Deadly Force

A Primer on Use of Force

The deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor have sparked a national wave of public protests. It has sparked, among other things, a national conversation around law enforcement response and deadly force. These incidents, at their core, involve an illegal and inappropriate use of force.  As America discusses how to handle policing, DoD leaders should also look critically at use of force within the military. 

Airmen from the 375th Security Forces Squadron participate in active shooter training Jan. 29, 2014 at Scott Air Force Base, Ill. The Airmen went through the hallways searching for the person who was acting out the role of an active shooter. Once the person was found, they disarmed and apprehended him. (U.S. Air Force photo/Staff Sgt. Maria Bowman)

Use of Force versus Rules of Engagement

There is a distinct difference between use of force and the other deadly functions within the DoD. In an overseas or combat environment, we are governed by host nation agreements and rules of engagement (ROEs). ROEs are clear guidelines and rules that tell combatants what they can and cannot do. In war, we are governed even further by the Geneva Convention and Laws of Armed Conflict (LOAC). These guide the weapons and tactics we can use in an attempt to prevent the unnecessary suffering of combatants. 

Use of force is different in that it governs what we can and can’t do in a domestic, law enforcement/security environment. Use of force deals with how armed DoD personnel should conduct themselves in a garrison environment. It is more nuanced than ROEs because the threats we face in a garrison environment are typically American citizens and DoD personnel. 

What is Use of Force/Deadly Force?

The use of force is any combination of weapons, tactics, techniques, or actions taken to subdue another person to protect life or property. Deadly force is any amount that is likely to cause serious injury or death to another person. Use of force recognizes the paramount importance of human life. It is a framework for how DoD personnel can best respect human life while simultaneously protecting themselves and others under their charge. You cannot have proper use force without a foundational respect for another person’s life.

Each service component has their own regulations, doctrine, and procedures arming personnel and use force. They are all based on the same DoD Directive 5210.56, Arming and the Use of Force.

DoDD 5210.56 provides overarching guidance on how to select DoD personnel to bear arms and who the arming authority should be for different cases. It also delineates where armed DoD personnel have the authority to bear arms and use force (i.e. on base versus off base and on duty versus off duty). Above all else, the directive stresses the value of human life, the importance of ensuring that personnel are mentally/physically suitable to bear arms, and that these duties do not conflict with civilian law enforcement responsibilities. Section 3 discusses how and when personnel should use force in the performance of their duties. Here are its main points.

When at all possible, DoD personnel who are armed to perform law enforcement/security duties should:

  • If reasonable and when circumstances permit, make every attempt to use verbal warnings and de-escalation techniques.
  • When reasonable, use less-than-lethal tools or techniques to subdue the threat (NOTE: Less-than-lethal tools or techniques can still cause serious injury or death)
  • NEVER fire warning shots or “disabling” shots (NOTE: There are some conditions under which warning shots are authorized in a maritime environment)

DoD personnel, armed to perform law enforcement/security duties, may use deadly force under the following circumstances:

  • Inherent right of self-defense
  • Defense of other DoD personnel or civilians
  • Stopping/preventing serious offenses (e.g. rape, blinding, maiming)
  • Protection of assets vital to national security
  • Protection of national critical infrastructure
  • When apprehending, arresting, or preventing escape (NOTE: only applies if suspect would pose an imminent danger to others if they were to escape)
  • Against vicious animals

Training Use of Force

We, as leaders, must understand the use of force framework and train it. When we treat it as just another annual training item, we do a monumental disservice to our troops. Our soldiers, airmen, sailors, or marines might face a situation where they must use force. Furthermore, use of force is not just marksmanship skills. That is just one piece of deadly force. Just as throwing a football accurately doesn’t make someone a great quarterback, being a good shot on the range does not mean that person will legally and effectively use force. 

Training use of force means creating robust exercises and scenarios. These events call upon soldiers to use all of their physical, mental, and emotional capabilities to subdue a threat in a legal and reasonable manner. After these scenarios, personnel must receive immediate and accurate feedback on their performance so that they can call upon these lessons learned in an actual use of force scenario. This is much easier for leaders to say than to do. These training events require specialized equipment (e.g., simulators, actors, dummy weapons) and a large time investment. Again, we as leaders need to make sure that training use of force stays a priority requirement in our units.

A Culture of Responsible Use of Force

The last thing I would like to emphasize is that leaders need to create the right culture for their troops to use force in a legal/reasonable manner. This is where the art of leadership and managing emotions becomes critical. Leaders in all military units, and especially those conducting law enforcement/security missions, need to balance two cultural features of their unit. On one end, we need to encourage a warfighting mentality in our units where our teammates feel confidence in their training and weapon systems. We need a unit culture where members are not afraid to enter into a critical situation and fight. On the other end, we have to control the fervor and the aggressiveness that often results from combat training. We need a unit culture where members value humanity and respect the serious decision to take another person’s life. 

Leaders need to find a way to take these two cultural features, a fighting attitude and a respect for human life, and make them coexist within their unit culture. We cannot accomplish this in a single speech in front of a formation or by computer-based training. Leaders must reinforce it at every conversation, guard-mount, performance feedback, staff meeting, and opportunity to engage troops. By cultivating a culture of responsible use of force, understanding its intricacies, and training our troops to use deadly force correctly (Be, Know, Do, sound familiar?) we can ensure that our personnel are successful in the performance of their duties.

Andrew is a U.S Air Force Security Forces officer stationed at Minot AFB, ND. He leads nuclear security operations that support 150 Minuteman III nuclear ICBMs. When he’s not inside hiding from -20 ℉ temperatures, Andrew likes to go snowboarding and take road trips with his wife Amanda and dog Frederik.

Subscribe to The Company Leader!

Complete archive of The Company Leader Posts

Back to Home