Dr. Rick Parent
When police officers find themselves facing a violent
individual or superior numbers, the level of potential danger is increased
significantly. As a result, the police
officer must quickly disable the attacker(s) and improve the likelihood of
control. In these instances, compliance
tools such as pepper spray and impact weapons may provide the necessary means
for the police officer to control the situation.
Unfortunately, as with any “weapon”, there is always the
risk of causing death or serious bodily harm.
Beanbags and other less-lethal impact weapons are believed to be
responsible for the unintentional killings of at least 12 individuals in the
In some instances, the
less-lethal weapon will never penetrate the skin but death nonetheless
results. One such case was exemplified
where an individual was killed after being struck in the throat by a beanbag
projectile. In another instance, an
individual was killed by a beanbag round after being struck in the chest. The non-penetrating round impacted the
recipient’s sternum resulting in a fatal cardiac arrhythmia. In two other cases, individuals died after
being hit in the chest with a projectile fired from an Arwen. The impact in both cases fractured ribs,
resulting in internal hemorrhage and death (Ijames, 1997).
Ideally, a less-lethal
weapon will incapacitate the perceived threat to the officer while inflicting
only minor injuries to the attacker. In
this regard, the manufactures of less-lethal weaponry typically state that
their products are accurate, safe and effective, if used properly. This would include discharging the weapon at
a safe distance as well as having the less-lethal projectile strike the
appropriate part of the human body.
However, unlike “laboratory testing”, police personnel often deploy
less-lethal weaponry under less-than-ideal circumstances, facing a variety of
issues that include surroundings, weather, human stress and fatigue.
Over time, police
personnel have learned that the technological advances made by manufactures in
the laboratory often require refinement and adaptive training. For example, the original “square” beanbag
round consisted of a sack that was the size of a tea bag and filled with lead shot. Difficulty occurred in deploying the round,
as there was no guarantee that the beanbag round would hit its intended target
at the correct speed and with correct positioning. In some instances, the square beanbag would
not unfurl in the correct manner upon discharge, at times resulting in the
round impacting in a manner that would cause serious bodily harm or even
death.
In this case, police were summoned to an apartment complex
to deal with a disturbance. Upon police
arrival, they located a 34-year-old naked individual in his one-bedroom
apartment, screaming wildly and waving a bloodied knife. The individual had slashed his wrists and
severed his penis with a kitchen knife in a bizarre suicide attempt. The male
was behaving irrational and ignoring police commands, refusing to drop his
knife as he bled profusely.
A highly
trained tactical unit arrived on the scene and attempted to negotiate with the
individual but to no avail. When the
individual attempted to harm himself further police personnel decided to shoot
the male with a beanbag shotgun in order to save his life. One beanbag round was discharged, striking
the male in the chest just above his heart.
The impact of the beanbag round caused the male to collapse to the
ground where medical personnel applied treatment and rushed the individual to
the hospital.
Unfortunately, shortly
after arriving at the hospital, the individual died. Owing to the self-inflicted injuries and the
resulting severe bleeding, medical staff listed the cause of death as suicide. The next day an autopsy was conducted to
verify the cause of death. Surprisingly,
the autopsy revealed that the individual died when the 42-gram lead sac beanbag
penetrated the skin and embedded itself in the male’s chest. A “fist-sized” cavity was discovered where
the beanbag round had impacted above the heart area.
A subsequent
investigation into why the death occurred speculated that the beanbag never
unfolded after it was fired from the police officer’s shotgun. As a result, the beanbag likely struck the
individual in the shape of an “arrow head”, ultimately causing his death. It is unknown why this occurred. Regardless, it is believed that the police
acted appropriately under the circumstances. They had discharged the beanbag at
a safe distance and, in accordance with the manufacture’s specifications. The beanbag had impacted the chest area of
the intended recipient with maximum effect.
In another incident, a riot broke out in the downtown area
of a large city. As a result, a crowd
control unit was dispatched to the scene equipped with a variety of less-lethal
weaponry. The purpose of the crowd
control unit was to identify key agitators and instigators in the riot,
confronting them in a manner so that they would disperse. Police
tactics for dispersal included the deployment of gas and Arwen
projectiles.
As the crowd control
unit began to confront members of the riot, one specific individual came to the
immediate attention of the crowd control unit.
This individual would not leave the riot and instead confronted and
taunted the police. The subject stood in
front of the riotous crowd acting as a ringleader, throwing a stick at the
police and then a bottle of liquid. He then adopted a fighting stance and
brandished a large screwdriver at the police.
His actions were encouraging other individuals to riot.
As a result of the
aggressive behavior displayed, a decision was made to fire an Arwen projectile
at the subject so that he would cease his aggression and disperse from the
scene. Upon being struck in the back by
the projectile, the subject left his position and went to the sidelines of the
riot.
However, rather than leave the
location, the subject returned to frontlines of the riot, some 20 minutes after
the police Arwen projectile had struck him.
Once again, this same individual confronted the police crowd control
unit in an aggressive manner with his screwdriver. He began swear and taunt the police by
lifting up his shirt and showing his bruised back, telling the police to shoot
him again. The subject then began to
dance on the street, bobbing and weaving in an apparent attempt to avoid the
crowd control unit’s Arwen marksman.
Once again, a decision was made to
fire an Arwen projectile at the individual so that he would leave the
area. Once again, the officer aimed for
the center body mass area of the subject, discharged his Arwen gun at the
agitator. However, during this
occurrence the individual suddenly crouched when he saw the officer fire his
Arwen round. Due to his sudden and
unexpected actions, the Arwen projectile struck the individual in the head
causing serious injuries. The individual
was taken to hospital for treatment and was later convicted in criminal court
where he was ordered to serve a prison sentence.
The rioter subsequently sued the police agency by using
government legal aid funding, while he was serving his prison sentence. Initially, the courts ruled that the police
department was negligent in the application of the less-lethal weapon, granting
the plaintiff $25,000.00 for the injuries that he received as a result of the
weapon. However, subsequent judicial
appeals rejected the award stating that the police acted appropriately in the
deployment of the less-lethal weapon, under the circumstances.
Finally, in another incident police utilized their firearm
as a means of less-lethal force during a botched robbery that had evolved into an
apparent suicide incident. In this case,
police were alerted to a bank robbery that had just occurred. A 22-year-old, male bank employee had staged
a bizarre act of robbery at his place of work.
The individual, who was employed as a teller, lit a small fire in the
storage room of the bank at closing time as a distraction to staff
workers. When fellow employees gathered
in the storage room area to put out the fire, the culprit pushed his fellow
tellers out of the way while grabbing a large parcel of money. He then placed the money in a duffle bag and
ran out the door of the bank, fleeing on foot.
Another employee observed the
actions of his co-worker and gave pursuit on the street. Eventually, the employee located and cornered
the fleeing co-worker on the street. As
the employee went to approach the culprit, the individual reached into his
pocket and fumbled open a hunting knife stating, “I’m going to kill
myself”. Upon seeing the knife and
hearing the statement, the pursuing bank employee backed off, following the
culprit from a safe distance as he ran down the street into a shopping mall
area. At one point during the pursuit,
the culprit stopped, dropped to knees and took off his shirt. He then began to inflict wounds into his
chest and neck area with his knife.
As this was
occurring, police units were responding to the scene. The initial attending officer arrived at the
scene and exited his patrol vehicle.
Upon seeing the patrol vehicle, the suspect got up off his knees and
removed his bloodied shirt while clutching his knife in his right hand. In
response, the officer commanded, the suspect to “Put the knife down”. Instead of obeying the police officer’s
commands, the suspect began to once again stab himself in the neck and chest
area with his knife say “Come on, Come on” to the officer. As the officer watched, blood sprayed and
then readily flowed from the individual’s neck area down to his waist.
The police officer,
fearing that the individual would eventually kill himself, fired one round from
his service pistol striking the individual in the right upper arm area. Upon being struck by the bullet the
individual collapsed to the ground. The police officer then removed the
individual’s knife and applied first aid to his wounds until medical emergency
services arrived. While laying on the
ground the wounded individual turned to the officer and stated, “Let me
die.”
The individual was then
transported to a hospital where it was learned that he had suffered six stab
wounds to his chest as well as three stab wounds to his neck. One wound was deep and had penetrated his
lung. In addition, the individual was
treated for a single gunshot wound to his upper arm. Later, his condition was stabilized and a
psychiatric assessment was ordered.
In explaining his
actions the police officer later stated, “I had to shoot him. He was slashing his body and throat, blood
was gushing out, and I had to stop him.
He was going to kill himself. I
aimed for his shoulder.”
As a result of the problems associated with square beanbag rounds, most
police agencies in the
Other options include
the “goo” or sticky gun, which is basically a delivery system of sticky foam
that is deployed to glue a person in place.
However, complications abound with this option as the sticky substance
is difficult to deploy and even more problematic to clean up. Police personnel would be force to deal with
the issue of contamination due to the “gooey” substance that would require
removal in order to transport the arrested individual.
The US Pentagon is one of the
locations where research is being conducted for the purpose of providing more
less-lethal options to
Future
less-lethal technology includes:
·
Webs and Nets: State of the art technology in this area includes a
3-meter wide Kevlar net known as “Webshot”.
The net is packed in a cartridge and fired from a special shotgun allowing
the disabling and capture of an individual.
The net can be deployed so as to entangle targets as far away as 9
meters.
·
Malodorants: Formulated smells that are so repellent that they will
cause an individual to quickly leave the area in which the smell is
deployed. Scientists have tested the
effectiveness of odours that include vomit, burnt hair, sewage, rotting flesh
and a potent concoction known euphemistically as “U.S. Government Standard
Bathroom Malodors.” These odours could be utilized by police as a less-lethal
weapon in residential areas where an individual has barricaded himself or
herself or in public spaces where rioters or unruly individuals have
gathered.
·
Anti-traction Material: A sprayable anti-traction gel allows the
deployment of this technology on the surface of an object causing it to be
slippery to human contact. If sprayed on
a flooring surface it becomes virtually impossible for an individual to walk
upon being described as “slippery as liquid ball bearings.” If sprayed upon a door handle, it becomes too
slippery to turn. This non-toxic and
biodegradable product has 12-hour effectiveness and could be utilized by police
personnel in the apprehension of a fleeing individual or in containing an
individual until they could be apprehended.
·
Tuneable Projectiles: This would include softer and flatter bullets that
could be “adjusted” by the police officer on the street, depending upon the
situation that they were facing. This
technology would allow the “dialling in” of penetration power so that the
bullet discharged from the officer’s firearm could be adjusted for harder or
softer impact.
·
Directed Energy Weaponry: This would include technology that allows a
tight, focused beam of microwave energy to “flash-heat” an individual from a
distance. While directed energy beams do
not burn flesh and are considered harmless they do create an unbearably painful
burning sensation to the individual upon whom it is deployed. Like firearms and other current less-lethal
weaponry, the directed energy beam would allow more options to the police
officer in the field.
·
Pulsed Energy Projectiles: Somewhat similar to the science fiction “ray
gun”, this technology superheats the surface moisture around a target so fast
that it literally explodes, producing a bright flash of light and a loud
bang. The effect is like a disabling
stun grenade; however, unlike a stun grenade, pulse energy projectiles can be
deployed from a safe distance and travel at the speed of light with pinpoint
accuracy. In addition, development in
this area includes a flashlight-size device that transmits a powerful electric
current along a beam of ultraviolet light.
Similar to the Taser, this electric current could be deployed upon a
human target causing them to be disabled.
However, unlike the wired Taser with its maximum range of roughly 20
feet, this pulse energy current would be “wireless” with an effective range of
roughly 2 kilometres.
·
Weaponized Drugs: This technology would allow the deployment of
anti-depressants, opiates and other “club drugs” that could be administered to
individuals or groups by police personnel for the purpose of controlling
irrational behaviour or unruly crowds.
However, critics of the new
technology that is being pioneered by the
In summary, while beanbags and other less-lethal weaponry are not
without controversy, it is important to emphasize that these weapons have saved
dozens of lives since their inception into street policing in the 1960’s. Police personnel have been afforded with
technology that has allowed them to intervene in potentially dangerous
situations without placing their lives in immediate danger, thereby reducing
police injuries and deaths. In most
cases, suspects have been subdued and apprehended without being shot by the
standard police issued firearm, thereby avoiding serious injuries and
death. In other instances, police were
forced to use their firearm in order to incapacitate a lethal threat, at times
saving individuals from greater harm.
Unfortunately,
the present array of less-lethal weapons available to many operational police
officers within
Dr. Rick
Parent is a serving police officer and crisis
negotiator in the
For further information
visit: www.theppsc.org/Staff/Parent/Rick.htm
Contact via e-mail: rbrian@telus.net
Back to Post your Research, Articles and Papers Page....
Geller, William
A. and Scott, Michael S. (1992) Deadly
Force: What We Know - A Practitioners Desk Reference on Police-Involved
Shootings.
Grossman, Lev
(2002) “Beyond The Rubber Bullet.” Time Magazine, Location,
Ijames, Steve (1997) Testing and Evaluating Less-Lethal Projectiles. The Tactical Edge. Spring. Vol. 15, No. 2.
Johnston, J and McKay, J. (1996) “Force Options Theory: A Common Sense Approach to the Use of Force.” Blue Line Magazine. Vol. 8 (2), February, 39-44.
National
Parent, Richard
(1996) Aspects of Police Use of Deadly Force In
Parent, R. B. and
Verdun-Jones, Simon (1998), “Victim-precipitated homicide: police use of deadly
force in
Parent, Richard
(2004) Aspects of Police Use of Deadly Force In
Whitelaw, Brian
and Parent, Richard and Griffiths, Curt (2006) Community Based Strategic
Policing In