Police Use of Force and De-Escalation Policies

Abstract

The use of excessive or unnecessary force and other forms of police misconduct have recently come under sharp focus because of the injuries and deaths they have caused. Police are allowed to use force in situations where they need compliance from a citizen who is unwilling to comply with lawful orders or instructions. However, police officers' cases using excessive force have been reported in many police departments across the United States. This has led to protests and calls on police departments to change their training and policies to reduce injurious and fatal encounters between citizens and police. The protests and other initiatives against excessive use of force have led to various measures being taken in police departments across the country, including civilian oversight of various police activities, the implementation of early intervention systems, the implementation of implicit bias training, the implementation of de-escalation training, and the adoption of body cameras. Even though de-escalation training has been widely adopted across the United States, there is little scientific evidence that training can reduce the excessive use of force. This paper investigates the excessive use of force by police and the de-escalation training and policies implemented to counter unnecessary force. In the last section, the paper provides recommendations in light of the facts established.

Introduction

As per the International Association of Chiefs of Police, police are allowed to use force in situations where they need compliance from a citizen who is unwilling to comply with lawful orders or instructions (NIJ, 2012). This is the case in many jurisdictions across the world. However, while police are allowed to use force, they are not allowed to use excessive force or more force that they need to use to control a citizen or a group of citizens (NIJ, 2012). Several factors determine whether the use of force is necessary in most police departments across the world. They include the location; the situation involved; the person or persons involved; the mental capacity of the person or persons involved, the presence or use of any weapon or weapons; and the presence or use of excessive alcohol and dangerous drugs.

Most police departments across the United States and the world define the use of force differently. The official definitions are meant to let officers understand the use of force, when necessary or allowed, and when the use of force can be considered excessive or too much. The definitions are usually included in police standard operating procedures, agency guidelines, and employment contracts (Terrill & Paoline, 2012, p.8).

In the Western World, officers can use three types of force lethal force, less-lethal force, and physical or verbal restraint. More police officers have been provided tasers to reduce the need for them to use lethal force in recent times. However, while tasers have generally helped officers to use lethal force less, their use has also been significantly criticized because some regard them as inhumane and by others as dangerous tools. Nevertheless, tasers have helped reduce the need to use lethal force, especially in situations where they are allowed by law or justifiable.

Prevalence

As per the Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics (2012), approximately 1.4 percent of police-citizen encounters in 2008 involved the use of threats or force. Of the 1.4 percent encounters, 74 percent reported that the force used was excessive, while 19 percent even reported injuries from the encounters. Of the encounters, only 12 percent of the individuals reported that they had disrupted police work or disobeyed police orders. In other words, an overpowering majority of the people who encountered the police in 2008, 84 percent of...

…and their impact. However, some studies show that de-escalation training has resulted in better attitudes among law enforcement officers, better perception of officers, and better behaviors and police-citizen encounters.

Even though most research on de-escalation training shows that the training can help in various ways, including reducing the severity and number of violent encounters, some studies have also concluded that the training has negative effects or no effects at all (Engel et al., 2020). However, what is positive to note is that about 50 percent of the time, the training almost always results in better behavior among participants and better de-escalation skills, and improved capacity to manage aggression or violence (Engel et al., 2019).

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study shows that officers usually use to utilize force only when they deem it is necessary. Nevertheless, there have been situations where the use of force has been excessive, especially in recent years. This has led to de-escalation training and other recommendations adopted by law enforcement agencies across the country to reverse police violence. De-escalation training teaches officers how to handle difficult situations without using force. It instills the belief in officers that force should only be used when necessary. Because when an officer uses force, even if they are allowed, it can lead to injury, termination, civil litigation, and so on if they are found not to have acted as recommended by police guidelines or the law. Police leaders have a responsibility to ensure de-escalation methods are taught to all their followers and that those who misuse police powers in encounters with citizens are reprimanded and punished (Engel et al., 2019). With all the above considerations, it is important to understand that officers also need to use force when they have no other choice because they are also human beings and need to make it…