Use of Force: How training, oversight, and transparency can help.

The use of force conversation by police in America has been brought to the forefront of the
conversation recently. The advent of body worn cameras, and cell phone cameras has seemingly
unveiled the wall behind the curtain, between police and civilian interactions. Seeing videos of
individuals interactions with police, and the force used by them has become common place.
While the advents of these technologies and social media has made it easier to share these
interactions, has it helped to address the problem of use of excessive force by police? Or has it
only helped to muddy the waters of what of what force is acceptable by police?
Scope of the Problem
One of the first, and biggest problems with understanding use of force by law enforcement is
data collection. According to the FBI’s website in 2015 a use of force data collection program
was created. It gathered important information on the race, gender, age, and other demographic
information regarding a use of force incident when it occurred. The problem is that information
being shared is not required. There is currently no independent oversight committee or
organization that requires the collection of data from use of force incidents by police unless
voluntarily given
Another problem that exists is a general lack of consistency with what is acceptable use of force
per the situation an officer arrives to. Almost every department has what is called a use of force
continuum. The National Institute of Justice(2009)laid out what a standard use of force
continuum should like.
 Officer Presence-No force is used, and officer presence is enough to deter
criminal behavior
 Verbalization-No physical force, but the officer is giving verbal commands and
directions to an individual to comply
 Empty Hand Control-Using soft techniques such as joint locks, pressure points.
Can evolve into hard techniques such as punches or kicks.
 Less Lethal Methods-Use of pepper spray, batons, rubber bullets, conducted
energy(Tazers)in order to gain compliance.
 Lethal Force-Officer uses lethal method such as firearm. Should only be used
when there is serious risk of loss of life to officer or others.
What the National Institute of Justice(2009)lays out is a very standard basic use of force
continuum model. Karen Evens in her “Police Use of Force”(2021)report point out tough that
not all agencies follow the same guidelines. Evens(2021) states “force of any type is based on
agency policy, the situation, and the experience of the officer.”. Evens(2021)goes into further
detail stating that while most departments have a use of force continuums are not the same.
Some have fewer, while others have more.
This lack of consistency could lead to confusion on what the appropriate force is expected in a
certain situation. This could also lead to confusion to the general public. Where a bystander
may see a police use of force incident in two separate jurisdictions with two separate results. As
Evens(2021)report points out that not only can the continuum be different, but how it is applied
can also vary. Where some departments only allow using force to match force, other
departments or states may allow you to exceed it by one. For example using the
NIJ(2009)standard use of force continuum model if a subject is being verbally noncompliant,
department A may only allow verbalization while department B allows you to exceed
verbalization by one step to Empty Hand Control in order to get the subject to comply. A
bystander not knowing the difference is only going to recognize there was a difference in force
applied, which could be easily seen as excessive.
Current Policy and Alternatives
As Evans(2021)states current policy with use of force varies, from state to state, and department
to department. Gary Cordner(2019)in “Rethinking police education in the United States” points
to federalism as a big reason why. Stating that federalism has allowed for the states and local
jurisdictions to focus on the training curriculum of police officers.
Cordner(2019)points out that the average academy training length in the United States is twenty
weeks long, with an additional twelve weeks of on the job training. During these training
periods officers are expected to show a knowledge of constitutional, state, and municipal law.
Along with an understanding of agency policies, including use of force continuum models. An
issue that does arise as is that the most of education received revolves around officer survival
methods, and less about officer de-escalation methods. Leading to an officer to forcibly follow
the use of force continuum up, with little training how to work down from it.
One alternative that has come up in recent years is the advent of civilian oversight committees.
One like the Civilian Office of Police Accountability established in Chicago. The committee
reviews complaints made by civilians against officers in use of force incidents, then reports those
findings and recommendations to the Chicago Police review board. The premise being that if an
officer knows that they are being monitored or could be investigated it will reduce the risk of
excessive force incidents. This though again is a method that is a reactive response and is not
addressing the underlying issues with what force is acceptable and when, and how to best train
the officers to apply those methods.
Call to Action
This is a call to action to create and enforce a national standardized policy to address what I
believe are the four biggest factors regarding use of force with police.
 Education-What type of education should be the acceptable standard to be a
police officer in the United States today.
 Consistency-Creating a policy that is universal so that officers know what the
expectation is and is not something that has to be relearned if they move to
another department.
 Transparency-Make information regarding use of force available to citizens and
use of force incidents mandatory to report so information can be tracked and
studied.
 Observation-Oversight committee either within the department or civilian based
to monitor officers and provide training that is not consistent with current policies
or standards.
Any policy created should begin by outlining what the standard education protocols for being a
police officer in the United States should be in 2021. Cornder(2019)reveals that in 1973 the
National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice and Goals set a target date of 1982 for all
new police to have a four year degree. Cornder(2019)does point out that roughly 40% of police
officers do have the qualifying education, but only 1% of the agencies require it. Where this
makes a difference in use of force is a 2016 report by Ben Stickle, “The National of the Effect of
Education, Training, and Pre-Employment Screening on Law Enforcement Use of Force”. In
Stickles(2016)report points to studies that show officers with at least a four year education are
less authoritative, and are 41% less likely to use lethal force. So future policy expectations
should require that departments meet Commission on Criminal Justice and Goals expectations
and require officers have at least a four-year college education before hire.
Secondly as we have referenced Evans(2021)report that consistency within the use of force
continuum needs to be clear and standardized. This is for the benefit of not only the officers, but
for the citizens who observe these incidents. The policy should clearly define what the use of
force continuum looks like, what approach is to be made within each point of the continuum, and
how an officer can work there way back down from it. The emphasis should be clear, concise,
and disseminated to all state, and local municipalities.
The policy created should include transparency. Following the demographic data collection
obtained in the 2015 FBI voluntary use of force data submission. The policy should remove the
voluntary aspect from the equation, and in place require that any use of force incident be
reported to a data information center. This information can then be gathered, with results and
findings and be published to allow the communities, and any oversight committees within an
organization to make the best decisions going forward with department practices.
Lastly the policy should mandate an oversight committee to monitor the behaviors, and training
of the officers involved. This should not be applied to use of force incidents, but otherwise
typical interactions. This is to ensure that that the officer involved is using the appropriate
training and adhering to federal, state, and department standards and operating procedures. This
would allow for not necessarily administrative action being needed, but follow up or remedial
training for the officer. This type of oversight, in conjunction with training would ensure that
officers are not only following these procedures but are applying them appropriately across all
age, ethnic, and gender demographics.
 References

Cordner, G. (2019). Rethinking police education in the United States. Police Practice &
Research, 20(3), 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2019.1598066
Evans K. Police Use of Force. Reference & User Services Quarterly. 2019;59(2):103-106. Accessed
April 17, 2021. https://searchebscohostcom.ezproxy.wsc.edu/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=eue&AN=142143223&site=eds-live
FBI Criminal Justice Information System(2021)National Use-of-Force Data
Colloectionhttps://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/ucr/use-of-force
National Institute of Justice, "The Use-of-Force Continuum," August 3, 2009, nij.ojp.gov:
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/use-force-continuum
Stickle, B. (2016). A National Examination of the Effect of Education, Training and Pre-Employment
Screening on Law Enforcement Use of Force, Volume 13, # 1.
http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/jpj_education_use_of_force.pdf
Civilian Office of Police Accountability(2021)https://www.chicagocopa.org/