The Effect of Warning on the Elimination of Police Responsibility (With an Emphasis on Legal Regulations on the Use of Weapons)

For maintaining social security and fulfilling their intrinsic duties, police are obliged to forbidding others and exercising power, which in some cases require the use of firearms. The consequence of the use of weapons may be the financial or human damages in the community that result in the discussion of the responsibility of the police. To eliminate the responsibility of the police or officers, in addition to factors such as the command of law, legal order or legitimate defense, a preventive warning is cited. In the case of civil liability, the warning can be considered as an independent factor in resolving responsibility and a complete defense. The purpose of this article is to review the rule of warning and its effectiveness in removing police responsibility by emphasizing the harmful consequences of using weapons and shooting.

The study is of a descriptive-analytic type and its findings are based on the library resources and jurisprudence of the Iranian judiciary.

The Iranian legislator's approach, although on the legislative path, is not the rule of the warning as presented in this paper, but in many laws and regulations, especially the law on the use of weapons to avoid danger, warning words and its implications have been used and warning is one of the necessary regulations for the use of weapons, so that, if these rules are complied with, the police are not responsible for the use of force and shooting at the loss. The lack of police responsibility based on the rule of warning can break the relationship between the conventional citation between a harmful act and a loss. In the proceedings of the Courts of Justice, there are many indications that the rule of warning, along with other regulations, has the implicit role of eliminating the responsibility of the police, as well as proving the fault and responsibility of the individuals.