Amnesty: U.S. doesn't meet international standards for deadly police force

Yamiche Alcindor | USA TODAY

A new report by Amnesty International that claims all 50 states and the District of Columbia don't meet international standards for the use of lethal force by law enforcement officers has pitted the group against police advocates who argue that departments nationally have clear policies that meet accepted standards.

A 41-page report released by Amnesty International on Thursday found that states lack statutes that require officers to use deadly force only as a last resort to protect officers or others against imminent threat of death or serious injury.

The report also found that 13 states have laws that don't comply with U.S. constitutional standards and that all states lack specific accountability mechanisms for officer-involved killings, including obligatory reporting that a firearm has been used and prompt, impartial investigations into killings.

"Police have a fundamental obligation to protect human life," said Steven Hawkins, executive director of Amnesty International USA. "Deadly force must be reserved as a method of absolute last resort. The fact that absolutely no state laws conform to this standard is deeply disturbing and raises serious human rights concerns."

However, at a time when the nation is fixated on claims of police brutality, racial profiling and use of force, law enforcement experts say Amnesty's report is deceiving.

They said it fails to mention that virtually all police departments around the country have policies that only allow deadly force as a last resort. They add that a lack of state statutes does not mean that officers aren't held to high standards and that in fact officer involved-killings are thoroughly and objectively investigated.

Many of the recommendations made in Amnesty's new report are old ideas that police unions have been working on and have supported for years, says James Pasco, executive director of the National Fraternal Order of Police.

"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."

DeRay McKesson, an activist and organizer who protested for months in Ferguson, Mo., disagrees vehemently with Pasco's claims and said Thursday's report highlights the systemic problems that are plaguing police departments across the country. He said police unions must be willing to support deep changes in laws governing lethal use of force and the culture of policing to protect lives.

"Unions are having a visceral response to being questioned," McKesson said. "For them, it is not about what is right and what is wrong. They are upset that people are asking questions of the way that they do the work. They have forgotten that they are public servants."

Hawkins argues that states across the country must change and create laws dealing with lethal force. His group believes state laws are too broad and that state legislatures and Congress should introduce or amend statutes that authorize the use of lethal force.

"The use of lethal force by law enforcement officers raises serious human rights concerns, including in regard to the right to life, the right to security of the person, the right to freedom from discrimination and the right to equal protection of the law," says the report, which cites several cases such as Michael Brown's death in Ferguson, Mo. and Eric Garner's death in New York City.

Amnesty's report also recommends that the president and Justice Department should create a national commission to review police policies and that Justice Department should publish nationwide statistics on police shootings.

Pasco pointed out that the National Fraternal Order of Police and several other police groups have been working with the Justice Department for more than a year and Congress for more than four years to establish the sort of federal police review commission described in Thursday's report.

Pasco's group has also publicly come out in support of federally recording all instances where officers kill people as well as all instances where officers are themselves killed or assaulted, he said.

Eugene O'Donnell, a former police officer and prosecutor who teaches at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, called the report "disingenuous" because often police departments have much stricter guidelines for their officers than state laws.

"Police agencies have often been trailblazers in creating policies that have reined in shootings," he said. "It's disingenuous to suggest that American police have a license to kill and that they are using it out there shooting with carte blanche. Many departments include a reverence for human life."

Yet, McKesson offered a different perspective. "The police have been hiding in plain sight," he said. "This report sheds light on just how loose they have been able to be with people's lives."

O'Donnell thinks it is unlikely that all 50 states will enact laws dealing with lethal use of force as Amnesty recommends.

However, he said, Amnesty's report can create a robust conversation that could possibly lead to data that would allow police departments with troublesome rates of deadly force to change. He also says the country should be concerned with the way U.S. police departments stack up against departments around the world.

Pasco stressed that Amnesty's report is misleading and will paint an unjust picture of officers because he doesn't know of one police department that doesn't require officers to use lethal force only as a last resort and only in the face of imminent danger.

"Amnesty regrettably, in this case, adds fuels to a fire that responsible people are trying to control and address equitably," Pasco said.