Disparities in Policing From Theory to Practice

In recent years, high-profile police use-of-force encounters with individuals of color (e.g., George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota; Breonna Taylor in Louisville, Kentucky; Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin) have increased the long-standing scrutiny of law enforcement actions and deepened the mistr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAmerican journal of public health (1971) Vol. 114; no. 4; pp. 384 - 386
Main Author Zare, Hossein
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States American Public Health Association 01.04.2024
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:In recent years, high-profile police use-of-force encounters with individuals of color (e.g., George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota; Breonna Taylor in Louisville, Kentucky; Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin) have increased the long-standing scrutiny of law enforcement actions and deepened the mistrust between communities and police when police behave inappropriately.Disparities in policing are indeed multifaceted issues that cannot be adequately understood solely by examining individual instances of violence. Analyzing how these events reflect broader systemic oppression is essential to gaining a comprehensive understanding. It requires exploring historical and ongoing patterns of discrimination, socioeconomic inequalities, neighborhood disadvantage, and the influence of power dynamics on policing practices. By recognizing and addressing these systemic factors, we are in a better position to address disparities in policing and reduce incidents of police violence. Theoretically, disparities in policing can be explained by three theories: majority-minority communities, conflict theory of law, and minority threat hypothesis-group threat theory. In majority-minority communities, the high level of violent crime leads to more police encounters and a greater need for police presence, which increases the risk of fatal outcomes.1 According to majorityminority communities, individuals living in lower-income, distressed communities of color, characterized by higher poverty rates, greater residential segregation, and elevated levels of violent crime, are more likely to experience social control measures, including heightened policing. Multiple studies have consistently shown that racial/ethnic minorities, particularly Black people and Hispanic people, are more likely to be subjected to more intense law enforcement practices than White people.2The conflict theory of law suggests that policing enforces social control that benefits those in power, resulting in intensified policing and potential use of force.3 This argument means that areas with a higher population of non-Whites, particularly Black people, could have larger police forces mainly because of Whites' fear and perceived economic threat.4 Finally, the minority threat hypothesis and group threat theory propose that minority-serving areas and socially marginalized populations experience more aggressive policing and lethal outcomes because these groups are seen as threatening the established order and power structure.5 On the community side, it might also lead to an increase in hate crimes targeting these minority groups6 Without taking these theories into consideration, there is a possibility of misinterpreting or misreading research findings.The study conducted by Ward et al. (p. 387) addressed a gap in the existing research on police violence by explicitly focusing on nonfatal shooting incidents. This study utilized a comprehensive data set, thereby offering valuable insights into the disparities in policing. Additionally, it highlights some essential findings that merit further explanation and analysis. In addressing various aspects related to this study and similar research, I highlight in the following sections several significant factors that directly or indirectly influence the subject matter.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ObjectType-Editorial-2
ObjectType-Commentary-1
ObjectType-Article-3
ISSN:0090-0036
1541-0048
1541-0048
DOI:10.2105/AJPH.2024.307588