,NOTE: This is an archive version of NOPD Use of Force Incidents, and was last updated on April 27th, 2021. The data in this dataset are in the original format (one row per officer per subject interaction), and are no longer being updated. Please switch to the new format (one row per incident).,This dataset represents use of force incidents by the New Orleans Police Department reported per NOPD Use of Force policy. This dataset includes initial reports that may be subject to change through the review process. This dataset reflects the most current status and information of these reports. This dataset includes one row of data for each combination of officer that used force and subject of force during the incident. For example, if during a use of force incident two officers used force and two people were the subject of force, there will be four rows associated with that incident in this dataset. The number of rows in this dataset does not represent the number of times force was used by NOPD officers. This dataset is updated nightly. Disclaimer: The New Orleans Police Department does not guarantee (either expressed or implied) the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or correct sequencing of the information. The New Orleans Police Department will not be responsible for any error or omission, or for the use of, or the results obtained from the use of this information. All data visualizations on maps should be considered approximate and attempts to derive specific addresses are strictly prohibited. The New Orleans Police Department is not responsible for the content of any off-site pages that are referenced by or that reference this web page other than an official City of New Orleans or New Orleans Police Department web page. The user specifically acknowledges that the New Orleans Police Department is not responsible for any defamatory, offensive, misleading, or illegal conduct of other users, links, or third parties and that the risk of injury from the foregoing rests entirely with the user. Any use of the information for commercial purposes is strictly prohibited. The unauthorized use of the words "New Orleans Police Department," "NOPD," or any colorable imitation of these words or the unauthorized use of the New Orleans Police Department logo is unlawful. This web page does not, in any way, authorize such use.,

DATASET DESCRIPTION This dataset contains offense incidents where any physical contact with a subject was made by an officer using the body or any object, device, or weapon, not including un-resisted escorting or handcuffing a subject. Any complaint by a subject that an officer caused pain or injury shall be treated as a use of force incident, except complaints of minor discomfort from un-resisted handcuffing. A response to resistance report is measured as a single subject officer interaction on a single case. A subject resistance may result in multiple types of force applied by an officer or multiple officers. Accordingly, the types of force used can be more than the total reports of response to resistance. GENERAL ORDERS RELATING TO THIS DATA It is the policy of this department that officers use only that amount of objectively reasonable force which appears necessary under the circumstances to successfully accomplish the legitimate law enforcement purpose in accordance with this policy. AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT DATA DISCLAIMER 1. The data provided is for informational use only and may differ from official Austin Police Department crime data. 2. The Austin Police Department’s databases are continuously updated, and changes can be made due to a variety of investigative factors including but not limited to offense reclassification and dates. 3. Reports run at different times may produce different results. Care should be taken when comparing against other reports as different data collection methods and different systems of record may have been used. 4.The Austin Police Department does not assume any liability for any decision made or action taken or not taken by the recipient in reliance upon any information or data provided. City of Austin Open Data Terms of Use - https://data.austintexas.gov/stories/s/ranj-cccq APD Data Dictionary - https://data.austintexas.gov/Public-Safety/APD-Data-Dictionary/6w8q-suwv/about_data

SUMMARY Use of Force data (UOF) collection and reporting requirements were updated significantly in 2016. This dataset reflects Use of Force incidents occurring between December 21, 2016, through April 11, 2022. Each record corresponds to an incident where an officer used force. For any incident, there may be more than one officer involved and/or more than one type of force used. Use of Force data in this release was captured under the standards set forth in DGO 5.01, Use of Force, passed on December 21st, 2016. See Dataset Explainer for more information. UPDATE PROCESS This dataset is historical only and will not be updated. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET This dataset can be used to provide counts of incidents involving use of force as well as counts of force, by type, date, subject demographics, and location. Use of Force standards have changed in subsequent revisions of DGO 5.01 and care should be taken when comparing Use of Force data across differing standards.

The purpose of the study was to investigate how and why injuries occur to police and citizens during use of force events. The research team conducted a national survey (Part 1) of a stratified random sample of United States law enforcement agencies regarding the deployment of, policies for, and training with less lethal technologies. Finalized surveys were mailed in July 2006 to 950 law enforcement agencies, and a total of 518 law enforcement agencies provided information on less lethal force generally and on their deployment and policies regarding conducted energy devices (CEDs) in particular. A total of 292 variables are included in the National Use of Force Survey Data (Part 1) including items about weapons deployment, force policies, training, force reporting/review, force incidents and outcomes, and conducted energy devices (CEDs). Researchers also collected agency-supplied use of force data from law enforcement agencies in Richland County, South Carolina; Miami-Dade, Florida; and Seattle, Washington; to identify individual and situational predictors of injuries to officers and citizens during use of force events. The Richland County, South Carolina Data (Part 2) include 441 use-of-force reports from January 2005 through July 2006. Part 2 contains 17 variables including whether the officer or suspect was injured, 8 measures of officer force, 3 measures of suspect resistance, the number of witnesses and officers present at each incident, and the number of suspects that resisted or assaulted officers for each incident. The Miami-Dade County, Florida Data (Part 3) consist of 762 use-of-force incidents that occurred between January 2002 and May 2006. Part 3 contains 15 variables, including 4 measures of officer force, the most serious resistance on the part of the suspect, whether the officer or suspect was injured, whether the suspect was impaired by drugs or alcohol, the officer's length of service in years, and several demographic variables pertaining to the suspect and officer. The Seattle, Washington Data (Part 4) consist of 676 use-of-force incidents that occurred between December 1, 2005, as 15 variables, including 3 measures of officer force, whether the suspect or officer was injured, whether the suspect was impaired by drugs or alcohol, whether the suspect used, or threatened to use, physical force against the officer(s), and several demographic variables relating to the suspect and officer(s). The researchers obtained use of force survey data from several large departments representing different types of law enforcement agencies (municipal, county, sheriff's department) in different states. The research team combined use of force data from multiple agencies into a single dataset. This Multiagency Use of Force Data (Part 5) includes 24,928 use-of-force incidents obtained from 12 law enforcement agencies from 1998 through 2007. Part 5 consists a total of 21 variables, including the year the incident took place, demographic variables relating to the suspect, the type of force used by the officer, whether the suspect or officer was injured, and 5 measures of the department's policy regarding the use of CEDs and pepper spray. Lastly, longitudinal data were also collected for the Orlando, Florida and Austin, Texas police departments. The Orlando, Florida Longitudinal Data (Part 6) comprise 4,222 use-of-force incidents aggregated to 108 months -- a 9 year period from 1998 through 2006. Finally, the Austin, Texas Longitudinal Data (Part 7) include 6,596 force incidents aggregated over 60 months- a 5 year period from 2002 through 2006. Part 6 and Part 7 are comprised of seven variables documenting whether a Taser was implemented, the number of suspects and officers injured in a month, the number of force incidents per month, and the number of CEDs uses per month.

This study was designed to describe the types and amount of force used by and against the police in Montgomery County, Maryland, for the seven years between January 1993 and December 1999. The researchers collected data from the Montgomery County Police Department's Use of Force Reports and arrest records for this time period. Part 1 contains data obtained from the Use of Force Reports, including information about the characteristics of the force used, injuries and medical treatment, characteristics of the officer and citizen involved, and the time and date of the incident. Part 2 contains data from the arrest records, including variables for location, time, and date of the arrest, the most serious charge, and demographic characteristics of the officer and arrestee. Part 3 contains aggregate data, including rate of force by different arrest characteristics, that were derived from the data in Parts 1 and 2.

This study examined the amount of force used by and against law enforcement officers and more than 50 characteristics of officers, civilians, and arrest situations associated with the use of different levels of force. An important component of this multijurisdiction project was to employ a common measurement of elements of force and predictors of force. Data were gathered about suspects' and police officers' behaviors from adult custody arrests in six urban law enforcement agencies. The participating agencies were the Charlotte-Mecklenburg (North Carolina) Police Department, Colorado Springs (Colorado) Police Department, Dallas (Texas) Police Department, St. Petersburg (Florida) Police Department, San Diego (California) Police Department, and San Diego County (California) Sheriff's Department. Data collection began at different times in the participating departments, so the total sample included arrests during the summer, fall, and winter of 1996-1997. Forms were completed and coded for 7,512 adult custody arrests (Part 1). This form was used to record officer self-reports on the characteristics of the arrest situation, the suspects, and the officers, and the specific behavioral acts of officers, suspects, and bystanders in a particular arrest. Similar items were asked of 1,156 suspects interviewed in local jails at the time they were booked following arrest to obtain an independent assessment of officer and suspect use of force (Part 2). Officers were informed that some suspects would be interviewed, but they did not know which would be interviewed or when. Using the items included on the police survey, the research team constructed four measures of force used by police officers -- physical force, physical force plus threats, continuum of force, and maximum force. Four comparable measures of force used by arrested suspects were also developed. These measures are included in the data for Part 1. Each measure was derived by combining specific actions by law enforcement officers or by suspects in various ways. The first measure was a traditional conceptual dichotomy of arrests in which physical force was or was not used. For both the police and for suspects, the definition of physical force included any arrest in which a weapon or weaponless tactic was used. In addition, police arrests in which officers used a severe restraint were included. The second measure, physical force plus threats, was similar to physical force but added the use of threats and displays of weapons. To address the potential limitations of these two dichotomous measures, two other measures were developed. The continuum-of-force measure captured the levels of force commonly used in official policies by the participating law enforcement agencies. To construct the fourth measure, maximum force, 503 experienced officers in five of the six jurisdictions ranked a variety of hypothetical types of force by officers and by suspects on a scale from 1 (least forceful) to 100 (most forceful). Officers were asked to rank these items based on their own personal experience, not official policy. These rankings of police and suspect use of force, which appear in Part 3, were averaged for each jurisdiction and used in Part 1 to weight the behaviors that occurred in the sampled arrests. Variables for Parts 1 and 2 include nature of the arrest, features of the arrest location, mobilization of the police, and officer and suspect characteristics. Part 3 provides officer rankings on 54 items that suspects might do or say during an arrest. Separately, officers ranked a series of 44 items that a police officer might do or say during an arrest. These items include spitting, shouting or cursing, hitting, wrestling, pushing, resisting, fleeing, commanding, using conversational voice, and using pressure point holds, as well as possession, display, threat of use, or use of several weapons (e.g., knife, chemical agent, dog, blunt object, handgun, motor vehicle).

In 1996, the Bureau of Justice Statistics sponsored a pretest of a survey instrument designed to compile data on citizen contacts with police, including contacts in which police use force. The survey, which involved interviews (both face-to-face and by phone) carried out by the United States Census Bureau, was conducted as a special supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), an ongoing household survey of the American public that elicits information concerning recent crime victimization experiences. Questions asked in the supplement covered reasons for contact with police officer(s), characteristics of the officer, weapons used by the officer, whether there were any injuries involved in the confrontation between the household member and the officer, whether drugs were involved in the incident, type of offense the respondent was charged with, and whether any citizen action was taken. Demographic variables include race, sex, and age.

This national survey was designed to collect information on police departmental policies and practices pertaining to the use of physical force--both deadly and less than lethal--by law enforcement officers. A further objective was to investigate the enforcement of these policies by examining the extent to which complaints of policy violations were reviewed and violations punished. Additionally, the survey sought to determine the extent to which departments kept records on the use of force, and to collect from those agencies that recorded this information data relating to how frequently officers used force, the characteristics of officers who did and did not have complaints filed against them, and the training of recruits on the appropriate use of force. The study also provides data on citizen complaints of excessive force, the disposition of those complaints, and litigation concerning allegations of excessive force. Additional variables provide agency size, demographic characteristics, and workload.

,