The Use of Deadly Weapons by Law Enforcing Officers - Research Paper Example

? Dealing with officer-involved shootings Dealing with officer-involved shootings The use of deadly weapons by law enforcing officers is a consequential event and affects all the parties involved that consist of the officers and their immediate families, suspects and their relatives, the community, and the police agency at large. In the wake of these consequential events and the adjacent profound impacts, the law enforcement module is emphasizing on critical investigation on matters regarding officer involved shooting (Jack, 2011). In order to ensure these investigations uphold the will of transparency and accountability, agencies developed meticulous procedures and policies for addressing the criminal and administrative investigations of these events (Wayne, 2008). However, in the recent year, psychologists have come to realize that law enforcement officers experience mixed reactions and emotions after a shooting incidence. With that respect, this paper intends to analyze the impacts of dealing with officer-involved shootings from a psychological perspective. Studies show that following the costs both financially and human involved after a police officer undergoes a shooting incidence contributed immensely to the Police Department to seek professional support. Psychological findings show that officers who are involved in shootings undergo a particular level of emotional reactions. These emotions are never good, as it is now clear that they experience what psychologists refer to as “post shooting stress or trauma” (Klinger, 2008). This is a dimensional kind of feeling, which takes the form of posttraumatic stress disorder. In this case, an officer involved in shooting may experience thoughts related to suicide, depression, and guilt and as such, the overall police agency and family relations face the same kind of wrath. More intense research findings show that when an officer shoots a suspect, he or she incurs a few long term negative emotions. This means that some officers are more resilient and get few negative physical effects upon involving themselves in a shooting incidence (Jack, 2011). In 2006, the National Institute of Justice carried out a research with the aim of establishing what really happens before and after an officer becomes part of a shooting incidence (Thomas, 2011). The researchers sampled and explored the physical, emotional, and psychological feelings or emotions of 80 sheriff’s deputies and officers within and after 113 cases whereby these officers shot someone. By use of a combination of personal interviews and questionnaires, the researchers found out that a large number of officers experienced a particular range of physiological, psychological, and emotional reactions just some moments before and after they pulled the trigger (Wayne, 2008). To their suspense, these reactions distorted the distance, time, sound, and sight involved in the whole scenario. Findings depict that these officers found their shooting ability being imperfect moments after their recollection. Surprisingly, some of the officers claimed that they were not even aware when firing their firearms especially in extreme cases. Overly, some days, weeks, and/or months after an officer undergoes a shooting incidence, he suffers from adverse reactions that include anxiety, depression, and sleep interruption. In spite of the fact that some officers put across that they did not experience any instances of fear during the shooting scenario, they however, felt or sense some imminent danger to either the people that encountered that standard use of lethal or deadly weapon or themselves (Klinger, 2008). Conversely, the research found out that some officers suffered long lasting negative emotional impacts after the shooting. Ideally, what influenced the officer’s responses that took place after a shooting incidence were an influence fueled by their friends, family members, colleagues, and investigators. Nevertheless, these responses or reactions faded away markedly after sometime as the activities and attention surrounding the incidence lessened. After the research, it was deducible that officers involved in shooting incidences required mental health counseling and training. Upon interviewing officers who encountered mandatory post shooting counseling it came out that most officers felt that their shooting experience was not good at all (Wayne, 2008). Wit that respect, the research sought to find out how counseling stood to help these officers recover. Facts set out that mental counseling supported the officer’s emotional reactions and opined that the whole agency needed counseling in order to shield itself from cases of legal liability. Provision of legal guidelines for supporting these officers mentally came out as pragmatic measure considerable for providing recommendations and information for the benefit of the public’s safety (Jack, 2011). Following the fact that some of the incidences were critical and brought about potentially distressful emotions, the agency decided to call on board the IACP Police Psychological Services Section given the idea that their recommendations could reduce the probability of negative reactions resulting from shooting incidents. Since research based on the application of deadly weapons by law enforcement officers involves a limited spectrum of literature, which seeks to examine the impacts of activities that involve an officer who pulls a trigger. Generally, this literature examines just two distinct cases that relate to impacts of shooting. In this instance, this literature seeks to establish what an officer experiences at the time of shooting and secondly what an officer experiences after carrying out the shooting (Klinger, 2008). In this context, it is agreeable that officers involved in shooting incidences suffer from posttraumatic stress due to emotional reactions. Apart from the emotional reactions that an officer faces moments before and during a shooting incidence, law enforcement officers also experience pervasively disturbing emotions in the aftermath of a shooting incidence. Note that when some officers are involved in shooting incidents, they develop phobia and tend to feel nervous and insecure about telling the real problem (Thomas, 2011). For instance, with reference to the result findings from the research, it came out that some officers lied about the real scenarios regarding the scene of crime. They claimed that they were not willing to disclose information to psychologists who happened to be part of the agency and might make decisions contrary to their expectations (Jack, 2011). This shows that investigators and mental health assistants who probe officers involved in shooting activities undergo hard times following the fact that they feel insecure about the truth. Sources set out that investigators have to go an extra mile in order to ensure that the information they acquire is accurate and can serve to ascertain the real events surrounding the situation. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, officials in charge of investigating officers involved in officer shooting put across that the overall process of assessing events that prevailed during the shoot out case is complex and requires thorough investigation measures (Wayne, 2008). As a result, they end up investigating all the officers present at the place of shooting and may even go to an extend of subjecting their weapons for further investigation in search of tangible evidence even if the officers maintain that the shooting was justice related or accidental. Details connected to this arena opine that an officer involved in a shooting incidence may fail to give the correct information mainly because of procedures and investigations that follow such an incidence. Based on that assumption, mental health professionals ascertain that post-shooting trauma is also an emotional effect resulting from such administrative issues (Klinger, 2008). Nevertheless, you should be able to understand this is not a reason that can hamper or deter or rather stop administrative investigations to go on. That is why you find that once an officer experiences a case related to use of deadly weapons such as a gun, he or she ends up undergoing post-shooting trauma. At the scene, immediately after Psychological investigations relevant to this subject hold that law enforcement officers experience physical emotions that happens to be the force behind the altered time during shooting, tension, and depression that comes later after the shooting event. Since these reactions related to shooting can turn out to be devastating on the side of the officer involved in the shooting and his or her immediate persons such as fellow officers and familial friends, psychologists assert that providing these officers with mental support is necessary (Wayne, 2008). Therefore, some of the guidelines that they propose comprise of measures capable of taking away all the depression, guilt, and physical trauma among other negative emotions involved. Psychologists propose that once an officer shoots someone, it is important that you provide him with mental support communication and physical first aid in order to assure him of sensual safety. This should happen immediately after the shooting since its aim is to give support for things like physical trauma and emotional stress as well as sense of safety (Thomas, 2011). Additionally, psychologists find it congruent to isolate an officer involved in a shooting event from the scene immediately after the ordeal (Thomas, 2011). They maintain that this is crucial and an officer should immediately leave the scene, stay away from media attention, and the other colleagues provide physical and emotional support by sensitively transitioning him to a safe and supportive environment. This means that the agency where the officer works should provide him with transportation services to his designated location (Jack, 2011). Critical assessment by psychologists and other mental health supporters maintains that there should be no circumstance that the agency and family leave or rather isolate an officer involved in a shooting alone! Instead, peers, family, and peers should always be available and if there is need for the agency to probe the officer before the start of the real investigative procedures, the agency should do so in the presence of these physical and emotional communicative supporters. Furthermore, after a shooting incidence, the investigative administrators always take away the officer’s weapon upon shooting a person. Psychologists opine that, in order to maintain the officer’s confidence and emotional support, the officer should get another firearm for replacement immediately after the shooting (Jack, 2011). This is because, after a shooting incidence, officers involved feel vulnerable in case they do have a firearm. Moreover, giving the officer another firearm acts as a sign of support and confidence as well as trust unless the officer’s credibility with regard to work is questionable. On top of providing the officer with a firearm, psychologists put forward that it is of paramount importance to provide the involved in the shooting with a professionally trained peer or an officer who has been through the same situation while employed by the agency to provide security and support (Thomas, 2011). After that the officer involved in shooting should always have tangible and up-to-date information regarding when his firearm is available for pick up (Wayne, 2008). In short, he should always know when is due time to get back his weapon. Another step that is very crucial after an officer-involved shooting is that the officer should be in a position to contact his family immediately (Klinger, 2008). This shows that in case of an incidence of officer shooting, a number of procedures follow. Investigations tell us that it is profoundly important for the officers to contact their families themselves. Therefore, no one should get in contact with the officer’s family before the officer has had the chance to so. Nonetheless, precautions related to these incidents highlight that if the officer involved in a shooting sustains injuries and is in no position to contact family members on his own, then the chosen officers have the powers to call the officer’s family members on his behalf. Generally, offers to call the officer’s familial members, chaplain, and friends among others should take place mainly to ensure family members mobilize their support system in due time (Jack, 2011). Surprisingly, then investigative procedures that follow an officer involved shooting are the most stressful and build up the most part of the reasons as to why some officers end up suffering long term negative emotional effects (Wayne, 2008). As such, it is advisable for the union agent or peer representative to inform the officer about the probable administrative events that might take place immediately after a shooting incidence as well as the required administrative actions to take or consider. This entails that the assigned peer agent should provide the officer involved in a shooting with a summary of the written investigative and administrative procedures and actions once a shooting case takes place (Thomas, 2011). At this time, which happens to be full of confusion and emotional impacts, officers, may wish to consult their legal advisors on choices related to further education on bases of the investigative and administrative procedures or actions. In order to support officer involved shooting psychologically, the following two days after the incidence should contain profound education potential for illustrating the protocol of investigations, actions media is likely to take, and grand jury as well as the board of review (Klinger, 2008). Thus, it is preferable that the peer assigned to take care of the officer involved shooting to ensure officers present must adhere to these steps before any investigative interview takes place. Equally, it is potent that officers stay aware of the investigations proceedings. Finally, psychologists see it vital for an agency to provide officers involved in a shooting event with written information that has guidelines for reviewing psychological and physical reactions of an officer involved in a shooting incidence (Jack, 2011). Hence, topics covered in the draft should consist of what to expect, means of supporting one another, congruent strategies for coping and recovery, and people or institutions to aid in case of need for further assistance. Post shooting interventions Policymakers direct that only licensed, trained and experienced mental health professionals have the responsibility and power to handle cases regarding a post shooting case. In addition to that these professionals must have prior knowledge and interactions with the law enforcement personnel (Thomas, 2011). Thus, careful approach is of paramount vitality while choosing a mental health professional in order to ensure that he has knowledge and ideally versed with issues related to law enforcement culture. Moreover, the professional must have experience and knowledge important for dealing with treatment of individuals suffering from traumatic incidences (Wayne, 2008). Bear in mind that some officers oppose the idea of participating in a post shooting intervention yet when they happen to attend, they find the lessons learnt very helpful. Therefore, it is important that senior and experienced officers encourage others to attend these lessons. Psychologists hold that many officers who undergo a shooting event concern themselves frequently with whether what happened physiologically and emotionally moments before and after the shooting incident was “normal”. As such, post shooting interventions should ensure education provided to these officers have physiological and emotional knowledge with response to the fact that this education acts as reassurance best for reducing anxiety and worry and above all negative self assessment (Klinger, 2008). For most of the times, the education and normalization knowledge provided serves to facilitate sufficient and affordable support for development of individual coping mechanisms. Note, it not taken care of, these reactions may lead an officer involved in a shooting to require treatment services due to chronic and sever problems that might develop (Jack, 2011). In conclusion, in an officer involved shooting, mental health support should be as pragmatic as any essential aspect of national security. According to the Los Angeles Police Department, there should be group sessions held jointly chaired by one or more mental health professionals in order to facilitate joint support from both other officers and the professionals. These professionals should be rich in knowledge and experience on matters of work concerning the law enforcement personnel. Normally, these supportive sessions require confidentiality and the most common and basic thing to all members present is to hold a lucrative degree of confidentiality (Wayne, 2008). References Jack, K. (2011). Handbook of Police Psychology. New Jersey: Taylor & Francis. Klinger, D. (2008). Police response to officer involved shootings. Retrieved on June 20, 2012 from http://www.killzonevoices.com/finalrpt3.pdf Thomas, D. (2011). Police Psychology: A New Specialty and New Challenges for Men and Women in Blue. Santa Barbra: ABC-CLIO. Wayne, S. (2008). Administrative investigations of police shootings and other critical incidents: Officer statements and use of force reports, Part Two: The Basics. Retrieved on June 20, 2012 from http://www.aele.org/law/2008FPAUG/2008-8MLJ201.pdf Read More