Police Use Of Force Continuum Essay

The police protocol on force, using the force continuum, is not a bad thing itself; however, with misguided views and misunderstanding it can be applied in a bad way. The force continuum serves as a guidance tool for officers to follow in order to properly uphold their duties. Each individual department has the ability to implement the use of a force continuum that goes along the lines of the Constitution in order to educate officers on what amount of force they can or cannot use. This in theory is a perfect way for officers to implement justice without infringing on any American citizens’ personal rights. This would have a positive effect on society and allow the law to be enforced with limited debate amongst the public. Officers often misinterpret or just do not understand how this continuum is supposed to work. Consequently, people are put at risk because of a lack of knowledge and training. Officers make decisions in a few seconds that impact not only their lives but also the lives of people around them forever. The public opinion versus how police perceive things also plays a role in this debate. Many people assume that as a way to show dominance, police officers will freely use force in order to show that they are in control. Although there are problems internally in

each department, the officers as a whole answer to the chief and he or she sets the standards that are to be followed.
I examined a study conducted by Rojek, Alpert, and Smith (2012), “Examining Officer and Citizen Accounts of Police Use-of-Force Incidents.” The problem of the study is to analyze how often police brutality occurs compared to how the public perceives it.

I chose this topic after hearing about the Michael Brown case. I feel that although this is a very controversial topic, it is something that should be further explored by society as whole. I thought of all the police incidents of brutality going on and wanted to know how common it actually is, compared to how the media interprets it. Police brutality is a relevant and contemporary problem that will continue to be an issue as laws start to

change.
It is a common occurrence that people believe that police all must follow one universal force continuum, which dictates how they should act on a given situation based on circumstantial evidence. This however, is a false notion. In fact it is the responsibility of each department to have their own separate force continuum if any at all. This calls for no such mandate that departments follow. The only thing that dictates the force continuum that each department decides to use is the Constitution. In essence, the force continuum serves as a guideline for officers to follow in order to enforce the law in a way that upholds the Constitution. Since the United States formed an organized police force, there needed to be certain standards set in regards in the amount of force an officer should or should not use. The force continuum generally starts with just the presence of an officer being a deterrent of a crime. The next level of the continuum generally elevates into a verbal command given by the officer as a way to eliminate the problem. Following this stage of force consists of some sort of hand controlled force of a subject which can range anywhere from pushing to punching. After this comes using less-lethal technologies that have been developed for officers. This includes things such as batons, Tasers, and even things such as pepper spray. Finally, the last and most serious stage of the force continuum is the ability for an officer to legally take the life of an individual if the individual posed a threat to the officer or the general public (Brandl & Stroshine, 2013, p. 565).
When law enforcement officials do act out of the norm that they are supposed to follow this not only affects the way that their peers view law enforcement officials, but also influences how the general public feels about law enforcement. According to research done by Rojek, Alpert, and Smith (2012), in most cases officers will perceive their actions as proper, while citizens will perceive the same action as uncalled or violating what is called for constitutionally (p. 317). In a comparison of “Officer and Citizen Claims of Highest Level of Force and Resistance,” 66.7 percent of officers claimed to use defensive resistance, while 47.6 percent of citizens claimed that officers used hard empty hand tactics (Rojek, Alpert, & Smith, 2012, Table 1). Another study, conducted in 2010 by Brandl and Stroshine (2013) examining the “Frequency of use of Force by Officers,” showed that 70.9 percent of officers were involved in zero force incidents (Table 1). The force continuum is something that is misunderstood by much of law enforcement and society in general. People do not understand what officers can and cannot do in given situations. There is not one universal understanding of the force continuum, but in fact generalized ideas that each department follows. This leads to much inconsistency as seen in how enforcing laws are handled in given situations. The problem lies with the officers not understanding what the proper action to take. This can result in the reality that the majority of officers do not have a firm grasp on what he or she is asked to do. This is problematic for not only law enforcement and their ability to be consistent, but also leads to issues with the public. Inconsistency in how similar situations are handled will be scrutinized even more if a definite force continuum method is not followed by all of the officers enforcing the law.
Another problem with the force continuum lies with all of the inconsistent types of models of the force continuum. With the types of models ranging from linear, modified-linear, matrix, and the wheel there are many different types of models to choose from although the majority of departments rely on a linear model (Brandl & Stroshine, 2013, p. 561). When one method of any of following the continuum is applied it is not generalized enough for all departments. This will lead to even further inconsistency among law enforcement and how they handle their situations. The amount of each person’s understanding must increase in order to have a more positive effect on the nation’s law enforcement officials.
After reviewing these studies, I did notice some strengths and weaknesses. One weakness of the “Officer and Citizen Claims of Highest Level of Force and Resistance” study was that not all the agencies looked at were included, which means there are some results that are not accounted for (Rojek, Alpert, & Smith, 2012, Table 1). This would result in a bias in favor of the officers or people being experimented and examined. However, the results of the study were shown in a numerical table, which allowed for easy viewing and serves as a good visual tool for presentation. I do believe that the results were reasonable because they were peer reviewed scholarly articles, which means that they are non-bias and they seem to give very relevant and accurate information on the topic. I believe that both studies did a thorough and detailed job on examining this issue. If I were to conduct further research on this topic, I would use an observational study as well as collect past evidence and case convictions to examine the police population. I would gather statistical data on how many officers were guilty of violating their use of force. To do this, I would get the name of every person in the police force across the nation and insert their name into a program that would randomly select enough to represent the whole population. This would make the findings non-bias and fair. I would then gather all the data and put together an easy-to-follow report that suggests one specific conclusion pertaining to police brutality.
The force continuum is a debatable issue that will continue to be misunderstood and abused until a more universal form of a force continuum is created. The research done by experts on exactly how the public feels about this issue shows a negative response. In order to consider a more dynamic and tolerable protocol it is apparent that something needs to change in order for officers to gain the knowledge in understanding that they must assess the situation and act in the right manor. In order to better comprehend what a situation requires, officers should be exposed to more rigorous training. These training methods should have officers under strenuous situations that are as close to the real thing as possible. They should be required to go through this training yearly just to make sure they are up to date on their skills. One other circumstance that could help solve the misunderstanding that officers have could be the implementation of a universal force continuum, instead of by department. With a universal force continuum it would be much easier for police officers to go by a set of standards that is across the board. Officers need to be able to react to situations rather than have to take time to think about what they are doing. A few seconds that officers spend thinking could actually be what determines if they officer is killed in the line of duty. This thin line that officers have to make sure they do not cross when dealing with individuals, is one that will be scrutinized by the public if any mistake is made. The way officers feel pressure to make decisions in such an exact manor is truly pressing down on the officers in their everyday lives.