Use of Force and the Continuing Accountability Debate – Saul Roth

Image Credit: MateMedia

By Saul Roth

The use of force remains one of the most contentious law enforcement issues in the United States. Officers may need to respond quickly to dangerous situations, but communities expect those decisions to be necessary, proportionate, and subject to meaningful review.

Public concern is driven not only by highly publicized deaths and injuries but also by questions about what happens afterward. Was the incident independently investigated? Was video evidence preserved? Were department policies followed? Did supervisors intervene? Were similar incidents identified before?

De-escalation training has become a central part of the discussion. Its goal is not to prevent officers from using force when it is necessary. Instead, it gives them additional tools—communication, distance, time, tactical repositioning, and crisis assessment—to reduce the likelihood that a situation becomes violent.

Evidence from several departments suggests that well-designed training can improve outcomes. Chicago’s situational decision-making training was associated with a reduction in officers’ use of force. Louisville programs combining communication, assessment, and tactics were associated with decreases in use-of-force incidents and injuries. Camden, New Jersey, also reported a substantial decline in serious use-of-force incidents after implementing a de-escalation program.

Training, however, cannot substitute for accountability. Policies must be clear, repeatedly practiced, and reinforced by supervisors. Agencies should collect consistent data on force incidents, publish meaningful summaries, and investigate complaints independently when possible.

Accountability also requires a duty to intervene. Officers should be expected—and legally protected—when they stop a colleague from using excessive force or report misconduct. A department’s culture is shaped by what supervisors reward, ignore, and discipline.

The goal is not merely to reduce statistics. It is to make lawful, effective, and humane decision-making the normal expectation in every encounter.