01/12/2015
Practical Police Psychology
with Dr. Laurence Miller
When cops kill: The psychology of deadly-force encounters
The law does not require police officers to utilize the absolute minimum force necessary in a
threat situation — only that the level of force used be reasonable to control a deadly threat
In the wake of several well-publicized cases of deadly force encounters between police and
minority citizens, now is a good time to review some of the findings from police psychology and
Force Science research on police use of force and the psychology of deadly force encounters.
One common misconception among our citizens is that deadly force automatically equates to
excessive force. In a police-citizen encounter, necessary force is the amount of force required to
control a given situation so as to preserve the life and maintain the safety of police officers or
vulnerable civilians at the scene — excessive force is any use of force beyond that required for
safety and control.
The severity and intensity of the force used — from verbal commands, to handcuffing, to baton,
pepper spray, TASER, or firearm — should be based solely on the dangerousness of the suspect’s
present actions and should have nothing to do with the suspect’s attitude or the presumed moral
“blameworthiness” of the crime in question. Necessary force is for protection, not
punishment. The law does not require police to utilize the absolute minimum force necessary in a
threat — only that the level of force be reasonable to control a deadly threat. Officers are
charged with reacting to the imminent and credible threat of violence by the suspect — they are
not required to wait until the suspect has already begun to commit a violent act, because by then
it would be too late to prevent death or injury to the victim. We must somehow better
communicate that to our communities.
Defining
“Armed”
Estimating threat level is related to defining an “armed” person. Many people assume that unless
the suspect proportionately matches the police in lethal firepower, deadly force used by police in
such circumstances violates some street-chivalrous notion of a fair fight.
But every cop knows just how dangerous a citizen can be if enraged, intoxicated, delusional,
young-and-dumb,
or
some
combination.
A person lying prostrate and spread-eagle on the ground ten feet from you, head facing away,
can be on top of your chest with their hands around your throat in less than three seconds.
Any nearby object can become a lethal weapon. I’ve interviewed cops who have been choked
with a bathrobe sash, brained with a flowerpot, had shop tools or industrial chemicals hurled at
them, been clawed, bitten, spit on, peed on, and worse. Even full use of an assailant’s own body
is not necessary: in another case, a suspect on the ground in full hogtie restraint was able to
twist around and chomp on an officer’s ankle.
Judging
Bullet
Count
The average police officer (or soldier, for that matter) in a live-fire scenario misses his intended
target at least as often he hits it. So the rule for deadly force encounters is simple: do not use
deadly force unless there is absolutely no choice — but once the decision has been made, be
sure the force is as deadly as possible, as quickly as possible.
Why? Because, to prevent a dangerous suspect from killing or injuring someone else, the primary
goal is not to wound the assailant, or even to kill him, but to stop him. If you shoot a charging
suspect four times, it won’t make much difference if he dies of his injuries several seconds after
he’s had a chance to crush your skull with a brick. Once the assailant presents a clear and
credible threat, you want him down immediately, and while four bullets may not swiftly drop an
aggressive juggernaut, 40 bullets might.
Nevertheless, it’s impressive how often police officers restrain themselves from utilizing deadly
force even in circumstances where it would be justified. The average annual rate of use of deadly
force by U.S. law enforcement is about 360 cases a year. Compare that with over 60 thousand
reported cases of citizen assaults on officers each year, approximately 11 thousand of which
involve a lethal weapon.
FBI data reveal that approximately 85 percent of officers killed in the line of duty never
discharged their service weapons. Far from being trigger-happy gunslingers, the evidence
suggests that many police officers hesitate in using justifiable deadly force, even when it puts
their own safety in jeopardy.
Deadly
Force
Spiral
It’s rare for a firefight or grappling match with a suspect to begin immediately. Almost always,
there is an emotional and behavioral buildup that precedes the escalation to a violent
confrontation. Officers understand the inherent unpredictability of most encounters, so they
naturally are hypervigilant when facing physically imposing or citizens.
Police officers are the only nonmilitary professionals who are mandated to use, when necessary,
coercive physical force against citizens. What many of these citizens don’t realize is that, in most
circumstances the law requires them to obey a legitimate command from a police officer. Officers
come to expect this compliance, so when a citizen openly defies a police officer, the potential for
escalation increases. All it takes is a verbal or behavioral spark to ignite a use-of-force incident.
Ironically, the trend of utilizing less-than-lethal force may become the basis for even more
strident accusations of police brutality. Officers use nonlethal takedown procedures on a subject
— including the infamous chokehold — in lieu of shooting, TASERing, or clubbing him,then, if
there is an in-custody death, the cops may be vilified for callously manhandling the subject.
Deadly
Force
and
Race
Let’s be realistic: deadly force encounters often involve white officers and minority citizens. But
this is due primarily to the demographics of many high-crime communities, which typically have a
predominantly Anglo police department and a predominantly minority citizenry. In these
communities, young black males are more likely to be affected by deadly force encounters
because young males of any race or ethnicity are disproportionately involved in illegal activity and
aggressive confrontations of any sort. In white neighborhoods, the likely culprits will be young
white males, and in black neighborhoods, it will be young black males.
Consciously or subconsciously, many officers will pay closer attention to young minority males
engaged in certain types of suspicious actions because the cops’ instinct, training, and experience
has taught them that these situations carry a high probability for ongoing or potential illegal
activity. However, absent the suspicious behavior itself, there is no evidence that white cops
systematically “target” minority citizens for their race.
Almost always, deadly force involves a combination of pre-primed suspicion (white cops, minority
suspects), an escalating behavioral dance (citizens’ refusal to obey orders, verbal taunts, and
confrontational gestures lead to police use of authoritarian tactics), non-optimum physical
environment (poor lighting, bad weather, misidentification of a nonlethal object for a weapon),
and a tipping point at which officers feel genuinely threatened and then react — as their
judgment and training tell them to do — with deadly force.
Deadly
Force
and
Law
However, police culture is still important. Within a given law
structure and managerial attitude that ignores low-level
professionalism is more likely to tolerate dysfunctional and
varieties of misconduct, from petty theft to excessive force.
Enforcement
Culture
enforcement agency, a command
breaches of police ethics and
corrupt cops who engage in all
All things being equal, three factors have been found to be associated with fewer police deadly
force encounters in a community:
1. Higher overall educational level of the rank and file patrol force
2. Higher investment in mental health response and verbal crisis intervention training
3. Greater efforts at police-community relationship building
In most circumstances, police kill citizens when they believe they have no choice in order to
preserve human life — their own and/or that of other citizens. Sometimes there are errors in
perception, judgment, or procedure, and these must be vigorously investigated and corrected.
There also exist some corrupt cops, racist cops, and incompetent cops, which is why police
departments have Internal Affairs divisions: to minimize the effect of these bad apples on their
peers and on their communities.
But it is unfair and unproductive for citizens to assume that all adverse outcomes of police-citizen
encounters automatically signal callousness or maliciousness on the part of the officers involved.
The important thing for officers to realize is that for every complaining citizen and angry
protester, there is a silent majority of citizens — in any community — who appreciate what most
officers are trying to do every day to keep them safe.
About the author
Laurence Miller, Ph.D., is a clinical and forensic psychologist and law enforcement educator and trainer
based in Boca Raton, Fla. Dr. Miller is the police psychologist for the West Palm Beach Police Department,
mental health consultant for Troop L of the Florida Highway Patrol, a forensic psychological examiner for
the Palm Beach County Court, and a consulting psychologist with several regional and national law
enforcement agencies. Dr. Miller is an instructor at the Criminal Justice Institute of Palm Beach County
and at Florida Atlantic University, and conducts continuing education and training seminars around the
country. He is the author of numerous professional and popular print and online publications pertaining to
the brain, behavior, health, law enforcement, criminal justice and organizational psychology. His latest
books are "Practical Police Psychology: Stress Management and Crisis Intervention for Law Enforcement"
(Charles C Thomas, 2006) and "Mental Toughness Training for Law Enforcement" (Looseleaf Law
Publications, 2008).
Disclaimer: This article is for educational purposes only and is not intended to provide specific clinical or
legal advice. If you have a question about this column, please submit it to this website.