Discuss whether the use of deadly force to capture suspects is justified by the police? Explain how the case of Edward Garner and how it changed an existing law for the better?

What will be an ideal response?

Answers may vary.Police use of excessive force is another example of a problem for which psychology seeks explanations in the interactions between persons and the situations in which they function, rather than simply in the individual's characteristics or the situational influences.From this perspective, we begin with police officers who typically are strongly committed to maintaining the conventional order and to protecting society. We repeatedly put them into potentially dangerous situations, we arm them well, we urge them to be "tough on crime," and we train and authorize them to use appropriate force. The result of mixing this type of person with these types of situations is not surprising: In some encounters, the police will use excessive force against citizens who are suspected of wrongdoing that threatens public safety. In addition, police justifications for extreme force can be motivated by stereotypes, mistaken information, and the mutual mistrust that can develop between individuals from different cultural and ethnic backgrounds.In the 1985 case of Tennessee v. Garner, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Tennessee law that allowed police to shoot to kill, even when an unarmed suspect fleeing a crime scene posed no apparent threat. In October 1974, Edward Garner, then 15, fled when the police arrived just after he had broken the window of an unoccupied house. He was pursued by Officer Elton Hymon. As Garner scaled a 6-foot fence at the back of the property, Officer Hymon yelled, "Police-halt!" Garner didn't halt, and Officer Hymon, knowing that he was in no shape to catch the fleeing youth, shot and killed him with a bullet to the back of the head.Garner's father sued public officials and the city of Memphis, alleging that the police had violated his son's civil rights by the use of excessive force. The city defended itself on the basis of a state statute giving police officers the right to use deadly force if necessary to stop a fleeing felon. The lower courts agreed with the city, but 11 years later the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the statute in a 6-3 decision (Tennessee v. Garner, 1985).The majority held that shooting a person, even one suspected of a felony, violates that person's Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The majority opinion added, however, that deadly force would be justified if the officer had reason to believe that the suspect posed an immediate threat to him or others.