Factors that Result in Higher Levels of Force by Police

This article will discuss whether or not police act or react differently in different neighborhoods. Specifically, if the use of force is higher in disadvantaged neighborhoods because of ecological factors as opposed to police/suspect encounters. Not surprisingly if you live in disadvantaged areas, studies show or prove that there is an indication of higher levels of force used by police with suspects in high crime, disadvantaged areas. However, other variables such as male, minority, youthful age and lower income status were included that had a direct affect on the use of force by police, which also increased the use of force.

The bigger problem here is that most people that live in these high disadvantaged areas that experience higher levels of police force are also mostly minorities - black and Hispanics. So, is it more of an ecological factor or a race factor? Some will say this is playing the so-called race card. Well, those who usually claim someone is playing the race card usually has hang -ups toward any issue that involves race. In other words, these people want to ignore or refuse to believe that race plays a part in the issue or any issue for that matter. They need a wake-up call. The fact that police are displaying this level of force just because of the area has a direct affect on the one on one encounter. Police officer cynicism also plays a big part.

Negative attitudes by the police can result in higher levels of force, like the "dirt-bag" syndrome, which is based on a police officer's negative perceptions of a person feeling that they feel deserve to be punished. The perception that people in disadvantaged areas deserve to be treated in a negative way because of the assumption that they are up to something or that they live in this area so they are more likely to participate in deviant behavior. This perception is based on stereotypes and prejudices of the police officers, and perhaps the organization, not based on any geographic location. - that is a negative stereotype from the police offer.

Residents in the area sense this sort of negative perception of their neighborhoods, and in essence, of themselves and that increases the distrust and the lack of respect for the police. This lack of respect and distrust for police officers by residents in the area lead to the police feeling like, and at times, needing to use more force. The negative perception within the police can spew into verbal threats and insults toward the residents or suspects. Insults and threats that are not necessary but based on the "dirt-bag" syndrome that the officers feel the person somehow deserve this treatment. These insults and threats could lead to the suspects not obeying the officer's demands, thereby resulting in higher levels of force used to gain control by the police. Police officers may experience a heightened sense of alertness and danger because of certain dangerous parts in these areas. That could possibly result in a higher use of force if the officer is in a dangerous area where anything could happen.

However, the police need to be aware that they could make things worse by using higher levels of force, especially if a crowd is around, a crowd that includes people who sense a negative perception of them by the police anyway. A few reasons for this perception by the police include the fact that police are seen as part of the haves and those in disadvantaged areas are the have-nots. The police are there to exert power and control over the have-nots and that includes the use of force or excessive force if need be. The police force is seen as a means of control. This could be part of the reason for the way police view those in disadvantaged areas and vice versa. The police may feel the need to control those less fortunate because they deserve it and are not part of mainstream society.

The second reason is psychological. This is based on the individual police officer's views, characteristics, and experience. If a police officer's view includes the "dirt bag" syndrome and their experiences and views have been for the most part negative, higher levels of force could often be used by the officer. The third reason is organizational - both formal and informal. This focuses on the organizations' influence over the police officer and their actions and reactions. An example is, New York's Mayor Guiliani's firm stand to reduce and eliminate crime. This zero tolerance mentally permeated throughout the police department and to no surprise, there were incidences of higher levels of force and unnecessary excessive use of force.

The same situation with the organizational perspective happened with the LAPD and Darryl Gates. There had been an acceptance or belief within this police organization that a higher use of force was acceptable, especially when dealing with the inner city areas and minority residents. After the Rodney King beating, Darryl Gates justified the beating. Instead of just one single reason, I believe that there is a combination of these reasons why the police use higher levels of force in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Along with the ecological/geographical factor, negative viewpoints, stereotypes and biases often result in the higher level of force used by police officers. Officers may make fewer arrests because of their lack of concern but when they make an arrest the use of force could be greater. Also, I believe that the stress and frustration of working in disadvantaged areas could lead to an increase in the use of force but that more is involved than just the geographical area. It's the perception of the people that live in these areas by the police that fosters the increased levels of force.

Is it the environment or the ethnicity backgrounds of those in the area that prompts the police to use higher levels of force? What difference does it make if the results of studies don't show higher levels of force in one on one encounters, if the police are using higher levels of force just because of the area they are working, especially if this particular area is mostly inhabited with non-whites. I really hate to use the word minorities since it gives a negative connotation, as if to say "less important." I know that the use of the word minority and majority simply depict the number of people based on a category but this is the problem. Many issues facing non-whites are seen as less important since it doesn't affect the majority, and these issues are not less important. The "majority" should not ignore issues like police abuse, high crime, and drug abuse - because it may not affect them. Eventually it will.