shogunronin
Full Registered User
Recently, I got into a bit of a situation with a known shoplifter. He is known for being aggressive and dangerous. He was banned from the site and he decided to try and gain entry whilst intoxicated (I had a black eye already from another innocent on the same day lol) As soon as I saw him approach I called for backup. He then came closer and I stood infront of him at the door. He then began walking closer to me with his fists clenched.
Ok so my job is to use minimum force. I took a few steps back and asked him not to come closer. He then began running for me and went to smack me in the face. I then put my hands up to protect my face. I dodged out the way of the strike. He then approached me once more. I put my hands out to stop him coming closer. He then tries his hardest to push me back and he ends up falling over on the floor.
Looking back on the CCTV, it looks like the push was harder than it was. I used reasonable force to stop him gaining entry, as he was a threat to those inside.
The incident has made me look deeper into this issue. As a licensed operative, I have to use minimal force. The problem is - what if that minimal force you use causes someone to be killed or injured? I have seen reports of a slight push back killing someone (because they fell over and hit their head on a brick) or even a drunk person falling over and ending up dead because you tried to kick them out whilst they were drunk and sitting down. The law is definitely not on our side. I know we can use pre-emptive strikes, but you have to be able to fully justify it in court against a prosecution solicitor.
It then made me think about all of the aggressive shoplifters I stop. In my previous companies, I have never had any restraint training. So for instance, you end up stopping a shoplifter who becomes aggressive. You then restrain him. He ends up with a bruise on his shoulder and files a assault charge. It ends up in court, and the lawyer asks you 'what restraint training have you had?' Oh your honor, I have had none..'' Oh in that case, you should not have been using them.'' - very likely you could have a assault charge.
So where is the line? And how have other officers dealt with these issues?
Ok so my job is to use minimum force. I took a few steps back and asked him not to come closer. He then began running for me and went to smack me in the face. I then put my hands up to protect my face. I dodged out the way of the strike. He then approached me once more. I put my hands out to stop him coming closer. He then tries his hardest to push me back and he ends up falling over on the floor.
Looking back on the CCTV, it looks like the push was harder than it was. I used reasonable force to stop him gaining entry, as he was a threat to those inside.
The incident has made me look deeper into this issue. As a licensed operative, I have to use minimal force. The problem is - what if that minimal force you use causes someone to be killed or injured? I have seen reports of a slight push back killing someone (because they fell over and hit their head on a brick) or even a drunk person falling over and ending up dead because you tried to kick them out whilst they were drunk and sitting down. The law is definitely not on our side. I know we can use pre-emptive strikes, but you have to be able to fully justify it in court against a prosecution solicitor.
It then made me think about all of the aggressive shoplifters I stop. In my previous companies, I have never had any restraint training. So for instance, you end up stopping a shoplifter who becomes aggressive. You then restrain him. He ends up with a bruise on his shoulder and files a assault charge. It ends up in court, and the lawyer asks you 'what restraint training have you had?' Oh your honor, I have had none..'' Oh in that case, you should not have been using them.'' - very likely you could have a assault charge.
So where is the line? And how have other officers dealt with these issues?