Minority Threat and Police Brutality: Determinants of Civil Rights Criminal Complaints in U.S. Municipalities

Abstract

The conflict theory of law stipulates that strategies of crime control regulate threats to the interests of dominant groups. Aggregate‐level research on policing has generally supported this proposition, showing that measures of minority threat are related to legal mechanisms of crime control. Police brutality (i.e., use of excessive physical force) constitutes an extra‐legal mechanism of control that has yet to be examined in this theoretical framework. This study extends research in the area theoretically and substantively by testing the hypothesis that the greater the number of threatening acts and people, the greater the number of police brutality civil rights criminal complaints filed with the U.S. Department of Justice. The findings show that measures of the presence of threatening people (percent black, percent Hispanic [in the Southwest], and majority/minority income inequality) were related positively to average annual civil rights criminal complaints.

Police officer characteristics and internal affairs investigations for use of force allegations

“…Based on the contention that the lower class is a threat to the dominant class, their neighborhoods are heavily patrolled by the police in order to control them. The relationship between the police and minorities symbolizes the deep-rooted division of the social classes; police are viewed as the representatives of the dominant class and minority groups as the lower class (Holmes, 2000). This division of the classes is illustrated in Lersch's (1998) study where she reported that minorities acted hostile toward the police at a greater rate than Whites.…”

“…Depending on the circumstance, the force employed by the police may be proper or excessive (Holmes, 2000). In terms of fulfilling their obligation to maintain order in society, the police have been authorized to use legitimate force as a function of their role (Adams, 1999a;Holmes, 2000). This means that police can use force to gain the compliance of those who threaten the integrity of American society.…”

“…Weitzer (1999) and Holmes (2000) assert that the police are the key to controlling the dangerous classes, those who are a threat to the dominant class.…”

“…Amplified police presence in turn raised the chances for police-public contact, and the use of force. As the threat to the interests of those in control increases, deviance increases, which brings about the need for control, which Holmes (2000) referred to as the ''threat hypothesis.'' The ''threat hypothesis'' is simply an equation that balances deviance with crime control.…”

“…At the two extremes of the range of force there exists what is considered legitimate use of force on one end and police brutality or excessive use of force at the other. Depending on the circumstance, the force employed by the police may be proper or excessive (Holmes, 2000). In terms of fulfilling their obligation to maintain order in society, the police have been authorized to use legitimate force as a function of their role (Adams, 1999a;Holmes, 2000).…”