When might a police officer be justified in using deadly force?

A police officer is justified in using deadly force primarily when there is an imminent threat of serious bodily harm to themselves or others. This principle is rooted in the necessity to protect life. When a situation arises where an individual poses a significant danger of causing serious injury or death to another person, the use of deadly force can be seen as a last resort to prevent further harm.

In scenarios where officers observe a suspect who is actively threatening or has the capability to inflict serious harm—whether that be in the act of violence or through the use of a weapon—the justification for employing deadly force becomes clear. The focus is not just on the officer's immediate sense of danger, but rather on the responsibility to safeguard others who may be in harm's way.

Other options do not sufficiently justify the use of deadly force. For example, preventing a suspect from escaping does not inherently warrant such extreme measures; there are often alternative methods to detain individuals. Similarly, personal feelings of threat without an immediate context of harm do not meet the criteria for deadly force. Lastly, if a suspect is armed but not actively threatening, responding with deadly force would generally not be considered justified, as the immediate threat to life is not present.