Skip to main content
//empty //empty

Police officers carry guns and they sometimes, in exceptional cases, have no choice but to use them. But police should be much better trained to de-escalate and defuse confrontations.

HANDOUT/REUTERS

Police officers carry guns and they sometimes, in exceptional cases, have no choice but to use them. But police should be much better trained to de-escalate and defuse confrontations. They receive extensive training and practice on how to use their guns. They need a lot more training on when and how not to use them.

That is the essence of the sensible recommendations of a jury in a coroner's inquest that considered the fatal shootings by the police of three people who were mentally ill, in separate incidents. All of them were carrying sharp objects when they were shot.

Police officers of course have a right to defend themselves, and sometimes they must shoot to kill. But that right should not trump all other considerations. The resort to force, deadly or otherwise, should be the very last possible response.

Story continues below advertisement

The jury was prudently cautious about any increased use of Tasers, and recommended further study on whether they present special dangers to people who are emotionally disturbed. And this isn't just a question of how police deal with the mentally ill. De-escalation, rather than guns or Tasers, may work best with many people who are not suffering from a mental illness at all, but simply upset or angry.

The death in 2007 of Robert Dziekanski, a Polish immigrant, in Vancouver Airport, is a striking example. He was frustrated and agitated; at one point he picked up a stapler – not exactly a dangerous weapon. The police officers who arrived, after he'd spent hours wandering the airport without harming anyone, did not try to talk to him. They did not try to figure out what was wrong. Instead, they went into a combat mentality, and repeatedly Tasered to him. He died.

Yes, it is especially important for police officers to learn to try to calm a mentally disturbed person. But de-escalation, and common sense, should be the first resort in all situations.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies