Official data dramatically undercount the number of people killed by the police. Both the Bureau of Justice Statistics’
Arrest-Related Deaths and the FBI’s
Supplemental Homicide Reports
estimated around 400-500 police kills a year, circa 2010. But the two
series have shockingly low overlap–homicides counted in one series are
not counted in the other and
vice-versa. A statistical estimate based on the lack of overlap suggests a true rate of around 1000 police killings per year.
The
best data come from newspaper reports which also show around 1000-1300
police killings a year (Zimring focuses his analysis on
The Guardian’s database.) Fixing the data problem should be a high priority. But the FBI cannot be trusted to do the job:
Unfortunately, the FBI’s legacy of passive acceptance of
incomplete statistical data on police killings, its promotion of the
self-interested factual accounts from departments, and its failure to
collect significant details about the nature of the provocation and the
nature of the force used by police suggest that nothing short of massive
change in its orientation, in its legal authority to collect data and
its attitude toward auditing and research would make the FBI an agency
worthy of public trust and statistical reliability in regard to the
subject of this book.
The FBI’s bias is even seen in its nomenclature for police
killings–“justifiable homicides”–which some of them certainly are not.
The state kills people in two ways, executions and police killings.
Executions require trials, appeals, long waiting periods and great
deliberation and expense. Police killings are not extensively monitored,
analyzed or deliberated upon and, until very recently, even much
discussed. Yet every year, police kill 25 to 50 times as many people as
are executed. Why have police killings been ignored?
When an execution takes place in Texas, everybody knows
that Texas is conducting the killing and is accountable for its
consequences. When Officer Smith kills Citizen Jones on a city street in
Dallas, it is Officer Smith rather than any larger governmental
organization…[who] becomes the primary repository of credit or blame.
We used to do the same thing with airplane crashes and medical
mistakes–that is, look for pilot or physician error. Safety didn’t
improve much until we started to apply
systems thinking. We need
a systems-thinking approach to police shootings.
Police kill males (95%) far more than females, a much larger ratio
than for felonies. Police kill more whites than blacks which is often
forgotten, although not surprising because whites are a larger share of
the population. Based on the Guardian data shown in Zimring’s Figure
3.1, whites and Hispanics are killed approximately in proportion to
population. Blacks are killed at about twice their proportion to
population. Asians are killed less than in proportion to their
population.
A surprising finding:
Crime is a young man’s game in the United States but being killed by a police officer is not.
The main reason for this appears to be that a disproportionate share
of police killings come from disturbance calls, domestic and
non-domestic about equally represented. A majority of the killings
arising from disturbance calls are of people aged forty or more.
The tendency of both police and observers to assume that
attacks against police and police use of force is closely associated
with violent crime and criminal justice should be modified in
significant ways to accord for the disturbance, domestic conflicts, and
emotional disruptions that frequently become the caseload of police
officers.
A slight majority (56%) of the people who are killed by the police
are armed with a gun and another 3.7% seemed to have a gun. Police have
reason to fear guns, 92% of killings
of police are by guns. But
40% of the people killed by police don’t have guns and other weapons
are much less dangerous to police. In many years, hundreds of people
brandishing knives are killed by the police while no police are killed
by people brandishing knives. The police seem to be too quick to use
deadly force against people significantly less well-armed than the
police. (Yes, Lucas critique. See below on policing in a democratic
society).
Police kill more people than people kill police–a ratio of about 15
to 1–and the ratio has been increasing over time. Policing has become
safer over the past 40 years with a 75% drop in police killed on the job
since 1976–the fall is greater than for crime more generally and is
probably due to Kevlar vests. Kevlar vests are an interesting technology
because they make police safer without imposing more risk on citizens.
We need more win-win technologies. Although policing has become safer
over time, the number of police killings has not decreased in proportion
which is why the “kill ratio” has increased.
A major factor in the number of deaths caused by police shootings is
the number of wounds received by the victim. In Chicago, 20% of victims
with one wound died, 34% with two wounds and 74% with five or more
wounds. Obvious. But it suggests a reevaluation of the
police training to empty their magazine.
Zimring suggests that if the first shot fired was due to reasonable
fear the tenth might not be. A single, aggregational analysis:
…simplifies the task of police investigator or district
attorney, but it creates no disincentive to police use of additional
deadly force that may not be necessary by the time it happens–whether
with the third shot or the seventh or the tenth.
It would be hard to implement this ex-post but I agree that emptying
the magazine isn’t always reasonable, especially when the police are not
under fire. Is it more dangerous to fire one or two shots and
reevaluate than to fire ten? Of course, but given the number of errors
police make this is not an unreasonable risk to ask police to take in a
democratic society.
The successful prosecution of even a small number of
extremely excessive force police killings would reduce the predominant
perception among both citizens and rank-and-file police officers that
police have what amounts to immunity from criminal liability for killing
citizens in the line of duty.
Prosecutors, however, rely on the police to do their job and in the
long-run won’t bite the hand that feeds them. Clear and cautious rules
of engagement that establish bright lines would be more helpful. One
problem is that police are protected because police brutality is common
(somewhat similar to
my analysis of riots).
The more killings a city experiences, the less likely it
will be that a particular cop and a specific killings can lead to a
charge and a conviction. In the worst of such settings, wrongful
killings are not deviant officer behavior.
…clear and cautious rules of engagement will …make officers who
ignore or misapply departmental standards look more blameworthy to
police, to prosecutors, and to juries in the criminal process.
Police kill many more people in the United States than in other
developed countries, even adjusting for crime rates (where the U.S. is
less of an outlier than most people imagine). The obvious reason is that
there are a lot of guns in the United States. As a result, the United
States is not going to get its police killing rate down to Germany’s
which is at least 40 times lower. Nevertheless:
[Police killings]…are a serious problem we can fix. Clear
administrative restrictions on when police can shoot can eliminate 50
to 80 percent of killings by police without causing substantial risk to
the lives of police officers or major changes in how police do their
jobs. A thousand killings a year are not the unavoidable result of
community conditions or of the nature of policing in the United States."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.