Advertisement

Impact of CEW and Other Types of Force and Resistance on Officer and Suspect Injuries

  • Michael R. Smith
  • Robert J. Kaminski
  • Jeffrey Rojek
  • Geoffrey P. Alpert
  • Jason Mathis
Chapter

The use of force by police has been the subject of empirical inquiry for more than 40 years. In that time, much has been learned about the nature and extent of the force used by police and the conditions and correlates that affect its application. Among the most important issues that have received attention from use-of-force researchers over the years are those involving injuries to officers and suspects. Almost half a century later, however, much of the research on injuries remains descriptive in nature or contains substantial data and analytic limitations that prevent the research from being used optimally to make policy or training decisions at the agency level. Furthermore, with the proliferation in recent years of conducted electrical weapons (CEWs) such as those of the Taser® and Stinger® brands, questions have arisen regarding the safety of such weapons and what their impact has been on injuries and in-custody deaths [1]. The lack of cross over research on CEWs and injuries has again left law enforcement agencies without the information they need to make sound policy decisions or to respond to inquiries from citizens, special interest groups, and policy-makers, some of whom question whether CEWs are an appropriate nonlethal alternative for general police use.

Keywords

Active Aggression Major Injury Deadly Force American Civil Liberty Union Oleoresin Capsicum 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Amnesty International. (2004). Excessive and lethal force? Amnesty international’s concerns about deaths and ill-treatment involving police use of tasers. Retrieved December 26, 2006 from http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGAMR511392004.
  2. 2.
    Amnesty International. (1997). USA: Police use of pepper spray – tantamount to torture. Retrieved December 26, 2006 from http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAMR510671997.
  3. 3.
    Edwards, S.M., Granfield, J., & Onnen, J. (1997). Evaluation of pepper spray. Washington, DC: National Institute of JusticeGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Granfield, J., Onnen, J., & Petty, C.S. (1994). Pepper spray and in-custody deaths. Alexandria, VA: IACP.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Petty, C.S. (2004). Deaths in police confrontations when oleoresin capsicum is used: Final report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kaminski, R.J., Edwards, S.M., & Johnson, J. W. (1998). The deterrent effects of oleoresin capsicum on assaults against police: Testing the velcro-effect hypothesis. Police Quarterly, 1, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kaminski, R.J., Edwards, S.M., & Johnson, J.W. (1999). Assessing the incapacitative effects of pepper spray during resistive encounters with the police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 22, 7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Morabito, E.V. & Doerner, W.G. (1997). Police use of less-than-lethal force: Oleoresin capsicum (OC) spray. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategy and Management, 20(4), 680–697. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smith, M.R. & Alpert, G.P. (2000). Pepper spray: A safe and reasonable response to suspect verbal resistance. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategy and Management, 23(2), 233–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lumb, R.C. & Friday, P.C. (1997). Impact of pepper spray availability on police officer use-of-force decisions. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategy and Management, 20(1), 136–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaminski, R.J. & Sorensen, D.W.M. (1995). A multivariate analysis of individual, situational, and environmental factors associated with police assault injuries. American Journal of Police, 14(3/4), 3–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smith, M.R. & Petrocelli, M. (2002). The effectiveness of force used by police in making arrests. Police Practice and Research, 3(3), 201–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    General Accounting Office. (2005). Taser weapons: Use of tasers by selected law enforcement agencies. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department. (2006). Taser project: First Year – Full Deployment Study. Charlotte, NC: Author. Retrieved December 26, 2006 from http://www.charmeck.org/NR/rdonlyres/e2alrn6jzttfx35m2gwabbqjzhlahc567iwaeusye62e5iz6amtldfmv4mel3ojqzq3qtzd375dhuii4ozio7y3estb/1+year+taser+study.pdf.
  15. 15.
    Jenkinson, E., Neeson, C., & Bleetman, A. (2006). The relative risk of police use-of-force options: Evaluating the potential for deployment of electronic weaponry. Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, 13(5), 229–241.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Seattle Police Department. (2002). The M26 taser year one implementation. Seattle, WA: Author.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Alpert, G.P. & Dunham, R.G. (1995). Police use of deadly force: a statistical analysis of the Metro-Dade police department. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fyfe, J. (1978). Shots Fired: Examination of New York City Police Firearms Discharge Unpublished Dissertation, State University of New York, Albany.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Geller, W.A. (1982). Deadly force: what we know. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 10(2), 151–177.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Scharf, P. & Binder, A. (1983). The badge and the bullet: police use of deadly force. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sparger, J.R. & Giacopassi, D.J. (1992). Memphis revisited: a reexamination of police shootings after the Garner decision. Justice Quarterly, 9(2), 211–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    White, M.D. (2002). Identifying situational predictors of police shootings using multivariate analysis. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 25(4), 726–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cardarelli, A.P. (1968). An analysis of police killed by criminal action: 1961–1963. Journal of Criminal Law Criminology and Police Science, 59(3), 447–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kaminski, R. J. (2002). An opportunity model of police homicide victimization. Dissertation Abstracts International (UMI No. 3053970).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kaminski, R.J. (2004). The murder of police officers. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kaminski, R.J., Jefferis, E.S., & Chanhatasilpa, C. (2000). A spatial analysis of American police killed in the line of duty, pp. 212–220, in Turnbull, L., Hendrix, H.E., and Dent, B.D., eds., Atlas of Crime: Mapping the Criminal Landscape, Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kaminski, R.J., & Marvell, T. B. (2002). A comparison of changes in police and general homicides, 1930–1998. Criminology, 40(1), 701–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    King, W.R, & Sanders, B.A. (1997). Nice guys finish last: a critical review of ‘Killed in the Line of Duty. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategy and Management, 20(2), 392–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Quinet K.D., Bordua D.J., & Lassiter W. (1997). Line of duty police deaths: a paradoxical trend in felonious homicides in the United States. Policing and Society, 6(4), 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mencken, F.C., Nolan, J., & Berhanu, S. (2004). Juveniles, illicit drug activity, and homicides against law enforcement officers. Homicide Studies, 8(4), 327–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Durose, M.R., Schmitt, E.L., & Langan, P.A. (2005). Contacts between Police and the Public. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kaminski, R., DiGiovanni, C., & Downs, R. (2004). The use of force between the police and persons with impaired judgment. Police Quarterly, 7, 311–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Alpert, G.P., & Dunham, R.G. (2004). Understanding police use of force: Officers, suspects, and reciprocity. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Henriquez, M. (1999). IACP national database project on police use of force. In Use of force by police: Overview of national and local data, pp. 19–24. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice and Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Alpert, G.P., & Dunham, R.G. (2000). Analysis of police use of force data. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Meyer, G. (1992). Nonlethal weapons vs. conventional police tactics: Assessing injuries and liabilities. The Police Chief, 59, 10–17.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Campbell, A., Berk, R.A., & Fyfe, J.J. (1998). Deployment of violence: The Los Angeles Police Department’s use of dogs. Evaluation Review, 22(4), 535–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Alpert, G.P., & Dunham, R.G. (2000). Analysis of police use of force data. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hirschel, D.J., Dean, C.W., & Lumb, R.C. (1994). The relative contribution of domestic violence to assault and injury of police officers. Justice Quarterly, 11, 99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Uchida, C.D., Brooks, L.W., & Koper, C.S. (1987). Danger to police during domestic encounters: Assaults on Baltimore county police. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 2, 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    U.S. Department of Justice. (2006). Law enforcement officers killed and assaulted 2005. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved January 20, 2007, from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2005/table68.htm
  42. 42.
    Brandl, S. (1996). In the line of duty: A descriptive analysis of police assaults and accidents. Journal of Criminal Justice, 24, 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Brandl, S.G., & Stroshine, M.S. (2003). Toward an understanding of the physical hazards of police work. Police Quarterly, 6, 172–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Chan, T.C., Vilke, G.M., Clausen, J., Clark, R., Schmidt, P., Snowden, T., & Neuman, T. (2001). Pepper spray’s effects on a suspect’s ability to breathe. National Institute of Justice: Research in Brief. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    American Civil Liberties Union of South California. (1995). Pepper spray update: more fatalities, more questions.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gauvin, R. (1995). Oleoresin capsicum spray: A progress report. The ASLET Journal, May/June, 29–32.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    National Institute of Justice. (2003). The effectiveness and safety of pepper spray. Research for Practice. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Nowicki, E. (1993). Oleoresin Capsicum: A non-lethal force alternative. Law Enforcement Technology, 20, 24–27.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Laur, D. (2000). Taser Technology Research Paper. Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved January 9, 2007 from http://www.cprc.org/tr/tr-2000-01.pdf.
  50. 50.
    TASER International. (2006). Deadly Rhetoric: How the ACLU of Northern California’s fight against law enforcement control tools endangers communities. Phoenix, AZ: Author. Retrieved January 9, 2007 from http://www.taser.com/savinglives/documents/Deadly%20Rhetoric%20V12.pdf
  51. 51.
    Amnesty International. 2006. USA Amnesty International’s continuing concerns about Taser use. AI Index AMR 51/030/2006, http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/usa/document.do ?id=ENGAMR510302006. London: Amnesty International.
  52. 52.
    American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California. (2005). Stun Gun Fallacy: How the lack of taser regulation endanger lives. San Francisco, CA: Author.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ho, J.D., Miner, J.R., Lakireddy, D.R., Bultman, L.L., & Heegaard, W.G. (2006). Cardiovascular and physiologic effects of conducted electrical weapon discharge in resting adults. Academic Emergency Medicine, 13, 589–595.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Jauchen, J.R., Sherry, C.J., Fines, D.A., & Cook, M.C. (2005). Acidosis, lactate, electrolytes, muscle enzymes, and other factors in the blood of Sus scrofa following repeated TASER exposures. Forensic Science International, 161(1), 20–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Lakkireddy, D., Wallick, D., Ryschon, K., Chung, M.K., Butany, J., Martin, D., Saliba, W., Kowalewski, W., Natale, A., & Tchou, P.J. (2006). Effects of cocaine intoxication on the threshold of stun gun induction of ventricular fibrillation. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 48(4), 805–811.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Levine, S.D., Sloane, C., Dunford, J., Chan, T., Vilke, G., & Dunford, J. (2005). Cardiac Monitoring of Subjects Exposed to the Taser, 12, Suppl 1, 71.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Nanthakumar, K., Billingsley, I.M., Masse, S., Dorian, P., Cameron, D., Chauhan, V.S., Downar, E., & Sevaptsidis, E. (2006). Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 48(4), 798–804.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Garner, J., Maxwell, C., & Heraux, C.G. (2003). Characteristics associated with the prevalence and amount of force used by the police. Justice Quarterly, 19(4), 705–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Bliese, P.D., & Hanges, P.J. (2004). Being both too liberal and too conservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they were independent. Organizational Research Methods, 7(4), 400–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Moerbeek, M. (2004). The consequence of ignoring a level of nesting in multilevel analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1), 129–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Long, J.S., & Freese, J. (2001). Regression models for categorical dependents variables using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Long, J.S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Fu, V.K. (1998). Estimating generalized ordered logit models. Stata Technical Bulletin, 44, 27–30.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Hougland, S., Mesloh, C., & Henych, M. Use of force, civil litigation, and the Taser. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 74, 24–30.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Hickey, R.H., & Hoffman, P.B. (2003). To bite or not to bite: Canine apprehensions in a large, suburban police department. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31, 147–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Mesloh, C. (2006). The impact of training on police canine force outcomes. Police Practice and Research, 7(4), 323–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Dill, L.P. (1992). Police dog attacks: A dogmatic approach to crime control. Whittier Law Review, 13, 515.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Police Executive Research Forum. (2005). Conducted Energy Device Policy and Training Guidelines for Consideration. PERF Center on Force & Accountability. Washington DC, USA.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Garner, J.H., Maxwell, C.D., & Heraux, C.G. (2002). Characteristics associated with the prevalence and severity of force used by the police. Justice Quarterly, 19(4), 705–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael R. Smith
  • Robert J. Kaminski
  • Jeffrey Rojek
  • Geoffrey P. Alpert
  • Jason Mathis

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations