The Use of Excessive Force: Human Rights and Legislative Laws - Essay Example

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) officers have an authorization to appropriately use deadly force when faced with certain critical circumstances (Cole & Smith, 2010). However, the use of excess force has always been a point of critical concern. Thus, the organizations has put in place policies and laws that protect them in case they are required to use excessive force for the restoration of law and order. The officers have specific jurisdiction protocols that direct them on the management and control of situations that require the use of excessive force. Furthermore, they undergo rigorous training that ensures that even during the use of such excessive force, they undertake all measures necessary to minimize the infliction of harm to the American citizens. The training goes hand in hand with proper supervision from the senior officers that ensure the appropriate protocols are implemented as required. In addition, the allowance of public oversight ensures that the FBI is on check regarding compliance to human rights, legislative laws, and professional ethics. The use of excessive force has usually resulted into litigations against the FBI officers. The FBI undertakes its mandate with a keen consideration of legal issues that relate to the use of excessive force.

The use of excessive force entails the utility of all resources available and undertaking all the measures necessary to contain a critical situation that puts the lives of the FBI officers and that of the civilians at risk. In a life-threatening situation, FBI officers are required to use excessive force that could be deemed inevitable (Lim, 2017). However, the officers need to consider certain factors before making a decision on the use of excessive force (Koper, 2016). They need to justify the need of such force and whether they have the required training for the execution of their roles in critical situations. Moreover, the FBI needs to consider the level of liability that they could be subjected to after the use of excessive force. This means that the FBI is faced with a philosophical dilemma, in that in the course of protecting the citizens, some individuals may be injured. Moreover, the FBI is faced with a philosophical irony, in that the FBI officers are also a part of the citizenry, but the stand apart from the other citizens in terms of law, authority, and responsibility. Therefore, rogue actions by the FBI including the use of force could be perceived as citizenry actions.

One of the challenges faced by FBI is the less effect of community policing. Community policing puts an emphasis on the citizens as the co-producers of law and order in collaboration with the FBI officers (Cole & Smith, 2010). To this effect, the community imposes strict restrictions in terms of public oversight, but fails to corporate in situations that could trigger the FBI into using excessive force. In addition, the FBI faces aggressive policing that related to the theory of broken windows. The theory provides that curbing minor offenders generally leads to the control and elimination of major crime within the community. Thus, the FBI officers leave no chance in ensuring that they arrest minor offenders, which may be perceived as use of excessive force (Lim, 2017). This means that the FBI officers have zero tolerance towards the perpetration of criminal activities in the community. Although the broken windows theory advocates for zero tolerance, the FBI officers could be faces with a threat in relation to the exaggeration of minor offences. The exaggeration aims at the provision of immunity to the officers, but it has the effect of justifying the use of excessive force and increasing the level of authority abuse by the FBI officers.

In terms of the challenge in relation to community policing, the citizens need to give the FBI officers an easy task during arrests. This means that the FBI should create awareness to the public regarding their mandate in ensuring the success of community policing. For instance, in most cases, the FBI uses excessive force when a suspect resists arrests. The likelihood of the FBI officers to use excessive force depends on public corporation in critical situations. Thus, the officers could be justified for using excessive force in case of arrest resistance. In relation to the broken windows theory, it is evident that some officers exaggerate minor offences to justify excessive force. This means that a portion of such officers could be rogue and would only be essential for them to be laid off (Cole & Smith, 2010). The elimination of such officers protects the image of the FBI, while ensuring the safety of the citizens. Moreover, some of the officers could be violent because of frustrations and subsequently use excessive force, as they are emotionally unstable (Lim, 2017). Such officers need to be taken of counseling sessions and anger management sessions to help restore their stable status making them fit for their work.

One of the factors that would affect the implementation of the recommendations is the availability of resources. For the creation of awareness regarding community policing, FBI needs to consider the availability of funds. Such funds could be channeled to the media and online platforms until sufficient levels of awareness are attained. In addition, the level of impunity levels in the justice system could affect the implementation of the recommendations (Koper, 2016). For instance, FBI officers that are found guilty of offences perpetrated through using excessive force are usually acquitted under unclear circumstances. Furthermore, the law does not allow the termination of the contract of any officer without a just reason. Thus, if the FBI unfairly dismisses some of its officers in grounds of alleged use of excessive force, the officers could sue the organization for unfair dismissal (Koper, 2016). Such litigation could be costly, in terms of paying for the damages and court fines. In terms of the violent officers, some of them could be unwilling to undertake the correctional sessions; thus, subjecting the citizens to a risk of the effects of excessive use of force. This especially could occur if the officers are deployed in high crime areas that have a record of rebellious offenders.

If the recommendations were implemented, one of the expectations is that the public will be more cooperative with the FBI officers. This would ensure the levels of crime have dropped significantly, in addition to the reduction in the use of excessive force, as criminals will show less resistance towards arrest. Moreover, the FBI will be more responsible and reluctant towards the use of excessive force unless they are left with no other alternative. Furthermore, the FBI will formulate essential policies and procedures that relate to control of a critical situation that warrants the use of excessive force. Additionally, the justice system would be willing to give a fair hearing whenever a citizen sues the FBI for damages caused in the course of the restoration of law and order given the use of excessive force. The FBI officers will develop clear-cut standards for the determination of minor and major offences. For minor offences, the use of excessive force would be unnecessary, but major offences may guarantee the use of excessive force provided certain defined threshold has been met. Furthermore, public oversight will foster for the promotion of improved policies, training, and supervision of FBI officers for proper governance and provision of guidelines in relation to the use of force. This would favor the FBI, in terms of the reduction of potential liability from litigation arising from unfounded legal actions related to the use of excessive force.