NCJ Number
193788
Date Published
2001
Length
15 pages
Annotation
This paper examines reasons for the development of less-than-lethal (LTL) technologies for use in policing, describes various LTL technologies, and identifies some impediments to progress in LTL development and usage.
Abstract
Concern over civil liability in the use of deadly force has fostered an interest by police agencies in LTL technologies. Fears of liability on the part of police have largely stemmed from U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Tennessee v. Garner (1985) and Graham v. Connor (1989), which require police to be much less lethal in suspect incapacitation. Although this paper does not exhaust the LTL technologies currently in use or under development, it does profile some of the more popular and promising options. The described technologies are divided into five sections: ammunition, aerosol spray, gassing technology, the use of electricity, and miscellaneous LTL components. The latter components include immobilizing sound waves, microwave neurological disrupter and immobilizing radiation beams, water stream technology, "spiderman" snares, and "discostrobe" lights. Some technological advances that can be applied to provide increased protection for police officers are also briefly described. Some impediments to progress toward LTL development and usage by police departments include inadequate training and education for officers in the large number of small departments, as well as the restrictive budgets for such departments. Further, rural police agencies are less inclined to favor new equipment and styles of policing compared to urban police departments. Appended police technology timeline and 35 references