Re-examining the Use of Force Continuum: Why Resistance is Not the Only Driver of Use of Force Decisions

AuthorKyle McLean,Arif Alikhan,Geoffrey P. Alpert
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1177/10986111211066353
Published date01 March 2023
Date01 March 2023
Subject MatterArticles
Article
Police Quarterly
2023, Vol. 26(1) 85110
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/10986111211066353
journals.sagepub.com/home/pqx
Re-examining the Use of
Force Continuum: Why
Resistance is Not the Only
Driver of Use of Force
Decisions
Kyle McLean
1
, Arif Alikhan
2
, and Geoffrey P. Alpert
3
Abstract
Policing research and use of force policies have been guided by the continuum model
for the past several decades. The continuum species a relationship between the
amount of resistance a suspect presents and the amount of force that an ofcer should
use to respond to or overcome a given level of resistance. In this paper, we show that
resistance alone is an insufcient indicator of the necessity and level of force to be used
both conceptually and empirically. We argue for the inclusion of considerations of
perceived threat in the analysis of use of force incidentsboth in policy and in re-
search. Our analysis also reiterates the importance of police culture in understanding
use of force decisions.
Keywords
use of force, force continuum, response to resistance
In May and June 2020, massive protests were held across the United States and in other
countries demanding major police reform and defunding or abolishing law enforcement
1
Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA
2
Alikhan Insights, LLC, Irvine, CA, USA
3
University of South Carolina and Grifth University
Corresponding Author:
Kyle McLean, Clemson University, Clemson, 139 Brackett Hall, Clemson, SC 296341356, USA.
Email: kdmclea@clemson.edu
agencies. While the trigger event was the killing of George Floyd by members of the
Minneapolis Police Department, the larger crisis has been attributed to poor policy-
making and decision-making regarding police-citizen encounters that result in uses of
force. Protestors accurately point out that police departments and their ofcers break the
social contract they are expected to uphold when policing involves misconduct and
brutality. One of the suggested reforms coming out of the protests involves the policies
suggested by #8cantwaitwhich include the establishment of a use of force continuum
in every police department. Use of force continua provide ofcers with a frame work
that authorizes levels of force based on perceived levels of resistance from suspects.
The policies of #8cantwait resonated so strongly that many cities across the country
passed resolutions mandating their police department adopt the policies (see, for
example, Memphis Poe, 2020; Charlotte WBTV Web Staff, 2020; and Pittsburgh
Wadas, 2020). However, what is often lost in this conversation is that many police
departments already have force continua and that use of force incidents that many nd
objectionable are permitted under these policies. For example, in some force continua
an ofcer who perceives that a subject is actively resisting (or in some cases eeing),
can use physical force or a less-lethal weapon such as a TASER or OC spray in response
to the resistance or ight. As a result, the images of ofcers using high-capacity
streamers to pepper spray protestors as they are backing away is troubling, but may not
be violations of a force continuum or agency policy as the protestors are resisting and
the ofcers are responding with an allowablelevel of force.
Furthermore, use of force continua inherently rely on the ofcer s subjective
perception of resistance and provide opportunities for ofcers to deviate from the policy
in deciding which level of force to use (Terrill & Paoline, 2012). Specically, prior
research has shown that multiple individuals viewing the same incident can perceive
different levels of force and resistance (Hickman et al., 2015) and that a variety of
ofcer characteristics, such as gender (National Center for Women and Policing, 2002),
age (Crow & Adrion, 2011), and even cultural attitudes (Terrill et al., 2003), can impact
ofcersdecision-making in a use of force context. Thus, resistance may not provide
objective guidance on if and how much force should be used in a given situation.
We suggest that police departments and their ofcers move beyond the use of
suspect resistance to justify force and adopt and train threat assessments (in our study,
exemplied by the concepts of ability, opportunity, and intent) to determine when an
ofcer should use force (see also McLean et al., 2019). Under this conceptualization,
ofcers should not use force unless a subject has the ability to harm the ofcer or
another person, the opportunity to harm the ofcer or another person, and the intent
1
to
harm the ofcer or another person (Stoughton et al., 2020). Recall the protest incident
described above where an individual is actively resistingand/or eeing, but is not
presenting the ability, opportunity, or intent to harm someone. The subject should not
have force used against them, as there was no objective threat.
Our research examines how ofcers perceive incidents with citizens and how they
make use of force decisions. Prior to the killing of George Floyd and the subsequent
protests, we administered a survey with an integrated video of an ofcercitizen
86 Police Quarterly 26(1)

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT