Friday, July 27, 2018

police officers and excessive force

more than 20 years ago, congress ordered the justice department to collect data on excessive use of force by police officers. it didn't actually occur until the obama administration.

when the justice department polled local police departments to gather the government's first database of use of force by officers, they discovered that a) many police departments don't track use of force, b) police departments that do track use of force are often unwilling to share the data, and c) among police departments that track use of force and are willing to share their data, what they consider 'force' varies markedly, and 'excessive force' is often a meaningless term (i.e., they have no guidelines for what constitutes 'excessive force).

nonetheless, some bits of the data that was gathered makes it clear why attorney general jeff sessions wants to stop the government from monitoring or policing police departments:


  • 1 out of 5 episodes of police force by the seattle police department were deemed excessive
  • from 2009 to 2019, most shootings by albuquerque police officers were unjustified
even now, only about half of large police departments document each use of force separately. 1 out of five refused to say how they track excessive force, or even if they do.

taxpayers fund police departments, and have to be able to trust law enforcement personnel to enforce the law - not to act as judges, juries, or - all too often - executioners. when municipalities are sued over excessive use of force or outright murder by police departments, it is the local taxpayer who pays the bill, even when the officers involved are not convicted (as is most often the case).

it is clear that taxpayers should have not only more oversight of local police departments, but more control over who is hired, who is fired, and what defining what constitutes 'excessive force'.