The degree of force that officers use is heavily influenced by police discretion in real-world situations rather than espoused by a certain agenda. Discretion can be classified into four different categories where administrators, the community, and the individual police officer exercise differing degrees of influence in decision-making. What is needed to help officer discretion is a central ethos that will guide discretion when all other rules fail to help.
Normal force is distinct from legal and brutal force (Hunt, 1985). Legal force is taught in police academy. It pertains to being able to subdue, restrain, and control a suspect if the officer is threatened with great bodily harm. Legal force also encompasses the use of deadly force if justified. Normal force is learned when the officer hits the streets and is conditioned to buy more effective weapons, which produce more damage to the suspect. In the academy recruits are taught not to hit a person on the head or neck because of their vulnerability, but on the street officers must hit the suspect wherever they can to control them. Peer approval further justifies this treatment. Thus, when police use the necessary amount of force they are not held accountable for a needed increase, but in fact will be looked down upon by fellow officers if a rookie does not show the necessary aggression.
Police use discretion through weighing the costs and benefits of each situation (Wilson, 1968). The helpfulness of their choice is much more important than obeying their duty or moral. Thus, when normal force is explained it is done under the pretense of justifiably. To recap, normal force is simply the force used under police discretion that is neither legally taught nor brutal (Hunt, 1985). Normal force is justified by taking responsibility for their actions, yet denying they were wrong because of situational or abstract events. At other times officers use excuses for normal force and recognize their use of force as inappropriate. They will recall emotional or psychological states as a reason for such inappropriate actions.
Police discretion is structured and controlled by the kind of situation that the police must deal with (Wilson, 1968). Wilson (1968) delineates four different situations. Police-invoked law enforcement, citizen-invoked law enforcement, police-invoked order maintenance, and citizen-invoked order maintenance.
In police-invoked law enforcement police initiate action against crimes that usually do not have victims (Wilson, 1968).
Decision Making – Police officers have considerable decision making powers at their own discretion. This is true for low ranki...
With the articles and past research that I have collected, studies tell us that less than 3 percent of police-citizen contacts involve the threat of physical force by the police. The percentages are higher when the level of force is below lethal force, for instance 20 percent of arrests may involve some type of special or needed force to obtain and control the suspect in able to put him in custody. In the academy, police officers are taught to use equal or greater force to subdue the suspect and do what is necessary to protect the public and also look out for officer safety. Most incidents of force are low level applications such as using the arms, hands, legs, or their bodies to gain control of the suspect. Every police officer is supposed to be trained to a certain standard, and should be able to use the correct amount of force for the situation at hand. Police officers have situational training in the academy on what level of force to use if necessary. All police officers are equipped to handle most if not all situations or levels of force that is need to
These outcomes are determined by the community and states. At times the community supports the police officers and at times they do not which that also depends on the state and the budgeting. The police discretion can also be limited depending on economic hardship, social services agencies for youth. Another important part that plays an important role in discretion would be changes in political climate and public
Police officers have a significant level of discretion when ethical decision making is incorporated in deciding how to respond to a domestic violence call. For example, officers exercise discretion by deciding how to respond to domestic violence when a situation involves a fellow officer. America is a country in which many believe in privacy within the household and often choose not to be involved in a domestic dispute because families should resolve their own problems. However, discretionary powers abused by an officer are used to dissuade the victim from filing charges against the officer’s colleague. Officers often do not choose to arrest in a domestic dispute because they believe the family, not the justice system, should resolve the problem. If the police officer abuses his discretionary power by persuading the victim to not file charges, then he is going against community policing. This is because, he is not serving the interests of the community, but rather the code of silence within a police department. This discretion is exercised even more when the domestic violence situation involves an off duty police officer. When police officers commit domestic violence against their spouse it is usually explained by the fact that police officers deal with difficult citizens on a daily basis on the streets and as a result of the high levels of stress on the job bring their frustrations home and spouse becomes the scapegoat for his feelings (Wetendorf, 1998:3).
Police brutality is a very real problem that many Americans face today. The police carry an enormous burden each day. Police work is very stressful and involves many violent and dangerous situations. In many confrontations the police are put in a position in which they may have to use force to control the situation. There are different levels of force and the situation dictates the level use most of the time. The police have very strict rules about police use force and the manner in which they use it. In this paper I will try to explain the many different reason the police cross the line, and the many different people that this type of behavior effects. There are thousands of reports each year of assaults and ill treatment against officers who use excessive force and violate the human rights of their victims. In some cases the police have injured and even killed people through the use of excessive force and brutal treatment. The use of excessive force is a criminal act and I will try and explore the many different factors involved in these situations.
This research proposal seeks to establish the level of police discretion used on duty. It aims to understand when it is appropriate for police to use discretion as well as given reasons for abusing their decisions. It focuses on issues with police discretion maintaining the responsibility to be ethical such as racial profiling, socioeconomic status and excessive force. Although police discretion can have positive factors, it also difficult to determine whether it is fair for police to make a decision during situations.
Police officers are faced each day with a vast array of situations with which they must deal. No two situations they encounter are ever the same, even when examines a large number of situations over an extended period of time. The officers are usually in the position of having to make decisions on how to handle a specific matter alone, or with little additional advice and without immediate supervision. This is the heart of police discretion. As we shall find, the exercise of discretion by police has benefits and problems associated with such exercise. The unfettered use of discretion can lead to the denial of citizen rights. Strategies that control the use of discretion are, therefore, very important. The benefits and problems of police discretion and controlling strategies are the focus of this essay.
Discretion is defined as the authority to make a decision between two or more choices (Pollock, 2010). More specifically, it is defined as “the capacity to identify and to document criminal and noncriminal events” (Boivin & Cordeau, 2011). Every police officer has a great deal of discretion concerning when to use their authority, power, persuasion, or force. Depending on how an officer sees their duty to society will determine an officer’s discretion. Discretion leads to selective enforcement practices and may result in discrimination against certain groups of people or select individuals (Young, 2011). Most police officer discretion is exercised in situations with individuals (Sherman, 1984).
Police are trained to demand control of all situations some officers even have problems separating their career life from their personal life. They "eat, live, die" police work. Their identity is defined by the uniform that they wear and any conflicts in their life are seen as challenges to their dominance (“The Misuse”). This training shows that the police are given the idea that they have authority over other citizens. The officers of the law are also trained to use force continuum which means to only use the amount of force necessary to control the situation and the person. It begins with officer presence, vocal direction and soft empty-hand techniques. If the person continues resistance, the officer may escalate to hard empty-hand techniques, chemical agents and upward toward lethal force the idea is to bring the person into compliance and under control without causing injury” (“The Misuse”). This system gives the police the idea of needing superiority and full control over the suspect in all cases also this gives the officers the permission to use the amount of power that they feel is necessary in order to gain the control of the situation. So when they stop somebody that has the predetermined negative connotation and fear of police will be scared of what is going to happen so they will be more likely to try to run or resist the officers commands and direction even if
Over the years, this country has witnessed many cases of police brutality. It has become a controversial topic among communities that have seen police brutality take place in front of their homes. Officers are faced with many threatening situations everyday, forcing them to make split second decisions and to expect the worst and hope for the best. Police officers are given the power to take any citizens rights away and even their lives. With that kind of power comes responsibility, that’s one major concern with the amount of discretion officers have when to use force or when to use lethal force.
“Discretion simply means choice, that’s all. As a police officer, I have to make many choices. We are limited by law and our department policy, but, to be honest, often times real police work becomes an art of tapping into your common sense.” (Nielsen, 2011) James Nielsen, a Minneapolis Police Officer and adjutant faculty member at Rasmussen College, uses the phrase common sense. Common sense is a simple philosophy that many have failed to master.
A '''use of force continuum''' is a standard that affords law enforcement officials & security officers (police, probation, or corrections) with guidelines as to how much use of force may be used against a repelling subject in a given situation. In certain ways it is similar to the military’s escalation of force. The reason of these models is to clarify, both for officers and citizens, the complex subject of use of force by law officers. They are often vital parts of law enforcement agencies' use of force policies. Although various agencies have developed different models of the continuum, there is no universal standard model (Stetser, 2001, p. 36)
Police discretionary practices vary from officer to officer and every officer is differently trained by departments. Without the proper use of discretion out on the field, police officers are left open for legal suit actions however, if the officers are trained and exercising the use of discretion in a good manner, each individual officer can be held accountable. The second disadvantage of use of police discretion is that it allows the police officers to have too much power on making decisions which can affect the life, safety or liberty of an individual (Bargen, 2005). Police discretion presents a clear danger to society because the average officer can make a poor decision and affect the life of a person or persons. If discretion in law enforcement is used in a wrongful manner, it has great potential for being abused out of the field. Discretion allows police officers to “perform a duty or refrain from taking action” (Gaines & Kappeler, 2003, p. 251). Police officers are supposed to enforce equality under the law, people in society all should have equal rights and should be treated the same. However, discretion allows police officers to misuse it by treating offenders of different genders, race, class, ethnicity, religion, age and more inappropriately (Pepinsky, 1984). Law enforcement officers are
How prevalent is police discretion and why does it exist? Can discretion be eliminated? Should it be? Due Date March 11 2005
Laws and procedures are the most common basis for officers choosing not to allow offenders to remain free based on their discretion, a study by Mendias and Kehoe (2006) has found. The study found that laws or responsibilities were the main reason for a decision to suspend discretion in eighty-two percent of cases involving an arrest. The study also found that keeping the peace and procedural implications were the primary justifications for ex...