Use of force continuum

Last updated
Operations Specialist 1st Class Dennis Marholz apprehends a mock suspect after being hit with pepper spray while Aviation Electronic Technician 1st Class Pete Ingram keeps close watch during a pepper spray testing evaluation that marked the final stage in a three-week series of training involving non-lethal weapons and the use of force continuum. US Navy 070720-N-1045B-118 Operations Specialist 1st Class Dennis Marholz apprehends a mock suspect after being hit with pepper spray while Aviation Electronic Technician 1st Class Pete Ingram keeps close watch.jpg
Operations Specialist 1st Class Dennis Marholz apprehends a mock suspect after being hit with pepper spray while Aviation Electronic Technician 1st Class Pete Ingram keeps close watch during a pepper spray testing evaluation that marked the final stage in a three-week series of training involving non-lethal weapons and the use of force continuum.

A use of force continuum is a standard that provides law enforcement officers and civilians with guidelines as to how much force may be used against a resisting subject in a given situation. In some ways, it is similar to the U.S. military's escalation of force (EOF). The purpose of these models is to clarify, both for law enforcement officers and civilians, the complex subject of use of force. They are often central parts of law enforcement agencies' use of force policies. Various criminal justice agencies have developed different models of the continuum, and there is no universal or standard model. [1] Generally, each different agency will have their own use of force policy. Some agencies may separate some of the hand-to-hand based use of force. For example, take-downs and pressure point techniques may be one step before actual strikes and kicks. Also, for some agencies the use of aerosol pepper spray and electronic control devices (TASER) may fall into the same category as take-downs, or the actual strikes.

Contents

The first examples of use of force continuum were developed in the 1890s and early 1900s. [2] Early models were depicted in various formats, including graphs, semicircular "gauges", and linear progressions. Most often the models are presented in "stair step" fashion, with each level of force matched by a corresponding level of subject resistance, although it is generally noted that an officer need not progress through each level before reaching the final level of force. These progressions rest on the premise that officers should escalate and de-escalate their level of force in response to the subject's actions. [3]

Although the use of force continuum is used primarily as a training tool for law enforcement officers, it is also valuable with civilians, such as in criminal trials or hearings by police review boards. In particular, a graphical representation of a use of force continuum is useful to a jury when deciding whether an officer's use of force was reasonable. [4]

Example model

While the specific progression of force varies considerably (especially the wide gap between empty hand control and deadly force) among different agencies and jurisdictions, one example of a general use of force continuum model cited in a U.S. government publication on use of force is shown below. [5]

  1. Officer presence – the professionalism, uniform, and utility belt of the law enforcement officer and the marked vessel or vehicle the officer arrives in. The visual presence of authority is normally enough for a subject to comply with an officer's lawful demands. Depending on the totality of the circumstances, a call/situation may require additional officers or on scene officers may request assistance in order to gain better control of the situation and ensure a more safe environment for all involved. It also will depend on the circumstances of the situation. For example, depending on how many people are at the scene with the officer, a larger presence may be required. However, if 10 officers arrive at a scene with only a single suspect, the public may perceive the situation as an excessive use of officer presence within the use of force continuum. [6] [7] [8]
  2. Verbal commands/cooperative controls – clear and understandable verbal direction by an officer aimed at the subject. In some cases, it is necessary for the officer to include a consequence to the verbal direction so that the subject understands what will happen if the subject refuses to comply with the officer’s direction. The verbal command and the consequence must be legal and not considered excessive according to the continuum. For example, an officer could not order a disabled person in a wheel chair to stand up or be sprayed by Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) Pepper Spray. [7] [9]
  3. Soft Control, PPCT – Pressure Point Control Tactics, Control Tactics, techniques – a level of force that has a low probability of causing soft connective tissue damage or bone fractures. This would include joint manipulation techniques, applying pressure to pressure points and normal application of hand-cuffs. [7] [9] [10]
  4. Hard control Techniques/Aggressive response techniques – the amount of force that has a probability of causing soft connective tissue damage or bone fractures or irritation of the skin, eyes, and mucus membranes. This would include kicks, punches, stuns and use of aerosol sprays such as oleoresin capsicum (OC) pepper spray. Some models split these techniques between empty hand, soft control and intermediate weapon techniques but only include 5 levels of the continuum. [7] [9] [11] [12]
  5. Intermediate weapons – an amount of force that would have a high probability of causing soft connective tissue damage or bone fractures. (e.g. expandable baton, baton, pepper spray, Taser, beanbag rounds, rubber fin stabilized ammunition, Mace (spray), police dogs, etc.) Intermediate weapon techniques are designed to impact muscles, arms and legs, and intentionally using an intermediate weapon on the head, neck, groin, knee caps, or spine would be classified as deadly or lethal force. [7] [9] [11]
  6. Lethal force/Deadly force – a force with a high probability of causing death or serious bodily injury. Serious bodily injury includes unconsciousness, protracted or obvious physical disfigurement, or protracted loss of or impairment to the function of a bodily member, organ, or the mental faculty. A firearm is the most widely recognized lethal or deadly force weapon, however, an automobile or weapon of opportunity could also be defined as a deadly force utility. [7] [9] [10]

The U.S. Navy teaches a six-step model: Officer presence, Verbal commands, Soft controls, Hard controls, Intermediate Weapons, and Lethal force. Hard controls includes the use of tools such as hand-cuffs, while soft controls equates to empty hand above, describing techniques where the officer may engage a resisting detainee. When escalating, voluntary submission to cuffs is a viable way to prevent the need for empty hand submission techniques which place the officer and the detainee at physical risk. When de-escalating, hard controls (i.e.: cuffs and isolation in the rear seat of a cruiser) give officers a reasonable and achievable goal after altercation with a detainee during which higher levels of force may have been required. [9] [13] [14]

Subject classifications

In all use of force continuum models, the actions of the subject is classified in order for the officer to quickly determine what level of force is authorized and may be necessary to apprehend or compel compliance from the individual. Listed below are examples of how subjects are classified.

Generally, the passive subjects and active resistors fall under levels 1–3 of the use of force continuum, while active aggressors fall under levels 4–6. The officers are trained to apply the proper measure of force within the continuum based on the actions and classification of the subject. [15]

Reasonableness standard

The United States Supreme Court, in the case of Graham v. Connor , (1989) ruled that excessive use of force claims must be evaluated under the "objectively reasonable" standard of the Fourth Amendment. Therefore, the "reasonableness" factor of a use of force incident must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and judged with the understanding that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation.

Broadly speaking, the use of force by an officer becomes necessary and is permitted under specific circumstances, such as in self-defense or in defense of another individual or group. However, there is no all encompassing consensus about when an officer would always need to use force, nor is there any agreed upon method that can efficiently measure or predict specific types of force actions that one would deem reasonable before the time comes.

The International Association of Chiefs of Police, has described use of force as the "amount of effort required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling subject". [17]

When force is observed

Garner and Maxwell (1996) [18] found that when force was necessary, in 80 percent of the encounters, police opted to use weaponless force such as grabbing or shoving. Alpert and Dunham (1999) [19] show that police use of force is reactionary, initiated by suspect resisting arrest. Force is more likely to be employed if suspect is disrespectful, intoxicated, and/or wielding a weapon. Research has also found that special division officers are more likely to use deadly force on suspects. [20]

Studies examining gender influences on the use of force are still inconclusive. Some findings suggest that male suspects are more likely to have force used against them, whereas others show insignificant differences. However, research examining male-female patrol teams show that these pairings are less likely to use force compared to male-male pairings. Conclusions suggest that female officers may be more effective at diffusing tense situations. [21]

See also

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Stetser, 2001, p. 36.
  2. ↑ Stetser, 2001, pp. 36-37.
  3. ↑ Stetser, 2001, p.38.
  4. ↑ Grossi, 2um006.
  5. ↑ "Garner and Maxwell" (PDF). ncjrs.gov. p. 37. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2006-10-04. Retrieved 2006-09-26.
  6. ↑ "The Use-of-Force Continuum". National Institution of Justice Statistics. August 4, 2009. Archived from the original on April 11, 2015. Retrieved April 6, 2015.
  7. 1 2 3 4 5 6 McGoey, Chris. "Use of Force, Security Guards, use of force, Chris McGoey, security guards expert". crimedoctor.com. Archived from the original on 2015-03-15. Retrieved 2015-04-17.
  8. ↑ "Use- of Force" (PDF). cops.usdoj.gov. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2015-01-22. Retrieved 2015-04-17.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 "Use- of Force" (PDF). cops.usdoj.gov. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2015-01-22. Retrieved 2015-04-17.
  10. 1 2 "The Use-of-Force Continuum". National Institute of Justice. August 4, 2009. Archived from the original on April 11, 2015. Retrieved April 6, 2015.
  11. 1 2 "The Use of Force Paradigm for Enforcement and Corrections". pss.cc. Archived from the original on 2015-04-15. Retrieved 2015-04-10.
  12. ↑ "The Use-of-Force Continuum". National Institute of Justice Statistics. August 4, 2009. Archived from the original on April 11, 2015. Retrieved April 6, 2015.
  13. ↑ "Use of Force". crimedoctor.com. Archived from the original on 2015-03-15. Retrieved 2015-04-10.
  14. ↑ "Escalation of Force - Non-Lethal Effects". marinecorpsconceptsandprograms.com. Archived from the original on 2016-05-09. Retrieved 2014-12-06.
  15. 1 2 3 4 5 "Use of Force" (PDF). cops.usdoj.gov. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2015-01-22. Retrieved 2015-04-10.
  16. 1 2 3 4 "The (Original) Use of Force Model". pss.cc. Archived from the original on 2015-04-15. Retrieved 2015-04-17.
  17. ↑ "Overview of Police Use of Force". National Institute of Justice. Archived from the original on 2020-12-02. Retrieved 2020-12-07.
  18. ↑ Garner J.H, Maxwell C.D. (1996). Measuring the amount of force used by and against the police in six jurisdictions. In Report to the National Institute of Justice: Use of force by police: Overview of national and local data (pp. 25–44), U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 
  19. ↑ Alpert, G.P., Dunham, R. (1999). The force factor: Measuring and assessing police use of force and suspect resistance. In Report to the National Institute of Justice: Use of force by police: Overview of national and local data (pp. 45–60), U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC
  20. ↑ Riksheim, E. C., & Chermak, S. M. (1993). Causes of police behavior revisited. Journal of Criminal Justice, 21(4), 353-382.
  21. ↑ Riksheim, E. C., & Chermak, S. M. (1993). Causes of police behavior revisited. Journal of Criminal Justice, 21(4), 353-382.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deadly force</span> Use of force, likely to cause serious bodily injury or death to another person

Deadly force, also known as lethal force, is the use of force that is likely to cause serious bodily injury or death to another person. In most jurisdictions, the use of deadly force is justified only under conditions of extreme necessity as a last resort, when all lesser means have failed or cannot reasonably be employed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Non-lethal weapon</span> Weapon intended to be less likely to kill a living target than conventional weapons

Non-lethal weapons, also called nonlethal weapons, less-lethal weapons, less-than-lethal weapons, non-deadly weapons, compliance weapons, or pain-inducing weapons are weapons intended to be less likely to kill a living target than conventional weapons such as knives and firearms with live ammunition. It is often understood that unintended or incidental casualties are risked wherever force is applied, but non-lethal weapons try to minimise the risk of casualties as much as possible. Non-lethal weapons are used in policing and combat situations to limit the escalation of conflict where employment of lethal force is prohibited or undesirable, where rules of engagement require minimum casualties, or where policy restricts the use of conventional force. These weapons occasionally cause serious injuries or death; the term "less-lethal" has been preferred by some organizations as it describes the risks of death more accurately than the term "non-lethal", which some have argued is a misnomer.

Pepper spray, oleoresin capsicum spray, OC spray, capsaicin spray, or capsicum spray is an inflammatory agent used in policing, riot control, crowd control, and self-defense, including defense against dogs and bears. Its inflammatory effects cause the eyes to close, temporarily taking away vision. This temporary blindness allows officers to more easily restrain subjects and permits people in danger to use pepper spray in self-defense for an opportunity to escape. It also causes temporary discomfort and burning of the lungs which causes shortness of breath.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Taser</span> Electroshock weapon used by police

A Taser is a conducted energy device (CED) primarily used to incapacitate people, allowing them to be approached and handled in an unresisting and thus safe manner. Sold by Axon, formerly TASER International, the device fires two small barbed darts intended to puncture the skin and remain attached to the target, at 55 m/s. Their range extends from 4.5 m (15 ft) for non-Law Enforcement Tasers to 10.5 m (34 ft) for Law Enforcement Tasers. The darts are connected to the main unit by thin insulated copper wire and deliver a modulated electric current designed to disrupt voluntary control of muscles, causing "neuromuscular incapacitation." The effects of a taser may only be localized pain or strong involuntary long muscle contractions, based on the mode of use and connectivity of the darts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Riot control</span> Measures taken against unlawful or violent crowds of people

Riot control measures are used by law enforcement, military, paramilitary or security forces to control, disperse, and arrest people who are involved in a riot, unlawful demonstration or unlawful protest.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electroshock weapon</span> Incapacitating weapon

An electroshock weapon is an incapacitating weapon. It delivers an electric shock aimed at temporarily disrupting muscle functions and/or inflicting pain without usually causing significant injury.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Right to life</span> Belief that a being should not be killed by another entity

The right to life is the belief that a human being or animal has the right to live and, in particular, should not be killed by another entity. The concept of a right to life arises in debates on issues including capital punishment, with some people seeing it as immoral; abortion, where some believe an unborn fetus is a human being whose life should not be ended prematurely; euthanasia, where the decision to end one's life outside of natural means is seen as incorrect; meat production and consumption, where the breeding and killing of animals for their meat is seen an infringement on their rights; and in killings by law enforcement, which is seen by some as an infringement of a person's right to live. Various individuals may disagree in which of these areas the principle of a right to life might apply.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Use of force</span> Force needed to compel compliance

The use of force, in the context of law enforcement, may be defined as the "amount of effort required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling subject".

A Terry stop in the United States allows the police to briefly detain a person based on reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminal activity. Reasonable suspicion is a lower standard than probable cause which is needed for arrest. When police stop and search a pedestrian, this is commonly known as a stop and frisk. When police stop an automobile, this is known as a traffic stop. If the police stop a motor vehicle on minor infringements in order to investigate other suspected criminal activity, this is known as a pretextual stop. Additional rules apply to stops that occur on a bus.

De-escalation is a human behavior that is intended to prevent the escalation of conflicts. It may also refer to approaches in conflict resolution. People may become committed to behaviors that tend to escalate conflict, so specific measures must be taken to avoid such escalation.

Conflict escalation is the process by which conflicts grow in severity or scale over time. That may refer to conflicts between individuals or groups in interpersonal relationships, or it may refer to the escalation of hostilities in a political or military context. In systems theory, the process of conflict escalation is modeled by positive feedback.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Warning shot</span> Intentionally harmless shot used as a warning

In military and police contexts, a warning shot is an intentionally harmless artillery shot or gunshot with intent to enact direct compliance and order to a hostile perpetrator or enemy forces. It is recognized as signalling intended confrontations on land, sea, and air.

Pain compliance is the use of painful stimulus to control or direct an organism.

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), is a civil case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that, under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, the officer may not use deadly force to prevent escape unless "the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Law enforcement in the United States</span> Major component of the American criminal justice system

Law enforcement is one of three major components of the criminal justice system of the United States, along with courts and corrections. Although each component operates semi-independently, the three collectively form a chain leading from an investigation of suspected criminal activity to the administration of criminal punishment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Correctional emergency response team</span>

A correctional emergency response team is a team of specially trained prison officers tasked with responding to disturbances, riots, cell extractions, mass searches, and other situations in prisons that are likely to involve uncooperative or violent prisoners.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Baton (law enforcement)</span> Club of less than arms length

A baton is a roughly cylindrical club made of wood, rubber, plastic, or metal. It is carried as a compliance tool and defensive weapon by law-enforcement officers, correctional staff, security guards and military personnel. The name baton comes from the French bâton (stick), derived from Old French Baston, from Latin bastum.

Police accountability involves holding both individual police officers, as well as law enforcement agencies responsible for effectively delivering basic services of crime control and maintaining order, while treating individuals fairly and within the bounds of law. Police are expected to uphold laws, regarding due process, search and seizure, arrests, discrimination, as well as other laws relating to equal employment, sexual harassment, etc. Holding police accountable is important for maintaining the public's "faith in the system". Research has shown that the public prefers independent review of complaints against law enforcement, rather than relying on police departments to conduct internal investigations. There is a suggestion that such oversight would improve the public's view on the way in which police officers are held accountable.

Use-of-force law in Missouri refers to the law & legal doctrine which determine whether a member of law enforcement in the state of Missouri is justified in the amount of force used to gain control of an unruly situation or person, including situations involving death. In the United States, doctrine about use of force is primarily defined by the individual states, although there have been some Supreme Court decisions of limited scope.

In the United States, use of deadly force by police has been a high-profile and contentious issue. In 2022, 1,096 people were killed by police shootings according to The Washington Post, while according to the "Mapping Police Violence" project, 1,176 people were killed by police in total.

References

Marine Corps

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.