PART III.  INSTRUMENTS OF FORCE EXPANDING BULLETS As law enforcement actions are not covered by the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets, or customary international humanitarian law, the prohibition on using expanding ammunition does not apply. Expanding ammunition is designed to enable the greatest level of kinetic energy to be delivered to a target, while minimizing over-penetration, such as the bullet going through the body still holding sufficient energy to inflict lethal wounds, because otherwise more shots would perhaps be required to achieve incapacitation, increasing the risk to bystanders. This is a contentious topic, nevertheless. Use of expanding ammunition can lead to massive wounds with a greater likelihood of death, thus some experts argue such ammunition should not be used at all.a a See for example: Robert Hårdh (2012): Swedish police should stop using expanding bullets. Download: https://roberthardhenglish.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/swedish-police-should-stop-using-expanding-bullets/ DO LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS NEED TO BE EQUIPPED WITH A FIREARM? While in many countries law enforcement officials are routinely equipped with a firearm, not all countries do so. Law enforcement officers in , Iceland, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, and the United Kingdom, as well as those in twelve out of 16 Pacific island nations, do not carry a firearm when on patrol. In the United Kingdom only specialized officers, so-called “authorised firearms officers” (AFOs), are issued with firearms, and only in specific circumstances and for specific situations. In England and Wales roughly 5-10 per cent of the force are AFOs.a The role of an AFO is a voluntary one. In all these countries however, there are back-up teams, such as the armed response vehicles in the United Kingdom and in New Zealand, which can be called upon whenever a situation may require the use of lethal force. a Punch, M. (2011). Risks and how to mitigate these In line with BPUFF, principle 11, rules and regulations on the use of firearms by law enforcement officials should include guidelines which: • Specify the circumstances under which law enforcement officials are authorized to carry firearms and prescribe the types of firearms and ammunition permitted. • Ensure that firearms are used only in appropriate circumstances and in a manner likely to decrease the risk of unnecessary harm. • Prohibit the use of those firearms and ammunition that cause unwarranted injury or present an unwarranted risk. • Regulate the control, storage and issuing of firearms, including procedures for ensuring that law enforcement officials are accountable for the firearms and ammunition issued to them. • Provide for warnings to be given, if appropriate, when firearms are to be discharged. • Provide for a system of recording and reporting whenever law enforcement officials use firearms in the performance of their duty. Any potentially lethal force, including the use of a firearm, should only be used in order to protect against the imminent threat of death or serious injury. Thus, when using a firearm, and in accordance with the right to life, the intention should be to stop the threat, rather than to kill (the “shoot-to-live” approach). It follows that as soon as the threat has been stopped, there is no 97