{"@type": "dcat:Dataset", "accessLevel": "restricted public", "bureauCode": ["011:21"], "contactPoint": {"@type": "vcard:Contact", "fn": "Open Data Office of Justice Programs (USDOJ)", "hasEmail": "mailto:opendata@usdoj.gov"}, "dataQuality": false, "description": "This study examined the amount of force used by and against\r\nlaw enforcement officers and more than 50 characteristics of officers,\r\ncivilians, and arrest situations associated with the use of different\r\nlevels of force. An important component of this multijurisdiction\r\nproject was to employ a common measurement of elements of force and\r\npredictors of force. Data were gathered about suspects' and police\r\nofficers' behaviors from adult custody arrests in six urban law\r\nenforcement agencies. The participating agencies were the\r\nCharlotte-Mecklenburg (North Carolina) Police Department, Colorado\r\nSprings (Colorado) Police Department, Dallas (Texas) Police\r\nDepartment, St. Petersburg (Florida) Police Department, San Diego\r\n(California) Police Department, and San Diego County (California)\r\nSheriff's Department. Data collection began at different times in the\r\nparticipating departments, so the total sample included arrests during\r\nthe summer, fall, and winter of 1996-1997. Forms were completed and\r\ncoded for 7,512 adult custody arrests (Part 1). This form was used to\r\nrecord officer self-reports on the characteristics of the arrest\r\nsituation, the suspects, and the officers, and the specific behavioral\r\nacts of officers, suspects, and bystanders in a particular\r\narrest. Similar items were asked of 1,156 suspects interviewed in\r\nlocal jails at the time they were booked following arrest to obtain an\r\nindependent assessment of officer and suspect use of force (Part\r\n2). Officers were informed that some suspects would be interviewed,\r\nbut they did not know which would be interviewed or when. Using the\r\nitems included on the police survey, the research team constructed\r\nfour measures of force used by police officers -- physical force,\r\nphysical force plus threats, continuum of force, and maximum\r\nforce. Four comparable measures of force used by arrested suspects\r\nwere also developed. These measures are included in the data for Part\r\n1. Each measure was derived by combining specific actions by law\r\nenforcement officers or by suspects in various ways. The first measure\r\nwas a traditional conceptual dichotomy of arrests in which physical\r\nforce was or was not used. For both the police and for suspects, the\r\ndefinition of physical force included any arrest in which a weapon or\r\nweaponless tactic was used. In addition, police arrests in which\r\nofficers used a severe restraint were included. The second measure,\r\nphysical force plus threats, was similar to physical force but added\r\nthe use of threats and displays of weapons. To address the potential\r\nlimitations of these two dichotomous measures, two other measures were\r\ndeveloped. The continuum-of-force measure captured the levels of force\r\ncommonly used in official policies by the participating law\r\nenforcement agencies. To construct the fourth measure, maximum force,\r\n503 experienced officers in five of the six jurisdictions ranked a\r\nvariety of hypothetical types of force by officers and by suspects on\r\na scale from 1 (least forceful) to 100 (most forceful). Officers were\r\nasked to rank these items based on their own personal experience, not\r\nofficial policy. These rankings of police and suspect use of force,\r\nwhich appear in Part 3, were averaged for each jurisdiction and used\r\nin Part 1 to weight the behaviors that occurred in the sampled\r\narrests. Variables for Parts 1 and 2 include nature of the arrest,\r\nfeatures of the arrest location, mobilization of the police, and officer\r\nand suspect characteristics. Part 3 provides officer rankings on 54\r\nitems that suspects might do or say during an arrest. Separately,\r\nofficers ranked a series of 44 items that a police officer might do or\r\nsay during an arrest. These items include spitting, shouting or\r\ncursing, hitting, wrestling, pushing, resisting, fleeing, commanding,\r\nusing conversational voice, and using pressure point holds, as well as\r\npossession, display, threat of use, or use of several weapons (e.g.,\r\nknife, chemical agent, dog, blunt object, handgun, motor vehicle).", "distribution": [{"@type": "dcat:Distribution", "accessURL": "https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03172.v1", "title": "Understanding the Use of Force By and Against the Police in Six Jurisdictions in the United States, 1996-1997"}], "identifier": "3347", "issued": "2001-06-29T00:00:00", "keyword": ["arrest procedures", "arrest records", "assaults on police", "law enforcement", "police officers", "police use of force"], "language": ["eng"], "license": "http://www.usa.gov/publicdomain/label/1.0/", "modified": "2006-03-30T00:00:00", "programCode": ["011:060"], "publisher": {"@type": "org:Organization", "name": "National Institute of Justice", "subOrganizationOf": {"acronym": "OJP", "id": 22, "name": "Office of Justice Programs", "parentOrganization": {"acronym": "DOJ", "id": 10, "name": "Department of Justice"}, "parentOrganizationID": 10}}, "rights": "These data are restricted due to the increased risk of violation of confidentiality of respondent and subject data.", "title": "Understanding the Use of Force By and Against the Police in Six Jurisdictions in the United States, 1996-1997"}