A police officer responds to a call about a young person with a gun sitting on a park bench. Upon arriving at the park in his cruiser, the officer tells him three times to “show your hands.” The young person did not show his hands and may have reached toward his belt. Within two seconds of arriving, he was shot and killed by the police officer. The young person turns out to be 12 years old and the gun turns out to be a toy. Is this a justifiable use of force by the officer? Explain your answer.

I would suggest looking at the Tamir Rice and Tyre King cases. Most of the 911 calls describe them as men with guns, and don't indicate an age. Now police officers don't have the luxury of knowing whether or not a gun is fake, and that's why it's a dangerous job. In both cases, the 911 operator failed to mention that these "guns" these young boys were carrying might be fake, and that they are most likely juveniles, so their was a miscommunication there that could've saved someone's lives. In regards to the Tamir Rice's case, the fatal shot that killed Rice was shot within seconds of the officers arriving on the scene. Why wouldn't an officers first instinct not be to neutralize a suspect non-lethally? These are hard questions and answers. Now parents fear that if there child is seen playing with a toy gun outside then they may be shot and killed. I guess by law they replica guns are indistinguishable and if an officer fears for their lives it's justified. Personally, I think it isn't it's very clear looking at Tamir Rice he is a child!!! I think deadly force should be a last result, and for them to pull a gun on him without evaluating the scene makes me think it had more to do with racial stereotyping more than anything.

no i don't think so.

explanation:

answer:

d

explanation: