Skip to main content

Singing the same tune? International continuities and discontinuities in how police talk about using force

Abstract

This article focuses on a research project conducted in six jurisdictions: England, The Netherlands, Germany, Australia, Venezuela, and Brazil. These societies are very different ethnically, socially, politically, economically, historically and have wildly different levels of crime. Their policing arrangements also differ significantly: how they are organised; how their officers are equipped and trained; what routine operating procedures they employ; whether they are armed; and much else besides. Most relevant for this research, they represent policing systems with wildly different levels of police shootings, Police in the two Latin American countries represented here have a justified reputation for the frequency with which they shoot people, whereas at the other extreme the police in England do not routinely carry firearms and rarely shoot anyone. To probe whether these differences are reflected in the way that officers talk about the use of force, police officers in these different jurisdictions were invited to discuss in focus groups a scenario in which police are thwarted in their attempt to arrest two youths (one of whom is a known local criminal) by the youths driving off with the police in pursuit, and concludes with the youths crashing their car and escaping in apparent possession of a gun, It might be expected that focus groups would prove starkly different, and indeed they were, but not in the way that might be expected. There was little difference in affirmation of normative and legal standards regarding the use of force. It was in how officers in different jurisdictions envisaged the circumstances in which the scenario took place that led Latin American officers to anticipate that they would shoot the suspects, whereas officers in the other jurisdictions had little expectation that they would open fire in the conditions as they imagined them to be.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    The English focus groups comprised two groups of unarmed officers, and two groups of routinely armed crews of Armed Response Vehicles.

References

  1. 1.

    Adams, K. (1996). Measuring the prevalence of police abuse of force. In W. A. Geller, & H. Toch (Eds.), Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 52–93). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Adams, K. (1999). What we know about police use of force. Report to the National Institute of Justice: Use of force by police: Overview of national and local data. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Travis, J., Chaiken, J. M., & Kaminski, R. J. (1999). Use of force by police: Overview of national and local data. Washington, DC.: National Institute of Justice and Bureau of Justice Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Chevigny, P. (1995). Edge of the knife: Police violence in the Americas (p. 319). New York: New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Terrill, W., Paoline, E. A., & Manning, P. K. (2003). Police culture and coercion. Criminology, 41(4), 1003–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Reiner, R. (2000). The politics of the police (p. 279, 3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    O'Connor, D. (2005). Closing the gap: a review of the 'fitness for purpose' of the current structure of policing in England & Wales. London: HM Inspectorate of Constabulary.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Hough, M. (2007). Policing London, 20 years on. In A. Henry, & D. J. Smith (Eds.), Transformations of policing (pp. 191–212). Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Blakey, D., & Crompton, D. (2000). 'Winning Consent': A review of murder investigation and community and race relations issues in the metropolitan police service. London: Her Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    McLaughlin, E. (2006). The new policing. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Waddington, P. A. J., & Wright, M. (2008). Police use of force, firearms and riot-control. In T. Newburn (Ed.), Handbook of policing. Willan: Collumpton.

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Rico, J. M. (1997). Justicia Penal y Transición Democrática en América Latina. Mexico: Siglo XXI.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Gabaldón, L., & C. Birkbeck (Eds.) (2003). Policía y Fuerza Física en Perspectiva Intercultural. Nueva Sociedad: Caracas.

  14. 14.

    Briceño-León, R. et al. (2002). Tiene la Policía Derecho a Matar a los Delincuentes? Un Estudio de Apoyo Ciudadano a la Violencia Policial. In R. Briceño-León and R. Pérez-Perdomo (Eds.), Morir en Caracas (p. 179–192). Caracas: Universidad Central de Venezuela.

  15. 15.

    Terrill, W., & Mastrofski, S. D. (2002). Situational and officer-based determinants of police coercion. Justice Quarterly, 19(2), 215–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Toch, H. (1996). The violence-prone officer. In W. A. Geller, & H. Toch (Eds.), Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 94–112). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Christopher, W. C. (1991). Report of the Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department. Los Angeles.

  18. 18.

    Lester, D. (1996). Officer attitudes toward police use of force. In W. A. Geller, & H. Torch (Eds.), Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 180–190). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Grant, J. D., & Grant, J. (1996). Officer selection and the prevention of abuse of force. In W. A. Geller, & H. Toch (Eds.), Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 150–164). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Shepherd, E., & Walsh, T. (1986). Selection and training of authorised firearms officers, Report on a pilot study. City of London: Applied Psychology Unit.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Mirrlees-Black, C. (1992). Using psychometric personality tests in the selection of firearms officers. Research and Planning Unit Papers. London: H.M.S.O.

  22. 22.

    Shepherd, E., & Walsh, T. (1987) Identifying the 'at risk' armed officer.

  23. 23.

    Jones, S. (1986). Policewomen and equality: Formal police v informal practice? (p. 235). London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Braithwaite, H., & Brewer, N. (1998). Differences in the conflict resolution tactics of male and female police patrol officers. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 1(3), 276–287.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Shockley-Zalabak, P. (1984). Sex differences in conflict style preferences. Communications Research Reports, 1, 28–32.

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Bloch, P. B., & Anderson, D. (1974). Policewomen on patrol: Final report. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Ffrench, M., & Waugh, L. (1998). The weaker sex? Women and police work. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 1(3), 260–275.

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Sherman, L. W. (1975). An evaluation of policewomen on patrol in a suburban police department. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 3, 434–438.

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Grennan, S. A. (1987). Findings on the role of officer gender in violent encounters with citizens. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 15, 78–85.

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Adams, K. (1999). What we know about police use of force. In J. Travis, J.M. Chaiken, & R.J. Kaminski (Eds.), Use of force by police: Overview of national and local data (pp. 1–14). Washington, DC.: National Institute of Justice and Bureau of Justice Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Walker, S. (1977). A critical history of police reform: The emergence of professionalization. Lexington: Lexington.

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Milton, C. H., et al. (1977). Police use of deadly force. Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Jakubs, D. L. (1977). Police violence in times of political tension: The case of Brazil, 1968–71. In D. H. Bayley (Ed.), Police and Society (pp. 85–106). Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Chan, J. B. L. (1997). Changing police culture: Policing in a multicultural society (p. 255). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Berkeley, G. E. (1969). The democratic policeman. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Skolnick, J. H., & Fyfe, J. J. (1993). Above the law: Police and the excessive use of force (p. 313). New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Kraska, P. B., & Kappeler, V. E. (1997). Militarizing American police: The rise and normalization of paramilitary units. Social Problems, 44(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Williams, J. J., & Westall, D. (2003). SWAT and non-SWAT police officers and the use of force. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31(5), 469–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Locke, H. G. (1996). The color of law and the issue of color: race and the abuse of police power. In W. A. Geller, & H. Toch (Eds.), Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 129–149). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Geller, W., & Karales, K. (1981). Split second decisions: Shootings of and by Chicago Police. Chicago: Chicago Law Enforcement Study Group.

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Geller, W. A., & Toch, H. (1996). Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (p. 379). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Matulia, K. (1981). Justifiable homicide by the police: A study of homicide by the police in 57 US cities. Gaithersburg: International Association of Chiefs of Police.

    Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Friedrich, R. J. (1980). Police use of force: individuals, situations and organizations. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 452, 82–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Kobler, A. L. (1975). Figures (and perhaps some facts) on police killings of civilians in the United States, 1965–1969. Journal of Social Issues, 31(1), 185–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Meyer, M. W. (1980). Police shootings at minorities: the case of Los Angeles. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 452, 98–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Fyfe, J. J. (1982). Race and extreme police–citizen violence. In J. J. Fyfe (Ed.), Readings on police use of deadly force (pp. 173–194). Washington: Police Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Mendez, G.A. (1983). The role of race and ethnicity in the incidence of police use of deadly force (p. 114–115). In Anon. (Ed.), Annual report. New York: National Urban League.

  48. 48.

    Brim, O. (1960). Personality development as role learning. In I. Iscoe, & H. Stevenson (Eds.), Personality development in children (pp. 127–159). Austin: Texas University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Mischel, W. (1973). Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality. Psychological Review, 80, 252–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Sherman, L. W. (1980). Causes of police behaviour: the current state of quantitative research. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 17, 69–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Alpert, G. P., & Dunham, R. G. (2004). Understanding police use of force: Officers, suspects, and reciprocity (p. 191). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Worden, R. E. (1996). The causes of police brutality: theory and evidence on police use of force. In W. A. Geller, & H. Toch (Eds.), Police violence: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 23–51). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Bayley, D. H., & Garofalo, J. (1989). The management of violence by police patrol officers. Criminology, 27(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Liska, A. J. (1992). Social threat and social control (p. 240). Albany: State University of New York.

    Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Liska, A. E., & Yu, J. (1992). Specifying and testing the threat hypothesis: Police use of deadly force. In A. J. Liska (Ed.), Social threat and social control (pp. 53–68). Albany: State University of New York.

    Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    United Nations (1999). Global report on crime and justice. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Shearing, C. D., & Ericson, R. V. (1991). Culture as figurative action. British Journal of Sociology, 42(4), 481–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Ericson, R. V. (2007). Rules in policing: Five perspectives. Theoretical Criminology, 11(3), 367–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Holdaway, S. (1983). Inside the British police. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Waddington, P. A. J. (1999). Police (canteen) sub-culture: An appreciation. British Journal of Criminology, 39(2), 286–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Brewer, J. D. (1990). Talking about danger: the RUC and the paramilitary threat. Sociology, 24(4), 657–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Fielding, N. (1994). Cop canteen culture. In T. Newburn, & E. Stanko (Eds.), Just boys doing business: Men, masculinity and crime (pp. 46–63). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Klockars, C. B. (1980). The dirty Harry problem. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 452, 33–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Klockars, C. B., Kutnjak Ivkovich, S., & Haberfeld, M. R. (2004). The contours of police integrity (p. 305). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Chan, J. B. L. (2003). Fair cop: Learning the art of policing. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. A. J. Waddington.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Waddington, P.A.J., Adang, O., Baker, D. et al. Singing the same tune? International continuities and discontinuities in how police talk about using force. Crime Law Soc Change 52, 111–138 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-008-9176-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Focus Group
  • Police Officer
  • Police Force
  • Innocent Bystander
  • Police Culture