it is carried out as fully as possible.
2. Do you really want your country to keep close company with nations like Russia, Iran and China, those shining beacons of civilisation?

BeAfraid wrote:

Unenforceable standards is no reason to not have standards.

It just means that a means of enforcing them is needed.

And that is DEFINITELY the case in the USA.


MB

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
I disagree on this being a training problem.

[snip]

In sum, this is a problem of accountability, not training. In America, you are responsible for EVERY round you fire...unless you're a cop.

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Alex C wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I would also like to see what countries do meet the "international standard". I would further love to know who wrote the standard.

I would also like to know why exactly the US is beholden to such standards.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

Agreed.

The international standards were developed by the United Nations.

As to why the USA should be beholden, there are various reasons:

1. The USA helped invent the UN and contributed a lot of its constitution, bill of rights and so on to the UN convention on human rights that is the basis of these international standards. You should be proud to have made such a contribution and want to ensure it is carried out as fully as possible.
2. Do you really want your country to keep close company with nations like Russia, Iran and China, those shining beacons of civilisation?

Ah, yes, the UN with the standards that allows actions like this, among others, to happen and be covered up:

http://www.cultureoflifeafrica.com/2015/04/the-un-french-soldiers-rape-african.html

Yep, the US should definitely lock step with everything this outfit says to do.

The UN was started with good intentions, but is turning into something that is not too desirable.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I would also like to see what countries do meet the "international standard". I would further love to know who wrote the standard.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Alex C wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I would also like to see what countries do meet the "international standard". I would further love to know who wrote the standard.

I would also like to know why exactly the US is beholden to such standards.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

Agreed.

The international standards were developed by the United Nations.

As to why the USA should be beholden, there are various reasons:

1. The USA helped invent the UN and contributed a lot of its constitution, bill of rights and so on to the UN convention on human rights that is the basis of these international standards. You should be proud to have made such a contribution and want to ensure it is carried out as fully as possible.
2. Do you really want your country to keep close company with nations like Russia, Iran and China, those shining beacons of civilisation?

Ah, yes, the UN with the standards that allows actions like this, among others, to happen and be covered up:

http://www.cultureoflifeafrica.com/2015/04/the-un-french-soldiers-rape-african.html

Yep, the US should definitely lock step with everything this outfit says to do.

The UN was started with good intentions, but is turning into something that is not too desirable.

Do you believe the Police use of force standards are bad ones?

Relapse wrote:
I don't believe I'm going to let an organization the enables the type of behavior exhibited by UN troops be the one to act as the moral compass for my home town police force.

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Alex C wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I would also like to see what countries do meet the "international standard". I would further love to know who wrote the standard.

I would also like to know why exactly the US is beholden to such standards.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
At the same time I feel like people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be arrested for inciting race riots.

Agreed.

The international standards were developed by the United Nations.

As to why the USA should be beholden, there are various reasons:

1. The USA helped invent the UN and contributed a lot of its constitution, bill of rights and so on to the UN convention on human rights that is the basis of these international standards. You should be proud to have made such a contribution and want to ensure it is carried out as fully as possible.
2. Do you really want your country to keep close company with nations like Russia, Iran and China, those shining beacons of civilisation?

Ah, yes, the UN with the standards that allows actions like this, among others, to happen and be covered up:

http://www.cultureoflifeafrica.com/2015/04/the-un-french-soldiers-rape-african.html

Yep, the US should definitely lock step with everything this outfit says to do.

The UN was started with good intentions, but is turning into something that is not too desirable.

Do you believe the Police use of force standards are bad ones?

I don't believe I'm going to let an organization the enables the type of behavior exhibited by UN troops be the one to act as the moral compass for my home town police force.