Police Use of Force

Police officers act as agents of social control in a society. As such, one of their most readily distinguishing characteristics is their lawful authorization to use coercive force during the conduct of their duties. While a society gives law enforcement officers the authority to impose force on its citizens for the sake of public safety and protection, at the same time the officers have obligations to use their coercive powers legitimately. The issue of race takes on importance because alienation and distrust of police by particular groups in the community can emerge as a consequence of improper use of police force. This can have negative effects for both the police and the community.

Most broadly defined, police use of force involves any type of physical control or restraint imposed upon a member of the public. Use of force may occur during arrests, in the course of interventions in ongoing assaults, or in crowd control situations. Officers use various levels of force to protect themselves or others, to sustain an apprehension or to maintain control of a situation. Police use of force includes a range of responses, [Page 633]such as establishing a physical presence; giving verbal commands; administering weaponless holds, punches, or kicks; using chemical irritant sprays, batons or stun guns, and lethal force. The majority of arrest situations do not involve physical force, and most of those uses are weaponless applications of force. However, some of the most controversial issues associated with law enforcement revolve around the use of force, particularly when the public or media perceive that the force was unnecessary or excessive. Force is considered excessive when an officer uses more than is needed to maintain control of a situation, induce compliance of a suspect, or sustain an apprehension. Excessive force by police can result in citizen distrust and outrage, as was made clear by the overwhelming public reaction to the 1991 beating of Rodney King by Los Angeles police officers.