Not a single U.S. state complies with international standards on the lethal use of force by law enforcement officers, according to a new report from Amnesty International.
The group found that states lack statutes in accordance with international law which only permits the use of deadly force by police officers as a last resort when it is necessary to protect officers or others against immediate deadly threats. Unlike many countries, no state requires the preservation of life be the priority governing law enforcement's use of force, according to the report, "Deadly Force: Police Use of Lethal Force In The United States."
Further, the report notes that 13 states have laws that don't fully meet U.S. constitutional standards, nine states and the District of Columbia have no laws on the books to deal with the use of lethal force, and none on the states' "use of lethal force" laws include accountability mechanisms, such as obligatory reporting of firearm use and speedy, non-biased investigations into killings. Only eight states require that officers first issue a verbal warning before using lethal force.
Amnesty found that African-Americans, representing 13 percent of the U.S. population, accounted for 27 percent of those killed by law enforcement.
The group is calling for laws to be brought into compliance with international standards, as well as mandatory reporting to the federal government for all deaths at the hands of a police officer. Amnesty also recommended that the Department of Justice collect and publish statistics on police shootings and create 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 thorough review and reform of oversight and accountability mechanisms."
"Police have a fundamental obligation to protect human life. Deadly force must be reserved as a method of absolute last resort," Steven W. Hawkins, executive director of Amnesty International USA, said in a statement. "The fact that absolutely no state laws conform to this standard is deeply disturbing and raises serious human rights concerns. Reform is needed and it is needed immediately. Lives are at stake."
According to a 2005 Supreme Court decision, though, police do not actually have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, reported The New York Times.
James Pasco, executive director of the National Fraternal Order of Police, told USA Today that the report is somewhat misleading, as police unions have been working on and supporting Amnesty's recommendations for years.
"They are criticizing out of ignorance rather than an informed position," Pasco said of Amnesty International. "They would lead you to believe by inference that the United States operates totally without any controls over use of deadly force which is absolutely untrue."
On the other hand, Ronald Hampton, retired DC Metropolitan police officer and former board member of Amnesty International, said he agrees with the report and its recommendations, and believes that the decision to use lethal force should not rest solely on the individual police officer.
"Yes, police departments do have policies, but policies aren't laws and policies don't convict police officers who violate policies," Hampton said, according to NBC News. "At most, there might be an administrative action but there's no criminal action. History would demonstrate to us that very few police officers are prosecuted for shooting citizens in the street."
