Frequency of Training in Less-than-Lethal Force Tactics and Weapons: Results of a Two-State Survey

Abstract

Failing to train police officers in the use of less-than-lethal force tactics and equipment increases the police department's liability risk. Police officers in Michigan and North Carolina (N=482) responded to a questionnaire pertaining to the training their departments have provided in less-than-lethal force tactics and equipment since graduating from the police academy. A number of respondents were unaware that their department had a non-deadly force policy, and a majority of those who were aware of a policy had never been tested in its contents. Patrol officers as a group had received training in a less timely manner than supervisors. Suggestions for formulating training strategies are provided.

Electronic control devices and use of force outcomesIncidence and severity of use of force, and frequency of injuries to arrestees and police officers

“…Like concerns about Oleoresin Capsicum spray during the 1990s, these concerns have generated critical questions regarding the devices' appropriate use, effectiveness, and potential for harm (Edwards et al , 1997; Gauvin, 1995; Granfield et al , 1994; Kaminiski and Jefferis, 1998, Kaminski et al , 1999; Lumb and Friday, 1997; Morabito and Doerner, 1998; Nowicki, 1993; Petty, 2004; Smith and Alpert, 2000). Among the concerns raised is that there is a lack of uniform guidelines, training and monitoring of electronic control device use among law enforcement and correctional personnel (McEwen, 1997; Ross and Jones, 1996; Walker, 1996; White, 2000, 2001). This concern has been raised principally by civil rights groups (American Civil Liberties Union of South California, 2005; Amnesty International, 2006; Human Rights Watch, 1998; White and Ready, 2007).…”