3 ms·

From Wikipedia: Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)[1], was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that, under the Fourth Amendment, wh

From Wikipedia: Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)[1], was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that, under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, he or she may not use deadly force to prevent escape 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." Which to say, yes. Although I don't think there's actually a requirement to verbally warn them.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
molecule 11y ago
>> do police in the US shoot suspects when there is no threat other than the risk they will get away? > he or she may not use deadly force to prevent escape 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." > Which to say, yes. Although I don't think there's actually a requirement to verbally warn them. Which is to say: not legally.
- Avshalom 11y ago
  If you're running from a cop, you must be guilty. Right? Which means you're a criminal; which means you're probably a serious threat to others. It's a bit of a toothless ruling because it's about the cop's state of mind at-the-time which is damn hard to disprove, harder when it's a cop's word.
  - branchan 11y ago
    Well I mean, it's kinda like a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you are running from a cop, then you are evading the police, which is a crime.
  - jedmeyers 11y ago
    "If you're running from a cop, you must be guilty. Right?" - Guilty or not is for judge and jury to decide. So far the only charge will be "fleeing/evading the police". "Which means you're a criminal" - you are not a criminal unless convicted. "which means you're probably a serious threat to others." - 'probably' is the key word. Cops cannot shoot people because they are probably dangerous. "Probable cause to believe" is not the same as "probably".
skarap 11y ago
> the officer has probable cause to believe.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt6kKhlX8vU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt6kKhlX8vU

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

molecule 11y ago

>> do police in the US shoot suspects when there is no threat other than the risk they will get away? > he or she may not use deadly force to prevent escape 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." > Which to say, yes. Although I don't think there's actually a requirement to verbally warn them. Which is to say: not legally.

Avshalom 11y ago
If you're running from a cop, you must be guilty. Right? Which means you're a criminal; which means you're probably a serious threat to others. It's a bit of a toothless ruling because it's about the cop's state of mind at-the-time which is damn hard to disprove, harder when it's a cop's word.
- branchan 11y ago
  Well I mean, it's kinda like a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you are running from a cop, then you are evading the police, which is a crime.
- jedmeyers 11y ago
  "If you're running from a cop, you must be guilty. Right?" - Guilty or not is for judge and jury to decide. So far the only charge will be "fleeing/evading the police". "Which means you're a criminal" - you are not a criminal unless convicted. "which means you're probably a serious threat to others." - 'probably' is the key word. Cops cannot shoot people because they are probably dangerous. "Probable cause to believe" is not the same as "probably".

skarap 11y ago

> the officer has probable cause to believe.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt6kKhlX8vU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt6kKhlX8vU