American Policing and the Danger Imperative

Abstract

Despite the fact that policing is growing safer in the United States, thedanger associated with police work continues to structure departmentaltraining and police behavior. This article describes how police aresocialized into a cultural frame conceptualized as the "danger imperative"—the preoccupation with violence and the provision of officer safety—and the unintended, deadly consequences of their perception through it. Using nearly 1000 hours of participant observation and 94 interviews across three urban police departments, the author demonstrates that officers are formally and informally socialized into this frame, and learn both policy-sanctioned and policy-deviant behaviors to protect themselves from violence. However, policy-deviant behavior such as not wearing a seatbelt when driving, though justified as necessary to allow officers to defend themselves from violence, places officers at grave risk of injury and death in high-speed car crashes.

Network exposure and excessive use of force

“…The learning of such behavior through observations is particularly likely to occur if “a police officer observes another officer using excessive force and obtaining a positive reward—say, approval by the officer's colleagues or the reward of reducing risk by shortening the duration of an encounter with a resistant civilian” (Roithmayr, , p. 429). This perspective is consistent with research findings more broadly by Sierra‐Arévalo (), who emphasized that certain behaviors that are adopted in the name of the “danger imperative,” although not necessarily in line with departmental policy, are often learned through informal means of socialization.…”

“…Similar to the ways that networks have been shown to influence criminal behavior in other contexts, our findings highlight one way social networks may shape deviance within police departments: through exposure to deviant officers. Although our study design does not allow for us to pinpoint the exact mechanism through which misconduct diffuses through police networks, we can determine that networks might play a role in shaping how behavioral scripts influence police work through interactions between colleagues in the field (Fagan & Geller, ; Roithmayr, ; Sierra‐Arévalo, ; Skolnick, ). Our study findings give further credence to the theory of social contagion of police excessive use of force brought forward by Roithmayr () and others.…”

Technological Innovation and Police Officers' Understanding and Use of Force

“…Unaddressed by technological solutions to excessive force are persistent features of police training and culture that socialize officers into an “us versus them” orientation that frames the public as potential threats instead of fellow citizens and allies (Brown ; Crank ). Combined with the aggressive tactics encouraged by a “warrior” style of policing that emphasizes officer safety at all times and at all costs (Marenin ; Sierra‐Arévalo ; Stoughton ), TASERs and other less‐than‐lethal technologies—including pepperballs, bean bag munitions, and sound cannons (Hager ; Moynihan )—are more likely to expand the range of tools that officers can misuse rather than remedy the underlying culture of the police occupation that over a half century of research links to the use of excessive force (Kappeler et al ; Skolnick and Fyfe ; Westley ).…”

“…If I got to peel your skin off with my teeth or if I have to pick up a rock. But if you're whooping my ass my job is to end the fight.The TASER is, at its core, one of several weapons that officers can use to ensure the survival emphasized by their training and the broader policing culture (Sierra‐Arévalo ; Skolnick ). Jasper sees no reason to get into a fistfight when he can use a TASER to quickly “win” a confrontation with an aggressive suspect and secure his own safety.…”

The commemoration of death, organizational memory, and police culture

“…Despite significant changes in the technology and implementation of policing over time (Alpert, Dunham, & Stroshine, ; Manning, ), police work and police culture also have remarkable longitudinal consistencies. One historically robust feature of police culture—the preoccupation with danger and possible death—has been documented by police scholars for more than 50 years (Marenin, ; Sierra‐Arévalo, ; Skolnick, ) and continues to hold a “prominent position within [the] occupational consciousness” of police (Loftus, , p. 13). This remains true even though official statistics and officers themselves have long noted the rarity of deadly violence while on patrol (Cullen, Link, Travis, & Lemming, ; Zimring, ).…”