Uses of Force by Chicago, New York, La police - Research Paper Example

? Uses of Force by Chicago, New York, La police Uses of Force by Chicago, New York, La police Introduction As maintainers of law and order in the public, police officers should be more cautious on the way they handle people in the public. They should be more concerned with what the citizen does, rather than being concerned with who the citizen is. Such a concern should be replicated in the police behavior regarding the use of force towards the citizens. From sociological and psychological view point, modern study scrutinizes on the determinants of police use of force using data gathered by Garner and Maxwell in 1996- 1997. The information herein entailed the adult custody arrests in six urban law enforcement agencies in the U.S. Dissimilar to most of the recent studies; the degree of force is extended to comprise threat of force as well as varied levels of physical force. The results have revealed strong and reliable evidence that probability os using force and the quantity of force used by the police largely is dependent on what the suspect commits rather than who the suspect is, even after controlling for other factors. The way a suspect is handled and the conduct towards the police seems as the most essential factor explaining the use of force behavior. The results obtained also reveals the effects of race and the gender relations as well as the occurrence of eyewitness and other officers on the outlook. Police use of force The nature of police to citizen encounter may vary from civil to very fiery, and this may entail both verbal and physical conflict. Acknowledging that characteristics of such nature may encounter alongside with the behaviors of the officers and suspects is essential to comprehend the factors impacting police use of force. All over the world, policing entails and at times demands some amount of force. Bittner (1975) accentuates on this aspect of police work and, moreover, affirms that police are nothing else but a mechanism for the dissemination of situational acceptable force in the society. The law and enforcement officers, are required to use force in particular circumstances, are trained in the use of force, and, in general, encounter numerous situations on their due course of duty when the use of force is required. For instance, in arresting wrongdoers, averting escape, putting into custody the disorderly participants, or when safeguarding themselves and the blameless victims from getting injured. As it has been confirmed by Skolnick and Fyfe (1993, p. 37), “as long as the public continues defying law and order, and resist arrest, use of force by the police remains inevitable. Even though the use of force by the police has been significant inn averting and regulating law and order in the society, it has however contributed to alarming rate of social and legal consequences amid the police and the public. This is an aspect that has predominantly resulted towards studying on this essential topic and would enrich our knowledge towards an efficient comprehension in this area of study. Recent research carried out on police use of force reveals that police use force rarely (Adams, 1999; Friedrich, 1980; Garner, Buchanan, Schade, & Hepburn, 1996; Garner & Maxwell, 1999; Worden, 1996). Whether indicated by authorized use of force, (Alpert & Dunham, 1999), the complaints of the citizens, those surveying the officers, the arrestees, citizens or the observational methods the recorded data constantly reveal that only a minor portion of police – public relations makes use of force. On the other hand, the encounter amid of the police and the citizen, in which police officers frequently are compelled to make swift decisions may generate inappropriate or unnecessary use of force that may ruin and lower the repute of police authority and authenticity in the public. Among the different theoretical orientations used to explain police use of force, Terrill and Mastrofski (2002) identifies a particular sociological and psychological perspective that have played a great role in building up recent research. The sociological view point focuses on an individual and a behavioral characteristic on the nature of the police citizen encounters; while on the other hand, psychological view point accentuates stresses the police officers’ distinctiveness, experiences and opinions. In illuminating some light on the sociological view point, better known as the situational approach looks into particular features of the suspects and the circumstances in which the police face citizens. Terrill and Mastrofski (2002, P.217) points out two discrete explanations within this domain: one of it being a kind of force that varies by who the citizen is while the other focusing on what the citizen does. We anticipate that the behavior of the police officers should not at any moment be influenced by the underlying features of the citizens, such as the race, gender, age or even the social class. Lawfully, the police officers are supposed to swiftly act to the actions of the citizens or the suspects rather than their characters. Moreover, any action that is taken by the police officers must fall within the legal boundaries and in the case of use police use of force, the force used must be justified in case it appears questionable. Applying force excessively based on who the suspect is rather than what the suspect does, will automatically underestimate the police self –esteem in the society. As Geller and Toch (1996) asserts, a considerate quantity of recent literature on police use of force, has focused on whether the police used force in any encounters with citizens and the motives and demographic features of both the officers and suspects. Conversely, there is absence of information on whether, ‘who the suspect is’ and ‘what the suspect does’ should account for any decisive factor on the behavior of police in relation to the suspects. The disparity amid of who the suspect is and what the suspect does should not be overlooked since use of police force to only that defy the law or intimidate the safety of the nation, will contribute to police legitimacy (Terrill and Mastrofski, 2002). There is also a need to have a scrutiny on the character traits of the officers, and this should be carried out on a psychological perspective. It’s also very imperative to keep in mind that, the use of force is not a concept that is still, but rather it’s a continuity of responses varying from verbal commands to the fatal force. Therefore, it does not matter whether the police use force or not, the extent of force used also merits the inquiry. In putting these issues into light, the study uses a force definition that amalgamates the real physical force with the threatened force to inspect the presence of force. Secondly, another measure – optimum force – is used to scrutinize the degree of force employed in various situations. Analyzing on the theoretical view point, to address the issue affecting police use of force, existing recent research will be examined and in what circumstances police use force. The data gathered by Garner and Maxwell in 1996- 1997 in the six in the U.S (Garner Maxwell, 2002) is analyzed to achieve a better comprehension of impacts of suspect and officer. The initial publication of Garner, Maxwell and Heraux (2002) and the recent study is required to build on the initial publication of Garner Maxwell and Heraux (2002) and recent research by further evaluating situational factors and features of officers on the pervasiveness and relentlessness of police force. To the degree that the characteristics (who the suspect is) or behavior (what the suspect does) of the suspect envisages police use of force, it implies policy involvement for police agencies. Theoretical Perspectives Police use of force is not an intermittent event, but rather the use of force happens as the lower level of the force variety entailing grabbing, pushing or shoving (Adams, 1999). Garner et al (1996, P.6) found in their Phoenix, Arizona study that in 918, which equals 57.9% of a total of 1,585 cases comprising some form of force, the maximum level of force used by the police was some form of resistance; in another 350, which accounts for 22.1 percent, there was no resistance that was required. According to Terrill’s (2003) observational analysis of the police in Indianapolis, Indiana, and St. Petersburg, Florida generated comparable results. After investigating 3,544 police-suspect encounters, he finished that if verbal force is incorporated, then a lot of force falls into this classification of behavior. Moreover, there is still more occurrence of force at the lower end of the range in the form of physical limit and control even if the verbal force is disqualified. Describing force as an act that intimidates or imposes physical harm on the suspects, Terrill and Mastrofski (2002) and Terrill (2003) presents a strong case to comprise verbal intimidation such as commands and threats into definition of force. They both regard commands and threats as force due to the intimidating nature of these acts. In this regard, police efforts to question, offer advice, persuade or even suggest did not at any time constitute as force and it was neither included in their language measure (Terrill & Mastrofski, 2002, p. 228). Some more researchers that comprise (Alpert & Dunham, 1999; Garner et al., 1995; Garner & Maxwell, 1999; Klinger, 1995; MacDonald, Manz, Alpert, & Dunham, 2003; Reisig, McCluskey, Mastrofski, & Terrill, 2004) also integrated verbal force in their force measures. For example, Alpert and Deunham (1999, p. 55 incorporated – commanding language rather than typical verbal commands. Additionally, as Garner et al. (1995; p. 158) deemed verbal force to comprise cases when – the police yelled or used a commanding tone. Garner and Maxwell (1999, p.35) also confirmed the nature of verbal communication, particularly if it comprises threats, yelling at others, or even cursing can be taken as a component of force and requires to be integrated into the way we think and measure the use of force. On the same note, threats of violence are accounted as violence in FBI’s Uniform crime reports. Moreover, due to the fact that most of the police force does occur at the lower degrees, or commences at lower degree and escalates more emphasis should be focused to varied levels of force other than exclusively putting emphasis on the optimum levels of force. It is thus essential to have a comprehension on the way various forms of force are applied, in what conditions and to what degree. As indicated in this study, sociological and psychological theoretical applications have majorly been used to expound on police use of force. The sociological approach focuses on the suspects’ individual and behavioral features and situational characteristics of the police citizen encounters On the other hand, the psychological approach seeks out to explain police use of force based on the personal characters of the officers. According to Friedrich (1980) he refers to these approaches or view points as situational and individual approaches, correspondingly. There is still yet another approach to police use of force, which regards police use of force as an artifact of the organizational structure (Friedrich, 1980). The later approach mainly takes into account the organizational structure and the surroundings upon which the police carry out their operation. Situational Factors Recent research has often addressed characteristics of the suspects in police use of force incidents. The suspects’ demographic traits (who the suspect is) and the suspect’s conduct and manner (what the suspect does) are frequently found to be linked with the occurrence and the degree of police force. Numerous studies report suspect’s age, gender, custom, and intoxication as accounting for fundamental predictors of police force ((Alpert & Dunham, 1999; Alpert & Fridell, 1992; Friedrich, 1980; Garner et al., 1995; Garner et al. 2002; Terrill & Mastrofski, 2002; Worden, 1996). Conclusion Recent analysis offers reliable evidence that the suspect’s conduct and threat or use of force the have an imperative impact on both the pervasiveness and the quantity of police force. In simpler terms, both the pervasiveness and the quantity of police force are mostly determined by what the suspect does rather than who the suspect is. Conversely, other factors also contribute towards the police use of force, and this may comprise the gender of the suspected individuals and officers, and various features of the arrest condition. The discussions in this study have greatly supported that in deed the police use of force may at times be use disproportionately. The conduct and manner in which police should present them in the due course of his/her duty should not at any time be influenced by the underling traits of the suspects. They are required to use force only when a situation demands for it, and this should in line with the law. References Adams, K. (1999). What we know about police use of force. In Use of Force by Police: Overview of National and Local Data (pp. 1-14). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice and Bureau of Justice Statistics, October 1999. NCJ 176330 Alpert, G.P. & Dunham R.G (1999). The force factor: measuring and assessing police use of force and suspect resistance. In Use of Force by Police: Overview of National and Local Data (pp. 45-60). Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice and Bureau of Justice Statistics, October 1999. NCJ 176330 Bittner, E. (1975).The Functions of the Police in Modern Society. New York, NY: Aronson. Garner, J.H., & Maxwell, C.D. (1999). Measuring the amount of force used by and against the police in six jurisdictions. In Use of Force by Police: Overview of National and Local Data (pp. 25-44). Washington D.C.: U.S. Terrill, W & Mastrofski, S.D. (2002). Situational and officer-based determinants of police coercion. Justice Quarterly, 19(2), 2002. Read More