U.S. Department of Justice Archival Notice Office of ...

1 Department of JusticeOffice of Justice Programs DEPARTMENTOFJUSTICE OFFICEOFJUSTICEPROGRAMSBJANIJOJJDPBJSOVC Archival Notice This is an archive page that is no longer being updated. It may contain outdated information and links may no longer function as originally intended. Archival Notice This is an archive page that is no longer being updated. It may contain outdated information and links may no longer function as originally intended. Archival Notice This is an archive page that is no longer being updated. It may contain outdated information and links may no longer function as originally intended. Archival Notice This is an archive page that is no longer being updated. It may contain outdated information and links may no longer function as originally intended. Department of JusticeOffice of Justice Programs810 Seventh Street , DC 20531 Janet RenoAttorney GeneralRaymond C.

2 FisherAssociate Attorney GeneralLaurie RobinsonAssistant Attorney GeneralNo l BrennanDeputy Assistant Attorney GeneralJeremy TravisJan M. ChaikenDirector, National Institute of JusticeDirector, Bureau of Justice StatisticsOffice of Justice ProgramsNational Institute of JusticeBureau of Justice StatisticsWorld Wide Web SiteWorld Wide Web SiteWorld Wide Web Site of Force by PoliceOverview of Nationaland Local DataContributors:October 1999 NCJ 176330 Kenneth AdamsGeoffrey P. AlpertRoger G. DunhamJoel H. GarnerLawrence A. GreenfeldMark A. HenriquezPatrick A. LanganChristopher D. MaxwellSteven K. SmithJeremy TravisJan M. ChaikenDirector, National Institute of JusticeDirector, Bureau of Justice StatisticsRobert J. KaminskiProgram Manager, National Institute of JusticePoints of view expressed by contributors to this report do not necessarily represent theofficial positions or policies of the Department of National Institute of Justice and the Bureau of Justice Statistics are components of the Officeof Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Office of JuvenileJustice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of : This report is indebted to many individuals and organizations for theirvaluable assistance and insights.

3 Special thanks are extended to the law enforcement agen-cies that cooperated with the researchers whose findings appear in this report . In so doing,the following agencies demonstrated the type of leadership so critical to the advancement ofpolicing practice and policy: Charlotte-Mecklenburg (North Carolina) Police Department ,Colorado Springs (Colorado) Police Department , Dallas (Texas) Police Department , Eugene(Oregon) Police Department , Miami-Dade (Florida) Police Department , St. Petersburg (Florida)Police Department , San Diego (California) Police Department , San Diego County (California)Sheriff s Department , Springfield (Oregon) Police Department , and the many departmentsthat have participated in the use-of-force database project of the International Association ofChiefs of , and offers a researcher s sug-gestions for a future research agenda onpolice use of force, with special attentiongiven to issues of excessive consistently demonstrates that asmall percentage of police-public interac-tions involve use of force.

4 Various datasources, including police use-of-force reports,civilian complaints, victim surveys, and ob-servational methods, confirm this basic find-ing. For example, the 1996 pilot test of thePPCS found that about 1 percent of peoplereporting contacts with police said that offic-ers used or threatened force. Beginning inJuly 1999, the PPCS is being fielded to amuch larger sample than responded to the1996 test, and the results will be presentedin a report next year. In the years ahead, itis expected that the PPCS will provide thebasis for a legislatively mandated annualreport by the Attorney General documentingthe prevalence of the use of excessive research at the local levelfound that, in the context of the subsetof police-public contacts involving adultcustody arrests, police used physical force(handcuffing excluded) in less than 20 per-cent of 7,512 arrests studied (chapter 4).

5 Even in those instances, police primarilyused weaponless tactics, such as grabbing orholding, which is consistent with the viewthat relatively minor types of force dominatestatistics on police use of force. That viewLaw enforcement officers are authorizedto use force in specified circumstances,are trained in the use of force, and typicallyface numerous circumstances during theircareers when use of force is appropriate forexample, in making some arrests, restrain-ing unruly combatants, or controlling a dis-ruptive demonstration. When the level offorce exceeds the level considered justifiableunder the circumstances, however, the activi-ties of the police come under public involving the use of excessive forceby the police frequently receive attentionfrom the media, legislators, and, in someinstances, civil and even criminal the excessive force is aberrantbehavior of individual officers or is a patternand practice of an entire law enforcementagency, both the law and public opinioncondemn such report is one in a series of publicationsby the National Institute of Justice (NIJ)and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)that seek to inform public discussion byexamining police use of force from many per-spectives.

6 The report provides an overviewof the state of research knowledge aboutpolice use of force, updates progress on thenational BJS Police-Public Contact Survey(PPCS) and the database project of the Inter-national Association of Chiefs of Police, pro-vides the latest findings from NIJ-supporteduse-of-force research projects in several localivUse of Force by Policeis further supported by research indicatingthat in incidents involving resistance by sus-pects, their injuries resulting from police useof force were typically minor (chapter 5).Ongoing research by NIJ and BJS seeks toprovide the perspective, insight, and factualdata needed by police and others to addressuse-of-force issues constructively. Throughthis and other policing research, we seekto advance our goal of assisting lawenforcement agencies in protecting thepublic, enhancing the safety of the commu-nity and officers, and building widespreadsupport among those they TravisDirectorNational Institute of JusticeJan M.

7 Chaiken, of Justice iiiExecutive vii1. What We Know About Police Use of 1by Kenneth Adams2. Revising and Fielding the Police-Public Contact 15by Lawrence A. Greenfeld, Patrick A. Langan, and Steven K. Smith3. IACP National Database Project on Police Use of 19by Mark A. Henriquez4. Measuring the Amount of Force Used By and Against the Police inSix 25by Joel H. Garner and Christopher D. Maxwell5. The Force Factor: Measuring and Assessing Police Use of Force andSuspect 45by Geoffrey P. Alpert and Roger G. Dunham6. A Research Agenda on Police Use of 61by Kenneth 75viiExecutive SummaryFor example, about 1 percent of people whohad face-to-face contacts with police saidthat officers used or threatened force, ac-cording to preliminary estimates based onthe Bureau of Justice Statistics 1996 pretestof its Police-Public Contact Survey (chapter2).

8 In 7,512 adult custody arrests, anotherstudy (chapter 4) notes that fewer than oneout of five arrests involved police use ofphysical force (defined as use of any weapon,use of any weaponless tactic, or use of severerestraints). That can be considered a lowrate in view of the study s broad definitionof known with substantial confidence isthat police use of force typically occurs at thelower end of the force spectrum, involvinggrabbing, pushing, or shoving. In the studyfocusing on 7,512 adult custody arrests,for instance, about 80 percent of arrests inwhich police used force involved use of weap-onless tactics. Grabbing was the tactic usedabout half the time. About percent of allarrests involved use of weapons by agents, such as pepper spray, werethe weapons most frequently used ( per-cent of all arrests), with firearms least oftenused ( percent).

9 From a police administrator s point of view,these findings are predictable. Officers aretrained to use force progressively along acontinuum, and policy requires that officersuse the least amount of force necessary toRecent developments have heightened concern about police use of force. Theyrange from well-publicized incidents involv-ing allegations of excessive force to the onsetof aggressive policing, whose frequentemphasis on zero-tolerance enforcement issometimes regarded as encouraging use-of-force abuses. No matter what specific eventtriggers concern about police use of force,how is the public to assess whether suchforce is, in the aggregate, a major problem?One way is to examine what research : What Do We Know AboutPolice Use of Force?As discussed in chapter 1, research-basedknowledge about police use of force can beplaced into three categories.

10 The first per-tains to knowledge that can be accepted withsubstantial confidence as fact. The secondrelates to use-of-force knowledge that can beaccepted only with modest confidence be-cause, for example, additional research iswarranted. The third category consists ofknowledge yet to be developed throughresearch that is, what is not yet with substantial confidenceKnown with substantial confidence is thatpolice use force infrequently. The data indi-cate that a small percentage of police-publicencounters involve organization of theexecutive summary par-allels that of the reportas a whole; that is, theorder of topics highlightedin this summary tracksthe chapter sequence. Oc-casional cross-referencesto specific chapters areintended to assist readersin locating more of Force by Policeaccomplish their goals. The kinds of policeactions that most arouse the public s con-cerns such as fatal shootings, severebeatings with fists or batons that lead to hos-pitalization, and choke holds that cause un-consciousness or even death are not typicalof situations in which police use injuries occur as a result of the useof force, they are likely to be minor.