Reprinted from Calibre Press Training Network

Just days ago, a PBS NewsHour segment claimed that more than 1,000 people died between 2012 and 2021 “after police used physical force that is considered non-lethal.” The piece cited batons, CEWs, physical restraint techniques and chemical agents as the “non-lethal” elements involved.

“The death of George Floyd, which sparked a national reckoning over policing resulted from a police technique that is considered non-lethal,” the segment begins. “A new investigation led by the Associated Press has now found that is much more common than had been thought.”

“This report is not only misleading, it’s downright false,” responded Calibre Press instructor Kelly Degman after watching the segment. “In today’s world, those who speak the loudest or most frequently are often the ones who garner the most attention as is the case here,” he said.

“As most people know, in any research process it is important to be ethical, objective and thorough to ensure the validity and reliability of your findings,” Kelly continued. “This was not the case here. In my opinion, this ‘investigation’ was based on initial assumptions and subsequent ‘research’ was conducted to validate their preconceived beliefs without substantial empirical evidence to support it.”

Watch the segment HERE, then look at the use-of-force data Kelly cites.

Kelly: In their investigation, they described the use of “non-lethal weapons.” There is no such thing. In law enforcement we use less-lethal tools which are typically designed to incapacitate or disable a potential threat without causing serious and lasting injury. However, these are not “non-lethal” tools and unfortunately, in a very few instances, they can cause the death of a person.

On the other hand, there is additional research that was conducted using unbiased, ethical, objective, and validated results. In 2018, the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery (Bozeman et al, 2018) conducted research on injuries associated with police use of force. The observational study of use-of-force incidents was conducted through mandatory investigations at three mid-sized police agencies over a two-year period. Expert physicians reviewed police and medical records to determine injury severity using predefined injury severity stratification criteria.

Here are the results of their research:

There were 893 UOF incidents, representing a UOF rate of 0.086% of 1,041,737 calls for service (1 in 1167) and 0.78% of 114,064 criminal arrests (1 in 128).

Suspects were primarily young (mean age, 31 years; range, 12–86 years) males (89%).

The 1,399 force utilizations included:

— Unarmed physical force (n = 710, 51%)

— CEWs (504, 30%)

— Chemical (88, 6.3%)

— Canines (47, 3.4%)

— Impact weapons (9, 0.6%)

— Kinetic impact munitions (8, 0.6%)

— Firearms (6, 0.4%)

— Other (27, 1.9%).

Among 914 suspects, 898 (98%) sustained no or mild injury after police UOF.

Significant (moderate or severe) injuries occurred in 16 (1.8%) subjects.

(Logistic regression analysis shows these are most associated with firearm and canine use).

There was one fatality (0.1%) due to gunshots.

No significant injuries occurred among 504 CEW uses (0%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0–0.9%).

Of the 355 suspects transported to a medical facility, 78 (22%) were hospitalized.

Most hospitalizations were unrelated to UOF (n = 59, 76%), whereas a minority (n = 19, 24%) were due to injuries related to police UOF”.

In this study, without cherry-picking data, it shows that police UOF is rare. When force is used officers most commonly rely on unarmed physical force and less-lethal tools to control a person and, unfortunately, during those attempts to control someone can get hurt, to include the police officers themselves.

[Resources Cited: Bozeman et al (2018) “Injuries associated with police use of force.” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 84(3):p 466-472, March 2018.]

COMMENTS? E-mail us at: [email protected]