L’assurance des risques informatiques
Cette maîtrise indispensable aux sociétés qui manient données informatiques (SSII, cabinets de conseil, les gouvernement de voyage, les entreprises de vente en ligne) couvre ordinateurs mais aussi socle de données et les frais de reconstitution dans l’hypothèse ou elles sont perdues et pourquoi pas endommagées. “Même un industriel confronté à une grosse panne informatique risque d’être châtié pour tenir ses bail vis-à-vis de ses clients ne pas être à même réaliser ses livraisons en temps et en heure. Quelle que va pour ça son activité, le dirigeant de gssein a intérêt à évaluer l’impact que peut avoir l’informatique sur son métier”, recommande Damien Palandjian.
Le montant de l’indemnisation dépend de les chiffres du matériel déclaré et des frais occasionnés chez son rachat et la reconstitution des données (ressaisies, reconstitution de logiciels, suppression des virus…) estimés en un expert.
La publicité se termine dans 15s
Fermer la publicité dans 5 s
>> Lire aussi: Trois contrats pour assurer son informatique
5. L’assurance du risque écologique
“Une entreprise n’ayant pas de circonstances industriel et pourquoi pas d’entreposage et non nympho à une autorisation préfectorale pour risques de pollution, peut couvrir son risque environnemental selon le biais de son contrat de responsabilité civile général. En revanche, si elle se trouve être nympho à autorisation préfectorale pour exercer son activité, elle souscrire un contrat spécifique pour couvrir les atteintes à l’environnement”, précise Damien Palandjian
Les garanties des atteintes à l’environnement (extensions de responsabilité civile professionnel et pourquoi pas contrats rares comme la garantie responsabilité environnementale) sont nécessaire aux entreprises desquelles l’activité léser à l’environnement (pollution de l’air, de l’eau, des plancher et nappes phréatiques, atteintes à des websites protégés…). Ces confiance s’appuient sur le principe du “pollueur-payeur” : le chef d’opération doit réparer le préjudice constaté, causé parmi sa société. Suivant contrats, l’assurance couvre la dépollution, les coûts d’évaluation des dommages, la production d’études pour déterminer les actions de réparation et les frais administratifs et pourquoi pas judiciaires.
Alors que 68% des Américains blancs sont optimistes à propos de la police, seuls 40% des Afro-Américains et 59% des Hispaniques le pensent.1 Après 1970, quand 67 pour cent. Blanc et 43 pour cent. Les Noirs ont signalé une attitude positive de la police, avec peu de changement d'attitude. 2 Les minorités raciales n’ont pas une attitude monolithique à l’égard de la police. Selon ce rapport, la police espagnole perçoit la police comme "au milieu" des Américains noirs et blancs.
Les républicains (81%) sont beaucoup plus favorables à la police que les indépendants (59%) et les démocrates (59%). Néanmoins, il existe un large consensus entre les trois groupes.
- Les écarts de confiance sont importants: Les groupes qui se sentent désavantagés par les forces de l'ordre locales ne sont pas certains de rapporter le crime qu'ils ont commis. Les Américains noirs et hispaniques, par exemple, disent plus de 20 points par rapport aux Américains blancs qu'ils vont certainement signaler un crime. Des études ont montré que lorsque la police a une légitimité, la loi en a une qui encourage la conformité et la coopération.3
- Aucun groupe ne "se bat contre un flic": Bien que certains groupes aient une vision positive de la police, les sondages affaiblissent l'affirmation selon laquelle ils sont "anti-policiers". Par exemple, peu de personnes ont une vision "négative" de l'application de la loi. Au lieu de cela, 40% des Afro-Américains, 28% des Hispaniques et 18% des Blancs sont en conflit et affirment ressentir une attitude "neutre" à l'égard de la police. Un quart des démocrates et des indépendants et 13% des républicains partagent ces sentiments.
En outre, il est difficile d'affirmer qu'un groupe est "anti-flics", aucun groupe ne souhaitant réduire le nombre d'agents de police dans leur communauté (9 personnes sur 10 s'opposent), et la plupart trouvent difficile le travail de la police.4 Environ 6 personnes sur 10 pensent que les fonctionnaires font un travail "très dangereux". Cependant, il existe un désaccord considérable entre ces groupes sur le point de savoir si les Américains font preuve de suffisamment de respect pour les fonctionnaires ces temps-ci – 64%. Blancs, 45%. Espagnol et 34 pour cent. Les Noirs disent que les Américains ne montrent pas assez.
Les perceptions de la manière dont la police accomplit son travail varient considérablement en fonction de la race et de la partisanerie
- Tactique policière: Les Afro-Américains (73%), beaucoup plus que les Blancs (35%) et les Hispaniques (54%), affirment que la police utilise la force meurtrière trop rapidement. De même, les Afro-Américains (56%) déclarent que les tactiques policières sont généralement trop sévères par rapport aux Hispaniques (33%) et aux Blancs (26%). Les républicains (80%) sont plus susceptibles de croire que la police utilise la force meurtrière uniquement en cas de besoin, contre 63%. Les démocrates pensent que la police l'utilise trop rapidement.
- Courtoisie: Les Américains blancs (62%) ont 19 points de probabilité de plus que les Afro-Américains (43%) et 13 points de plus que les Hispaniques (49%) estiment que les services de police locaux font preuve de courtoisie. En outre, les républicains (74%) affirment que les démocrates (48%) ont près de 30% de plus que la police locale se comporte de manière professionnelle.
- Impartialité raciale: Les Américains noirs (31%) et hispaniques (42%) sont beaucoup moins susceptibles que les Américains blancs (64%) d'être traités sur un pied d'égalité par tous les groupes raciaux dans leurs services de police locaux. Les démocrates (40%) pensent que la police est impartiale, environ la moitié moins que les républicains (78%).
- Compétence: Quatre Afro-Américains sur dix et cinq Hispaniques sur dix accordent à leur police locale des notes élevées en matière d'application de la loi, de protection du crime et de réponse rapide à un appel à l'aide, contre 6 Américains de race blanche sur 10. De même, 5 députés indépendants et démocrates sur 10 considèrent la police comme extrêmement compétente, contre environ 7 républicains sur 10.
Les expériences rapportées avec la police varient selon la race et l'origine ethnique
La plupart des Américains ont des expériences positives avec la police, mais ceux qui ont été victimes de maltraitance verbale et physique sont de manière disproportionnée noirs et hispaniques.
- Les Afro-Américains sont presque deux fois plus susceptibles que les Américains blancs de déclarer avoir juré devant un policier. Un quart des Afro-Américains et des Hispaniques ont déclaré qu'un policier utilisait ou méprisait personnellement un langage offensant, contre 15% des Américains de race blanche. Cette étude a mis en évidence des preuves montrant que les Blancs très offensants envers la police sont moins enclins à dénoncer l'obscénité de la police, tandis que les Noirs et les Latinos extrêmement lascifs ne signalent pas un comportement amélioré de la même manière.
- Les Afro-Américains sont environ deux fois plus susceptibles que les Américains blancs de savoir que quelqu'un est agressé physiquement par la police. 39% 18% des Afro-américains savent Blanc et 27 pour cent. Espagnol à quelqu'un qui a été physiquement maltraité par la police.
- Les Afro-Américains à revenu élevé déclarent s'être arrêtés environ 1,5 fois plus que les Américains blancs. En revanche, les Afro-Américains à faible revenu indiquent qu’ils sont arrêtés un peu plus souvent que les Américains blancs à faible revenu.
Les Américains ne croient pas que le système judiciaire américain traite tout le monde de la même manière
- 65% pensent que les policiers décrivent régulièrement les Américains par race et 63% s’opposent à cette pratique.
Près des deux tiers (65%) affirment que la police «arrête généralement les voitures et les piétons d'une certaine origine raciale ou ethnique, car elle estime que ces groupes commettent plus de crimes que d'autres». L'autre 63 pour cent. Il désapprouve également l'utilisation par la police de profilage racial pour les arrêts de la circulation et les piétons.
La plupart des Blancs (62%), des Hispaniques (62%) et des Noirs (77%) sont opposés au profilage racial par la police. Les républicains se démarquent à une faible majorité (51%) pour le profilage racial, avec 49%. Confronté. Mais les républicains noirs ne sont pas d'accord: 65%. Est contre le profilage racial et 35%.5
Les résultats de l'expérience sondée révèlent que les libéraux, plus que les conservateurs, soutiennent la réforme de la justice pénale lorsqu'ils sont prêts à examiner les accusations de partialité raciale dans le système. De telles accusations n'affectent pas le soutien des conservateurs à la réforme.
- 58% affirment que le système de justice américain traite de manière irrespectueuse le même traitement.
Seuls 42% des Américains déclarent que le système de justice américain traite tous les groupes raciaux de la même manière. De nombreux (45%) affirment que le système judiciaire américain favorise les Américains blancs, avec 13%. Affirme que ce système traite mieux les Noirs et les Hispaniques. Environ la moitié des Blancs (49%) affirment que le système judiciaire traite tous les groupes raciaux de la même manière, contre 17%. Afro-américain et 27 pour cent. Hispanique américaine. Les Républicains blancs se démarquent à une solide majorité (65%) qui déclarent que le système de justice traite tout le monde de la même manière; cependant, seulement environ un tiers des républicains blancs sont d'accord. Sept démocrates blancs et caucasiens sur dix estiment que le système favorise les Blancs.
Les Américains blancs sont plus susceptibles de croire aux préjugés raciaux dans le système s'ils ont tendance à faire preuve d'empathie. Les répondants dont l'indice de préjudice est élevé sont plus de deux fois plus susceptibles de penser que les préjugés raciaux sont préjudiciables au système de justice pénale que ceux qui les considèrent comme faibles (62% contre 28%).6ème
- Les Afro-Américains sont cinq fois plus susceptibles que les Caucasiens de s'attendre personnellement à un traitement pire de la part des policiers, mais la plupart s'attendent toujours à ce que les forces de l'ordre les incitent à aller dans la même direction. Un tiers des Afro-Américains s'attendent à ce que les policiers les traitent moins bien que les autres, contre 6% des Américains blancs et 13% des Américains hispaniques. Néanmoins, même si beaucoup pensent que le système n’est pas impartial, la plupart des Blancs (77%), des Hispaniques (72%) et des Noirs (60%) s’attendent à en personne Les forces de l'ordre bénéficient d'un traitement égal.
- Près de la moitié (49%) des Américains disent que "la plupart" des policiers pensent être "au-dessus de la loi". Les Afro-Américains (61%) et les Hispaniques (61%) disent beaucoup plus que les Blancs (46%) affirment que la plupart des agents de police se considèrent au-dessus des lois. Au lieu de cela, une majorité de Blancs (54%) déclarent ne pas se sentir dépassés par la police.
- 46% des Américains disent que la police n'est "généralement" pas responsable de l'inconduite. 64% des Afro-Américains affirment que la police n'est généralement pas responsable de l'inconduite, contre 43% des Américains blancs. Une petite majorité (51%) des Hispaniques a déclaré que la police ne réagissait pas. La plupart des démocrates (59%) craignent que la police n'en soit pas responsable. En revanche, la grande majorité (76%) des républicains et une petite majorité (51%) des indépendants estiment que les fonctionnaires sont tenus pour responsables.
La plupart des Américains s'accordent sur les principales priorités de la police
Bien que les Américains comprennent différemment la façon dont la police en fait Dans leur travail, la plupart des Américains noirs, blancs et hispaniques sont d’accord sur trois priorités clés de la police: enquêter sur les crimes violents (78%), protéger les citoyens du crime (64%) et enquêter sur les crimes contre la propriété (58%).
La plupart des groupes raciaux et ethniques s'accordent sur le chemin de la réforme
- 89% des Américains soutiennent les caméras de surveillance de la police et une petite majorité veut les accuser (51%) et permettre à la police de regarder les images avant de faire des déclarations officielles (52%). Les trois quarts estiment également que les caméras corporelles protègent également les fonctionnaires et les citoyens.
- 79% soutiennent les agences n'appartenant pas à la loi enquêtant sur les fautes de la police, alors que 21% choisissent les services de police pour mener ces enquêtes de l'intérieur.
- 68% Soutient la formation continue des agents de police sur la manière de gérer les affrontements, pendant ce temps, 32% pensent que les officiers ont déjà une formation adéquate.
- 73% souhaitent que la police prévienne les citoyens si elle refuse de s'arrêter et demande une perquisition.
- 77% Soutient l'interdiction faite aux policiers d'être abusifs envers les citoyens.
Un grand nombre de groupes raciaux et ethniques s'opposent également à diverses pratiques policières réelles et présumées:
- 84% S'oppose à la confiscation des biens de caractère civil: Les Américains s'opposent à ce que la police saisisse "l'argent ou les biens d'une personne soupçonnée d'être impliquée dans un crime de drogue avant d'être condamnés". Lorsque les services de police arrêtent les biens des personnes, 76% disent que les services locaux ne devraient pas garder les biens. Les Américains estiment que les avoirs saisis devraient être transférés soit à un fonds général de l'État (48%), soit à un fonds chargé de l'application de la loi au niveau de l'État (28%). Un quart (24%) disent que les services de police devraient garder les biens saisis.
- 54% déclarent que la police utilise la technologie militaire pour aller trop loin, tandis que 46% la jugent nécessaire aux fins de l'application de la loi. La plupart des groupes raciaux s'opposent à ce que la police utilise des armes militaires et des véhicules blindés (58% de Noirs, 53% de Blancs et 51% de Latinos). La plupart des républicains (65%) estiment que la police doit utiliser des armes militaires et 60%. Les démocrates et les indépendants estiment que la police utilise un tel équipement trop loin.
- 63% sont contre le profilage racial, Cependant, 65% le considèrent comme le plus couramment utilisé.
Six Américains sur dix (59%) soutiennent l'utilisation de drones par la police, mais la plupart (54%) craignent également que les drones ne portent atteinte à la vie privée des personnes.
Les Américains appartenant à des groupes démographiques et politiques soutiennent le drone utilisé par la police. Mais les démocrates et les indépendants (57%) sont plus prudents que les républicains (46%) quant aux risques d'atteinte à la vie privée des drones.
Les Américains veulent que la police obtienne un mandat avant de procéder à des fouilles de voiture et de maison et de surveiller les appels téléphoniques
Les Américains s'accordent à dire que même si une personne est soupçonnée d'enfreindre la loi, la police devrait obtenir une ordonnance du tribunal avant de perquisitionner le domicile de revendeurs de drogue présumés (66%) et de suivre les appels téléphoniques de criminels présumés (76%). La plupart (63%) s'opposent également à ce que les policiers contrôlent régulièrement les voitures en cas de consommation de drogue aux arrêts de circulation réguliers sans ordre du tribunal.
Cependant, les Américains peuvent être tentés de resserrer les règles sur la base du suspect. Alors que 66 pour cent Ils affirment que la police devrait demander une ordonnance du tribunal avant de perquisitionner le domicile d’un revendeur de drogue présumé, soit 51% seulement. Les personnes "susceptibles de sympathiser avec les terroristes" diffèrent de 15%. Quarante-neuf pour cent (49%) disent que la police n'a pas besoin d'une ordonnance du tribunal pour rechercher une personne qui, à son avis, pourrait être "compréhensive" envers les terroristes.7ème
Le respect des autorités informe le public sur l'attitude de la police
De nombreux conservateurs américains sont plus respectueux des autorités qui peuvent prédisposer une attitude positive de la police. Les Américains qui valorisent notre respect pour le Power Index (RAI) (qui est également trop conservateur) sont beaucoup plus susceptibles que ceux qui valorisent les arrêts à faible marche (87% contre 43%) et les flics utilisent des drones ( 71% contre 46% Supposons que la police utilise la force meurtrière uniquement lorsque cela est nécessaire (69% contre 41%) et il faut dire qu'il y a une guerre avec la police (77% contre 46%) 42%).8ème Les tests statistiques montrent que, étant conservatrices, les attitudes envers la police sont beaucoup plus prévisibles qu’elles sont libérales.
Les changements de statut socio-économique ou les partisans font peu pour changer les attitudes afro-américaines envers l'application de la loi
Les républicains blancs et les Blancs à revenu élevé ont une attitude plus favorable à l'égard de la police que les démocrates blancs et les Blancs à faible revenu. Toutefois, les Noirs républicains ou à revenu élevé sont beaucoup plus susceptibles que les démocrates ou les Noirs à faible revenu de faire part de leur attitude à la police. 9ème Ainsi, la race influence l'opinion de la police même après avoir pris en compte l'influence du revenu et de l'idéologie.
- Favorabilité: Les Américains blancs dont le revenu annuel est supérieur à 60 000 dollars par an sont 23 points plus favorables à la police que les Américains blancs dont le revenu est inférieur à 30 000 dollars par an (79% contre 56%). Cependant, les Afro-Américains à revenu élevé sont presque aussi favorables à la police que la police à faible revenu et un peu moins de la moitié à la police.
- Impartialité Les républicains blancs pensent que le système judiciaire américain traite tout le monde de la même manière (67% contre 26%) que les démocrates blancs. Mais les républicains noirs (15%), les indépendants noirs (16%) et les démocrates noirs (13%) pensent que le système est impartial. Les républicains espagnols sont d'accord avec 28 points de plus que les démocrates espagnols (45% contre 17%).
- Usage de la force: Les républicains blancs sont 41% plus susceptibles que les démocrates blancs de croire que la police utilise la force meurtrière uniquement lorsque cela est nécessaire (85% contre 44%). Cependant, les républicains noirs (36%) ne sont d'accord que 16 points de plus que les démocrates noirs (20%). Les républicains espagnols (58%) disent 16 points de plus que les démocrates espagnols (42%) affirment que la police utilise la force appropriée.
Ces données montrent que si les Blancs deviennent plus riches et plus républicains, ils deviennent plus conviviaux pour la police; Cependant, les Afro-Américains ne deviennent pas plus amis de la police si leurs revenus augmentent ou s'ils deviennent plus républicains.
60% disent qu'il est plus important de défendre l'innocent que de punir le coupable
Lorsqu'on leur a demandé ce qui serait pire, 60% ont déclaré qu'il serait pire d'emprisonner 20 000 personnes innocentes, tandis que 40% ont déclaré qu'il serait pire que 20 000 personnes innocentes soient libres.
La plupart des républicains (55%), des indépendants (60%) et des démocrates (64%) s'accordent à dire qu'il est pire d'emprisonner des innocents. Néanmoins, les premiers partisans de Donald Trump se distinguent de la majorité (52%), qui estiment que punir les coupables n’est pas pire. Les autres électeurs républicains sont en désaccord. Par exemple, 65% des premiers partisans de Ted Cruz ont déclaré que l'emprisonnement d'innocents était le pire.10ème
61% disent "guerre avec la police" en Amérique
À première vue, la plupart des Américains (64%) ont une opinion positive de leur service de police local et sont convaincus que leur police utilise la bonne force (58%), qu'ils sont courtois (57%) et honnêtes (57%), tous les groupes raciaux de manière égale (56%), protègent les personnes des crimes violents (56%), répondent rapidement aux appels à l’aide (56%) et s’occupent des membres de la communauté (55%).
En outre, 65%. Les Américains s'inquiètent du fait que les policiers effectuent des "travaux très dangereux", et 58% Estime que les fonctionnaires doivent trop souvent faire face à des citoyens indulgents qui ne manifestent pas suffisamment de respect. Parce que beaucoup d'Américains ne comprennent pas les problèmes systémiques de la police, ils intensifient leurs critiques sur leurs pratiques: une attaque contre la police: 61% des Américains pensent que la "guerre à la police" se déroule aujourd'hui.
Quatre groupes idéologiques d'Américains ont des attitudes différentes à l'égard de la police: les libéraux, les libéraux, les conservateurs et les communautaristes
Pour améliorer l'auto-identification idéologique (c'est-à-dire les libéraux / conservateurs), ce rapport utilise les réponses à un écran à trois questions (à l'annexe A) sur le rôle du gouvernement dans les affaires économiques et personnelles pour identifier quatre groupes principaux d'Américains: les libéraux (18). %) qui soutiennent un gouvernement plus large qui ne répand pas les valeurs traditionnelles, les libertaires (17%) qui soutiennent un gouvernement plus petit qui ne diffuse pas les valeurs traditionnelles, les communautaristes (16%) qui soutiennent un gouvernement plus large qui promeut les valeurs traditionnelles et les conservateurs (26%). .) Qui soutiennent un gouvernement plus petit qui promeut les valeurs traditionnelles. (Les 25% restants ne correspondent à aucune de ces catégories). Ce rapport explore également la manière dont ces quatre groupes idéologiques perçoivent la police en Amérique aujourd'hui.
Le dilemme des politiciens américains[block]1[/block]
À première vue, les Américains semblent satisfaits de leurs forces de l'ordre locales. Près des deux tiers (64%) des Américains ont une opinion positive de la police dans leurs communautés, y compris 33%. A "très favorable", et 31%. – une attitude "légèrement favorable". Seulement 14% déclarent avoir une attitude défavorable à l'égard de la police locale, tandis que 22% affirment ne ressentir aucun sentiment positif ou négatif. (Voir l'annexe B pour les citoyens qui évaluent la police.)
Cependant, ces chiffres de haut niveau cachent les différences évidentes d'attitudes vis-à-vis de la police en termes de race / ethnicité, d'âge, d'éducation, de revenu et d'idéologie. Certains groupes ont une vision très positive de la police, d’autres pensent que ses activités connaissent des problèmes systémiques.
Alors que 64% des Américains sont généralement positifs à propos de leur police locale, seuls 40% des Noirs et 59% des Hispaniques sont de cet avis. En revanche, les Américains blancs ont une vision beaucoup plus favorable de la police dans leurs communautés (68%). Cette différence marquée d’attitudes raciales et ethniques à l’égard de la police mérite en particulier d’être approfondie.
La génération du millénaire (Américains de moins de 35 ans) (53%), les ménages à faible revenu (<30 000 $) et les diplômés du secondaire (59%) sont également environ 20 points moins favorables à la police que les Américains de plus de 65 ans (82%), les ménages à revenu moyen et élevé (50 000 $ et plus) (76%) et les diplômés du secondaire (73%).11ème Les habitants des banlieues ne sont que légèrement plus favorables à la police (69%) que les résidents urbains (60%). Il est à noter que les hommes et les femmes ont des attitudes similaires à l'égard de la police. (Voir l'annexe C pour une ventilation des approches démographiques.)
La partisanerie est étroitement liée aux attitudes envers la police. Les républicains sont plus de 20 points plus favorables à la police (81%) que les démocrates (59%) et les indépendants (59%). De même, les conservateurs idéologiques constituent le groupe le plus favorable (80%) à la police. Les opinions libertaires (64%) s'apparentent davantage à celles des communistes (58%) et des libéraux (54%). (Voir Annexe A pour les définitions des groupes idéologiques).
Les Américains ne sont pas "en train de se battre contre les flics"[block]2[/block]
Bien que certains groupes aient une attitude moins favorable à l'égard de la police, des résultats d'enquêtes supplémentaires indiquent que ces groupes ne sont pas "anti-policiers". Premièrement, peu de gens ont une attitude totalement "défavorable" à l’égard de la police. Seulement 12% Espagnol, 13 pour cent Blanc et 19 pour cent. Les Afro-Américains adoptent une attitude "négative". Les Afro-Américains (40%) et les Hispaniques (28%) sont plus susceptibles que les Blancs (18%) de se sentir en conflit et de signaler à la police leurs sentiments neutres plutôt que leurs sentiments positifs ou négatifs.
En outre, la plupart s'accordent sur ce qui devrait être des priorités clés en matière d'application de la loi: enquêter sur les crimes violents et contre les biens et protéger les personnes du crime. De plus, être un «flic flic» devrait vous faire vouloir moins dans la communauté policière. Cependant, aucun groupe ne veut réduire le nombre d'agents de police dans leurs communautés (environ 9 sur 10). Au lieu de cela, environ la moitié des Noirs, des Blancs et des Hispaniques maintiennent leurs niveaux actuels et plus du tiers disent que leur communauté a besoin de plus d'officiers.
Conséquences de l'écart de confiance[block]3[/block]
Ces lacunes de confiance ont des conséquences. Un service de police efficace exige que la police et ses communautés travaillent ensemble dans une relation symbiotique basée sur le respect et la confiance mutuels. La police est la mieux placée pour servir et protéger leurs communautés lorsque les résidents coopèrent librement avec elle, par exemple lorsqu'ils souhaitent signaler un crime dont ils sont témoins.
Cependant, ceux qui ont des opinions policières moins favorables sont moins susceptibles de signaler un crime. Par exemple, alors que 78% des Blancs américains déclarent qu'ils rapporteront «nécessairement» le crime dont ils ont été témoins, beaucoup moins d’Afro-Américains américains (54%) et d’Hispaniques (57%) se sentent confiants. Moins de la moitié des hommes afro-américains dont le revenu annuel est inférieur à 30 000 dollars par an rapporteraient "définitivement" le crime.
Les jeunes Américains sont également moins susceptibles de déclarer qu'ils rapporteraient un crime violent s'ils en voyaient un par rapport aux personnes âgées (87% contre 53%). En outre, les ménages gagnant moins de 30 000 dollars par an (62%) et les diplômés du secondaire (68%) sont nettement moins susceptibles que ceux gagnant plus de 60 000 dollars par an (79%) ou les diplômés des collèges ( 81%) croient qu'ils vont signaler le crime violent dont ils ont été témoins.
Lorsque les résidents croient que le système de justice est juste et impartial, ils font confiance à la police. Une telle confiance encourage la coopération avec la police, nécessaire pour réduire la criminalité.14ème En outre, lorsque la police a une légitimité, la loi a une légitimité qui encourage la conformité. Des études ont montré que les citoyens sont plus susceptibles de faire appliquer les lois lorsque la police a une légitimité.15ème
Que faire à propos de l’écart de confiance?[block]4[/block]
Dans les communautés qui ne font pas confiance aux forces de l'ordre locales, les services de police devraient chercher à gagner la confiance des membres de la communauté. Cela renforcera la légitimité de la loi et aidera les responsables à effectuer leur travail efficacement et en toute sécurité.
Pour rétablir la confiance dans l'application de la loi, nous devons d'abord comprendre ce qui motive cette approche différente du maintien de l'ordre. Les sondages d'opinion publique peuvent non seulement aider à comprendre ce que les gens pensent de la police, mais également à comprendre qui pense ce qu'ils font. Cela peut donner aux services de police et aux législateurs la possibilité d'élaborer des politiques visant à améliorer les relations entre la police et la communauté.
L'écart de course Ce rapport se concentre sur les écarts raciaux dans l'opinion de la police et pour plusieurs raisons.
Premièrement, la race et l'appartenance ethnique sont associées à des différences significatives dans la favorabilité de la police (voir l'annexe C). En outre, des enquêtes sur l’opinion publique de la police ont longtemps révélé que la race prédisait fortement les attitudes à l’égard de la police.16ème
L'âge, le revenu et l'éducation peuvent changer, mais la race et l'ethnie des individus demeurent. Ainsi, avec le temps, les lacunes raciales dans l'opinion de la police sont plus persistantes.
Des études montrent que la fracture raciale au sein de la police n’a guère changé au cours des 50 dernières années. 1970 Une enquête nationale a révélé que 67% des Américains de race blanche et 43% des Afro-Américains étaient positifs à propos de la police.17ème De même, aujourd'hui, 68%. Blanc et 40 pour cent. Les Noirs accueillent la police. Cela montre que depuis les années 1970. Les réformes de la police mises en œuvre ont peu contribué à combler le déficit de confiance.
La race semble influencer les perceptions de la police, même après avoir pris en compte l'impact d'autres facteurs démographiques. Par exemple, les Caucasiens gagnant plus de 60 000 dollars par an (79%) ont plus de 20% de chances de plus que ceux gagnant moins de 30 000 dollars (56%) par an à se faire une opinion favorable de la police. Cependant, les Afro-Américains à revenu élevé (48%) ne sont pas beaucoup plus susceptibles que les Afro-Américains à revenu plus faible (41%) d’être positifs envers la police.
Un schéma similaire se dégage chez les partisans. Les républicains blancs (83%), près de 20% de plus que les démocrates blancs, se sentent favorables à la police. Mais les républicains noirs (44%) ne sont pas plus susceptibles que les démocrates noirs (44%) d’adopter un point de vue positif. Ainsi, la race peut influencer les attitudes envers la police, même en tenant compte de l'influence du revenu et de l'idéologie.19ème
Malgré le fait que les Hispaniques représentent 17,4% de la population américaine, peu de recherches ont exploré les similitudes et les différences entre les approches des Hispaniques et celles des autres groupes.20ème Une petite étude montre que les Espagnols peuvent obtenir un "juste milieu" entre les Américains noirs et les Blancs dans leurs attitudes envers la police et ne devraient pas être combinés avec d'autres groupes. 21ème Nos données suggèrent également que les Hispaniques ont des attitudes différentes envers les Noirs et les Blancs.
Ce rapport examine soigneusement le fossé racial dans l'opinion de la police et tente d'identifier les causes possibles. Des échantillons afro-américains et hispaniques ont été inclus dans cette enquête (voir la section Méthodologie de la recherche). Les résultats sont pondérés comme étant représentatifs de l'échantillon national.
Dans la section suivante, le rapport examine les différentes attitudes, expériences et croyances des Américains à l’égard de l’application de la loi qui peuvent influer sur les préjugés de la police. Ce qui suit explore quelles sont ces perceptions et expériences qui prédisent le mieux les faveurs de la police. Enfin, le rapport examine l’appui du public à diverses réformes et changements de politique proposés ces dernières années pour améliorer les relations entre la police et la communauté.
Facteurs potentiels de favoritisme policier[block]5[/block]
Cette section explore les croyances, les perceptions et les expériences des Américains susceptibles d’influencer leur penchant général pour la police, y compris l’anxiété liée à la criminalité dans leur quartier, le respect des représentants du gouvernement, les priorités de la police, l’expérience de la police, les compétences, le professionnalisme. , impartialité, recours à la force, responsabilité et intégrité. Il examine ensuite dans quelle mesure toute personne peut avoir une relation avec la loyauté de la police.
Anxiété à propos du crime[block]6[/block]
Malgré la baisse du taux de criminalité dans le pays, certaines études montrent que les Américains continuent de croire que la criminalité augmente chaque année. Par exemple, Gallup a constaté qu'environ les deux tiers des Américains déclarent que les États-Unis enregistrent aujourd'hui plus de crimes que l'année dernière, et que cette proportion a augmenté avec le temps. Même au niveau local, environ la moitié des Américains déclarent qu'il y a "plus de crimes" dans leur région qu'il y a un an. Pourtant, alors que les Américains peuvent dire que la criminalité est plus élevée, ce rapport montre qu'ils sont moins inquiets qu'auparavant pour la victime du crime, ce qui indique que le crime diminue. Voir aussi: Justin McCarthy, "La plupart des Américains voient encore des crimes l'année dernière." Gallup 2014 21 novembre, http://www.gallup.com/poll/179546/americans-crime-last-year.aspx.
23 Ces données proviennent des sondages suivants, disponibles auprès du Roper Center ou de l'auteur: 1988, Gallup / Times Mirror; 1994 et 1995, Princeton Survey Research Associates (PSRA) / Times Mirror; 1996, Fondation PSRA / Kaisier; 1997, PSRA / Pew Research Center; 1999, 2001, 2004, 2006, 2007 PSRA / Pew; 2015 et 2016, Institut YouGov / Cato. Statistiques sur la criminalité recueillies auprès du FBI, Uniform Crime Reports, compilées par les archives nationales de données sur la justice pénale.
Priorités de la société dans l'enquête[block]7[/block]
Les policiers ont peu de temps et de ressources et doivent décider de la hiérarchisation de leurs responsabilités. Les Américains s'accordent généralement sur trois priorités clés en matière d'application de la loi: enquêter sur des crimes violents tels que l'homicide, les voies de fait et la violence domestique (78%), protéger les individus contre les crimes violents (64%) et enfin, enquêter sur les crimes contre la propriété et le vol qualifié ( 58%).
Un peu moins du tiers (30%) pensent que la police devrait faire de la lutte contre la drogue une priorité absolue.
Notamment, seulement 19% des répondants estiment que la police devrait accorder la priorité absolue à l'application du code de la route. En d’autres termes, les Américains n’accordent pas la priorité à la tâche qui consiste généralement à communiquer avec la police – obtenir un billet de circulation.24ème
Un autre 18% Mano, kad policija turėtų teikti pirmenybę ne tik tradicinėms teisėsaugos pareigoms, bet ir „teikti patarimus ir socialines paslaugas neramiems jaunuoliams“. Dar 12 proc. Teigia, kad svarbiausia, jog policija vykdytų įstatymus dėl nepatogumų visuomenės atžvilgiu.
Juodi, balti ir Ispanijos amerikiečiai teikia pirmenybę toms pačioms trims teisėsaugos užduotims; tačiau grupės skiriasi paramos intensyvumu. Turbūt labiausiai stebina tai, kad afroamerikiečiai ir ispanai (45 proc.) 18 procentų mažiau nei baltaodžiai amerikiečiai (63 proc.) Teikia pirmenybę policijai, tiriančiai nusikaltimus nuosavybėn ir plėšimus. (Nors šis skirtumas tarp asmenų, didesnių už vidutines pajamas, iš esmės išsisklaido). Afrikos amerikiečiai ir latino gyventojai (27 proc.) Taip pat yra maždaug dvigubai labiau linkę nei baltaodžiai (15 proc.) Teigdami, kad policija turėtų teikti pirmenybę „orientavimo ir socialinių paslaugų teikimui neramiems jauniems suaugusiesiems“.
Nepaisant šių kuklių skirtumų, partizanams ir demografijai priklausantys amerikiečiai paprastai turi panašius prioritetus teisėsaugos srityje. Be to, įsitikinimai apie policijos prioritetus nesiskiria nuo palankumo policijai ir todėl greičiausiai nedaro įtakos požiūriui į teisėsaugą.
Asmeninis kontaktas su policijos ir teisingumo sistema[block]8[/block]
Asmeninis bendravimas su policijos pareigūnais ir baudžiamojo teisingumo sistema gali įtakoti teisėsaugos palankumą.25ème Šeimos narių ir draugų patirtis taip pat gali priversti žmogų „pergyventi“ tą bendravimą ir taip suformuoti policijos požiūrį.26ème Savo ruožtu, skirtinga asmeninė ir įvairi patirtis su policija gali padėti paaiškinti teisėsaugos palankumo skirtumus.
Įvertinimas Asmeninis kontaktas
Šešiasdešimt septyni procentai (67%) amerikiečių, kurie per pastaruosius penkerius metus turėjo asmeninių kontaktų su policijos pareigūnais, teigia esantys patenkinti jų susidūrimu ir įvertinę jų pasitenkinimą 4 arba 5 balais nuo 1 iki 5.27ème
Afrikiečiai amerikiečiai daug rečiau nei baltieji ir ispanai teigiamai vertina asmeninį bendravimą su policijos pareigūnais. Septyni iš 10 baltųjų amerikiečių (70 proc.) Ir ispanų amerikiečių (66 proc.) Savo asmeninius policijos susitikimus vertina kaip 4 ar 5, palyginti su 50 proc. Afrikiečių, vertinančių asmeninius susitikimus.
56 proc. Baltųjų amerikiečių teigia, kad per pastaruosius penkerius metus policijos pareigūnai susidūrė su patenkinamomis policijos problemomis (tiek su asmeniniais policijos kontaktais, tiek be jų per pastaruosius penkerius metus), taip pat 38 proc. Afroamerikiečių ir 51 proc. Ispanai.
Savo bendravimą su policija partizanai vertino skirtingai. Aštuoni iš 10 respublikonų praneša, kad yra patenkinti policijos susidūrimais per pastaruosius penkerius metus, palyginti su šešiais iš 10 demokratų ir nepriklausomų asmenų.
Nenuostabu, kad pasitenkinimas asmeniniais policijos ryšiais yra labai susijęs su palankumu vietos policijos departamentui. Tarp tų, kurie patenkinti asmeniniu policijos kontaktu, 86 proc. Turi teigiamą teisėsaugos nuomonę. Tačiau 61 proc., Nepatenkintų bendravimu su policija, yra nepalanki nuomonė.
Policijos stotelių dažnis
Trisdešimt aštuoni procentai (38%) amerikiečių teigia, kad juos per pastaruosius penkerius metus oficialiai sustabdė policijos pareigūnai: 20% teigia, kad jie buvo sustabdyti vieną kartą, 9% teigė, kad buvo sustabdyti du kartus, o dar 9 % say they've been stopped three or more times (August 2016 survey).28
Black Americans report being stopped at a higher frequency than whites and Hispanics. Among blacks, 27% report being stopped two or more times in the past five years, as do 18% of whites and 13% of Hispanics. In a similar pattern, 17% of blacks report being stopped three or more times, compared to 8% of whites and 4% of Hispanics.
There is some evidence that black Americans are more likely to be stopped by police as their income rises than white Americans similarly situated. A statistical test finds that as blacks' incomes rise they are significantly more likely to report being stopped by police (see Appendix D).29ème However, white and Hispanic Americans are no more likely to report being stopped by police as their income rises. For instance, blacks with incomes over $50,000 a year (Mean =1.34 stops) report being stopped at about 1.5 times the rate of whites with incomes over $50,000 a year (Mean =.91 stops). 30ème Among those making less than $50,000 annually, blacks' average number of reported stops (Mean=.84 stops) is only slightly above whites' (Mean =.76 stops).
This fits with anecdotal reports from wealthy African Americans who report they avoid driving expensive cars to avoid added police scrutiny. For instance, actor Isaiah Washington tweeted that he sold his Mercedes and bought three less expensive Honda Priuses because he "got tired of being pulled over by the police."31ème Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) and billionaire private-equity financier Robert Smith have shared similar stories of being stopped three to seven times a year.32
Types of Personal Contact
About a quarter (27%) of Americans report having had an experience in which a police officer kept them or their family member safe in a potentially dangerous situation. Such reports do not vary considerably among demographic and political groups. As one would expect, individuals who report being kept safe (76%) are about 16 points more likely to report a favorable opinion of the police than those without this experience (60%).
Most Americans have also personally or vicariously come into contact with the police and justice system for less auspicious reasons. About half (47%) say they know someone who has been stopped and searched by an officer, 63% say they know someone who has been arrested, and 57% say they know someone who has been in prison or jail.
African Americans (60%) are 13-20 points more likely than Caucasians (47%) and Hispanic Americans (40%) to know someone who has been stopped and searched by a police officer. About two-thirds of blacks and whites say they know someone who has been arrested or been to prison or jail, compared to 47% of Hispanics.
People who report knowing someone who has been stopped and searched by a police officer are about 14 points less favorable toward the police (57%) than those who do not know someone with this experience (71%). However knowing someone who has been arrested or been to prison or jail doesn't correlate (either positively or negatively) with favorability toward the police.
Whether someone lives in an urban, suburban, or rural area might influence their attitudes toward the police.33 People who live in densely populated areas are more likely to come into contact with officers. City centers also are more likely to have higher crime rates, which may increase the likelihood one has an encounter with law enforcement.34 However, actual differences in favorability toward the police by community type are rather small. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of individuals living in the suburbs have a favorable view of the police, as do 60% of those living in cities and 61% residing in rural areas.
Perceived Police Competency[block]9[/block]
In general, nearly 6 in 10 Americans give their local police forces high marks for enforcing the law (59%), protecting people from violent crime (56%) and responding quickly to a call for help (56%). Slightly fewer (50%) give their local police a high rating for solving crime.35 However, there are significant differences across race/ethnicity, ideology, income, and urban density in perceptions of police competency (see Appendix C).
White Americans are roughly 20 points more likely than African Americans, and 10-15 points more likely than Hispanic Americans, to highly rate their local police departments for effectiveness. (See Appendix C for full breakdowns.) For instance, while 60% of white Americans think police effectively protect people from crime, only 38% of African Americans and 49% of Hispanics agree. Similarly about 6 in 10 whites think the police do a good job enforcing the law and responding quickly, compared to 4 in 10 blacks and less than half of Latinos.
Perceptions of police competency strongly correlate with ideology. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of respondents who identify as "very conservative" gave their local police high ratings for enforcing the law, while only 46% of "very liberal" respondents agree. Similarly, while 62% of very conservative respondents have high confidence in their local police departments' ability to solve crime, only 35% of very liberal respondents agree.
Education, income, and age are also related to perceptions of police efficacy. College graduates (67%), households earning $60,000+ a year (69%), and seniors (72%) give the police high ratings for "enforcing the law." In contrast, considerably fewer high school graduates (55%), households earning less than $30,000 a year (54%), and millennials (53%) agree.36 Suburban residents (62%) are somewhat more likely than urban residents (53%) to believe the police are effective at enforcing the law.
In sum, Americans who are older, higher income, conservative, white, and living in the suburbs are the most likely to believe the police are good at their jobs. Conversely, individuals who are younger, lower income, liberal, African American or Hispanic, and living in urban neighborhoods are least confident that the police are competent. (See Appendix D for full breakdowns.)
Evaluations of police competency are highly correlated with overall favorability toward the police. Among those who give the police high ratings for protecting people from crime, 83% have a favorable view of local law enforcement, compared to 27% among those who have low confidence in police competency.37
Perceived Police Professionalism and Empathy[block]10[/block]
Nearly six in 10 Americans give their local police department high ratings for "being courteous" (57%) and for demonstrating they care about the people in the community (55%).38 About 3 in 10 give the police an average rating and 1 in 10 give police a low rating. Responses differ by race, age, income, and partisanship.
About 4 in 10 African Americans give their local police departments high ratings for being courteous and caring about community members, compared to 6 in 10 white Americans and half of Hispanics.
Millennials (45%) and households earning less than $30,000 a year (56%) are less likely than seniors (73%) and households earning more than $80,000 annually (64%) to give their police high ratings for courteousness. Similarly 43% of millennials and 50% of households earning less than $30,000 a year give the police high marks for caring about community members, compared to about two-thirds of seniors (66%) and households making more than $80,000 a year (61%).
Republicans (7 in 10) are also more likely than Democrats (5 in 10) to highly rate their police departments for being courteous and caring about the community. Race and ethnicity does not account for this result. White Republicans (74%) are 24 points more likely than white Democrats (50%) to give their local police high marks for being courteous.
Perceptions of police professionalism and empathy are highly correlated with individuals' favorability toward the police. Of those who give their local police high ratings for caring about community members, 85% have a favorable opinion of the police, compared to 24% of those who give local police low ratings for empathy.
Police Misconduct: Experience and Perception[block]11[/block]
About one in five Americans say a police officer has used profanity with them (17%) and say they know someone physically mistreated or abused by the police (21%).39
Reported experience with police mistreatment varies by race, age, gender, and income. African Americans are about twice as likely as whites to report profanity or knowing someone physically mistreated by the police. About a quarter of African Americans (26%) and Hispanics (22%) report police using abusive language with them compared to 15% of whites. Nearly 4 in 10 African Americans (39%) and 27% of Hispanics report knowing someone physically mistreated by police, compared to 18% of whites.
Men, millennials, and those making less than 30,000 a year (about a quarter) are also about 10 points more likely than women, seniors, and households making over $60,000 a year to report personal or vicarious experiences with police mistreatment.
An AP/NORC survey conducted in 2015 found that 57% of Americans thought that citizens' failure to cooperate with police during a stop was a "major reason" for police use of force.40 Some readers may wonder if police swearing occurs when citizens are uncooperative and disrespectful. Perhaps those inclined to respect authority defer to police and are thus less likely to incur verbal abuse.
To investigate, the author created a Respect for Authority Index (RAI), a composite scale based on averaging responses to three questions that measured people's general respect for authority without explicitly asking about police. (See Appendix E for question wording.) A higher RAI score indicates a respondent is more apt to respect authority figures. Higher RAI scores are not direct measures of deference to the police, but rather indicate a higher likelihood of deference.
Individuals with a higher RAI score are less likely to report police swearing at them; however, this finding primarily holds for white Americans. Among whites, those with low RAI scores are 3 times as likely as whites with high RAI scores to report experience with police profanity — 27% vs. 9%.41 In contrast, African Americans and Hispanics with lower RAI scores are not that much more likely than those with higher RAI scores to say they've experience police profanity.
This gives some indication that whites who are highly deferential toward the police may have better experiences, whereas blacks and Hispanics who are very deferential may not experience similarly improved treatment.
Unsurprisingly, only 40% of individuals who have personally or vicariously experienced verbal or physical abuse from officers have a favorable view of the police compared to 70% among those without these negative experiences. In sum, abuse at the hands of an individual police officer — whether individually or vicariously experienced — may be internalized and help explain differences in favorability toward the police.
A belief that police are biased should affect public opinion about the police. Individuals might see the system as biased in general but not toward them. Alternatively, they might believe the system is both biased in general and toward them. This report investigates both perceptions.
Perceptions of Systemic Racial Bias[block]13[/block]
Fully 58% of Americans say the criminal justice system fails to treat all individuals equally, including 45% who believe the system gives preference to white Americans and 13% who think the system treats black and Hispanic Americans better. Less than half (42%) of Americans believe the justice system is impartial. However, a majority (56%) give their local police departments high marks for "treating racial and ethnic groups equally."42
Perceptions of bias vary widely by race, ethnicity, and partisanship. About half (49%) of white Americans believe the criminal justice system treats everyone about the same. Only 17% of black Americans and 27% of Hispanic Americans agree. Instead, a strong majority (72%) of African Americans, a slim majority of Hispanics (51%), and 40% of Caucasians believe the justice system gives preferences to whites. About 1 in 10 black and white Americans and 2 in 10 Hispanic Americans think the justice system offers greater leniency to minorities.
More than two-thirds (69%) of Democrats say the system favors whites over blacks and Hispanics while 21% say the system treats everyone equally. But, 64% of Republicans say the system treats everyone the same while 21% think the system is biased in favor of whites. Independents are divided: 45% think the system is fair, and 41% think the system gives preference to Caucasians.
Here again, race matters more than partisanship. Although white Republicans (67%) are 41 points more likely than white Democrats (26%) to believe the system treats everyone equally, black Republicans (15%) are about as likely as black Democrats (13%) to think the system is impartial. Hispanics fall in between, with Hispanic Republicans 28 points more likely than Hispanic Democrats to believe the system is fair (45% vs. 17%).43 Ultimately, white Republicans are the only group that solidly believes the justice system treats all citizens fairly.
These data indicate partisan ideology is correlated with perceptions of impartiality in the justice system, but primarily for whites and Hispanics. Hispanic and white Republicans are both more likely than Hispanic and white Democrats to believe the system is fair. However, black Republicans and black Democrats have similar views about the system's fairness. Pourquoi African Americans may have different personal or vicarious experiences with the police.
Local Police Departments These confidence gaps extend to evaluations of local police departments. While 64% of white Americans highly rate their local police for impartiality, only 31% of African Americans and 42% of Hispanics agree.44 Republicans (78%) are also considerably more likely than Democrats (40%) and independents (57%) to highly rate their local police for impartiality.
Urban residents (47%) are also less likely than suburban (62%) and rural residents (59%) to believe the police treat all groups the same. This pattern generally holds across racial groups: whites living in suburbs are about 19 points more likely than whites living in cities to highly rate their local police for impartiality (70% vs. 51%). Suburban Hispanics (54%) are 14 points more likely than Hispanics living in cities (40%) to agree. Blacks living in cities are slightly more likely (33%) than blacks living in suburbs (25%) to highly rate their local police for impartiality.
Belief that one's local department suffers from racial bias strongly correlates with favorability toward the police. Among those who highly rate their department for impartiality, 83% have a favorable view of the police.45 However, only 31% of those who are not confident of such impartiality have a favorable view.
Although most Americans believe the justice system suffers from bias, 75% expect the police will treat them the same as anyone else for a traffic violation or minor offense. Ten percent (10%) of Americans think police would treat them worse than other people, and 15% expect they would be treated better.
Majorities of black (60%), Hispanic (60%), and white (77%) Americans personally expect to receive equal treatment from police. However blacks and Hispanics comprise a disproportionate share of those who expect worse treatment. African Americans (32%) are about five times more likely, and Hispanics (13%) twice as likely, as white Americans (6%) to expect worse treatment.
Notably, although only a third of African Americans and 42% of Hispanics highly rate their police departments for impartiality, majorities of both groups (60% and 72% respectively) believe they asmeniškai would be treated the same as other people.46 This suggests that expectations about personal treatment are not sufficient to explain perceptions of bias in the department overall.
Predictably, those who expect to receive equal treatment are more favorable toward the police than those who expect worse treatment by a margin of 70% to 29%.
Taking these results together, Americans are more likely to perceive racial bias in the criminal justice system overall than at the level of their local police department. They are least likely to expect to personally be treated inequitably. Ultimately, perceptions of systemic bias more strongly and negatively correlate with favorability toward the police than do personal expectations. It is important for people to believe the sistema is fair — even to other people — for the police to have legitimacy.
Who Believes Charges of Racial Bias? What might lead a person to believe disparate treatment exists if one doesn't personally experience it? Perhaps an above average concern for others experiencing harm may lead one to be more apt to believe charges of racial bias.
To investigate, the author created a Sensitivity to Harm Index (SHI), based on the Care/Harm Foundation in Moral Foundations Theory.47 The SHI is a composite scale based on averaging responses to two questions that measure people's sensitivity to others' suffering, without explicitly asking about police or race. (See Appendix F for question wording.)For instance, respondents who strongly agree that "compassion for those who are suffering is the most crucial virtue" score higher on the SHI scale. SHI scores do not vary considerably across demographics, except that women tend to have higher scores than men.
Individuals who score high on the Sensitivity to Harm Index (SHI) are far more likely to believe racial bias is a problem in the criminal justice system. For instance, 58% of whites with high SHI scores believe the justice system is biased against blacks and Hispanics compared to 27% among those with low scores.48 Whites who score low on SHI are far more likely to say the system treats everyone the same than those who score high (58% vs. 36%). These results suggest that people who tend to empathize may be more sensitive to charges of racial bias in police encounters.
Nearly two-thirds (65%) say police commonly "stop motorists and pedestrians of certain racial or ethnic backgrounds because the officer believes that these groups are more likely than others to commit certain types of crimes." Another 63% also oppose police using racial profiling for traffic and pedestrian stops. (Furthermore, 63% of Americans oppose racial profiling).
An overwhelming majority of African Americans (81%) believe the police regularly racially profile. A majority of Hispanics (70%) and Caucasians (62%) agree.
Democrats (80%) are considerably more likely than Republicans (53%) and independents (61%) to believe the police engage in racial profiling. Ideological Conservatives comprise the only political group with a majority (54%) who believe racial profiling does non commonly occur. In contrast, majorities of Liberals (87%), Communitarians (67%), and Libertarians (63%) think police routinely racially profile. (See Appendix A for definitions of ideological clusters.)
Who Perceives Bias?[block]16[/block]
|Who Perceives Bias?|
|What best predicts perceptions of bias in the criminal justice system, particularly for those who have not personally observed it? Given the wide racial confidence gap in police impartiality, separate statistical tests (logit regressions) were run among white, black, and Hispanic Americans respectively to determine what demographic variables, beliefs, and experiences best predict the belief that the justice system favors white Americans.49 (See footnote and Appendix G more statistical information).
Across all three groups, the belief that police tactics are "too harsh" positively and significantly predicts the perception that the justice system is not impartial. Conversely, conservatism among all three groups significantly predicts the belief that the system treats everyone equally. Being liberal does non predict perceptions of bias among blacks and Hispanics, but does among whites.
Among whites, being liberal, perceiving a lack of police accountability, and scoring high on the Sensitivity to Harm Index (SHI) also statistically predict perceiving bias in the justice system. Among blacks, being male and older also significantly predict perceptions of bias. Hispanics are also more likely to perceive bias if they know someone who was stopped and searched by an officer, arrested, or jailed.
The Sensitivity to Harm Index predicts perceptions of bias among white Americans and weakly among Hispanics. Empathy may lead whites to believe that other people may experience different treatment in the justice system. It may be harder for those with less empathy to believe the charge of bias if they don't see or experience it personally.
Talking about Police, Reform, and Race: What’s Persuasive?[block]17[/block]
|Talking about Police, Reform, and Race: What's Persuasive?|
| Is talking about racial bias effective? Many advocates of police reform argue that systemic racial bias plagues the criminal justice system and thus reform is necessary.50 Does this argument encourage people to consider reform? To find out, the survey embedded a small experiment to investigate how telling people the criminal justice system treats African Americans and Latinos unfairly affects their belief that the justice system is overly harsh. (See Appendix H for further details.)
Survey respondents were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups. The first group was shown this message: "Some people say the US criminal justice system is unfair to African Americans and Hispanics and so we should consider reforms of the system." Then both groups were asked: "In general, do you think the criminal justice system in this country is too harsh, too lenient, or about right in its handling of crime?" The following chart shows how considering racial bias affects one's belief that the system is overly harsh.
Note: Perceptions of harshness in the criminal justice system following exposure to treatment message. Data from the Cato Institute/YouGov November 2015 National Survey.
The racial bias message has a statistically significant effect, especially among liberals.51 On average, priming people to consider racial bias has the effect of convincing the average person who thinks the system is "about right" to instead believe the system is a "little too harsh." Liberals are already more likely than conservatives to say the justice system is more harsh than lenient — regardless of treatment effect. However, priming people to consider racial bias has the largest effect among "very liberal" respondents. There is only a weak effect among "very conservative" respondents.52 Part of the reason is that conservatives tend not to believe systemic racial bias exists in the criminal justice system whereas liberals do believe this. Consequently, "framing" criminal justice reform in terms of racial bias is more effective for liberals and moderates than among conservatives. Thus, these data indicate that charges of racial bias in the criminal justice system may effectively encourage liberals and moderates to consider reform; however, such charges will persuade few conservatives. Other approaches may be necessary to persuade conservatives to favor criminal justice reform.
Evaluations of Police Tactics and Use of Force[block]18[/block]
Most Americans think the police typically use appropriate force for each situation. Nearly two-thirds (63%) say the "tactics used by police officers" are "about right" while 30% say that they are too harsh and 7% say they aren't harsh enough. Most Americans (58%) also believe that police "only use deadly force when it is necessary" while 42% think that police are "too quick to use deadly force." Thus Americans are slightly more likely to believe police use lethal force unnecessarily than to believe routine police tactics are too harsh. Yet, Americans evaluate police tactics differently across race and ethnicity, income, age, and political ideology.
Six in 10 African Americans say police tactics are "too harsh" and 7 in 10 say police are too quick to resort to deadly force. In contrast, 7 in 10 whites think that police tactics are appropriate and that police only use necessary lethal force. Hispanics are in between: although a majority (54%) say police often unnecessarily resort to lethal force, a majority (58%) also say routine police tactics are reasonable.
Millennials are about 20 points more likely than seniors to say police are too quick to use deadly force (52% vs. 29%) and to think police tactics are too harsh (38% vs. 16%). White millennials are largely driving this shift: white millennials are 23 points more likely than white seniors to believe the police are too quick to use lethal force (47% vs. 24%). However, Hispanic and black millennials are about as likely as Hispanic and black seniors to believe police too often resort to excessive force.
Households making less than $30,000 a year are also about 11-14 points more likely than those making more than $60,000 a year to believe that police too easily resort to lethal force (52% vs. 38%) and that police use harsh tactics (36% vs. 25%). Whites are primarily driving this shift by age and income, as African Americans are no less likely to perceive harsh tactics with increasing age and income.
Partisans also disagree. Nearly two-thirds (63%) of Democrats say police are too quick to use lethal force while 80% of Republicans say police only use it when necessary. Democrats are also nearly four times as likely as Republicans to say police tactics are too harsh (40% vs. 11%).
Again, race matters more than partisanship in perceptions of police use of force. White Republicans are 41 points more likely than white Democrats to say police only use necessary deadly force (85% vs. 44%).53 However, black Republicans (36%) are only 16 points more likely than black Democrats (20%) to agree. In a similar fashion, Hispanic Republicans are only 16 points more likely than Hispanic Democrats to believe police only use necessary force. (58% vs. 42%).
This suggests that political ideology may affect evaluations of police use of force, though primarily for whites. This is a familiar pattern found in earlier analyses. White Republicans are far more likely than white Democrats to have a more positive opinion of the police; however, black Republicans do not differ much from black Democrats in their evaluations of police action.
Americans who score high on the Respect for Authority Index (RAI) are significantly more likely than those who score low to believe that police tactics are about right (79% vs. 39%) and to say that police only use necessary lethal force (69% vs. 41%). 54 (See Appendix E for RAI details.)
Evaluations of police use of force strongly correlate with favorability toward the police. Eight in 10 have a favorable opinion of the police among those who believe officers use appropriate force. Among those who believe police use excessive force, only four in 10 agree.
Perceptions of Police Accountability and Integrity[block]19[/block]
Nearly half of Americans (46%) believe police are non "generally held accountable for misconduct" when it occurs, while 54% believe they are. It is remarkable that nearly half believe misconduct "generally" is not brought to account. This view is held by larger shares of black and Hispanic Americans, younger people, lower income individuals, and Democrats.
About two-thirds (64%) of African Americans and 52% of Hispanics believe police "generally" are not held accountable for misconduct. In contrast, 57% of white Americans think police are held accountable.
Confidence in police accountability increases with age and income. Majorities of seniors (70%) and households earning more than $80,000 annually (60%) believe police are held accountable. In contrast, majorities of millennials (58%) and those earning less than $30,000 a year (54%) doubt police misconduct is punished.
Partisanship also strongly correlates with confidence in police accountability. Three-fourths (76%) of Republicans and a slim majority of independents (51%) believe police are held to account. In contrast, nearly 6 in 10 Democrats believe officers are not held accountable. These partisan differences are not merely a function of the parties' racial compositions. Sixty-five percent (65%) of white Democrats also worry officers are not held accountable, compared to only 26% of white Republicans.
Perceptions of police accountability are highly correlated with favorability toward the police. Americans who believe the police are held accountable for misconduct (81%) are 35 points more favorable toward the police than those who doubt police are brought account (46%).
Americans are also unconvinced that most police officers have integrity. Nearly half (49%) believe that "most police officers think they are above the law," while 51% disagree. Perceptions vary widely across race and ethnicity, income, and partisanship.
Six in ten African Americans and Hispanics believe officers think they are above the law. In contrast, a majority (54%) of white Americans believe police officers don't think they are above the law.
Democrats (61%) are also far more concerned than Republicans (36%) that the police think they are above the law. A majority (64%) of Republicans and a slim majority of independents (52%) think most police have integrity.
Majorities of millennials (63%) and of households making less than $30,000 (54%) a year believe that most officers think they are above the law, compared to 32% of seniors and 37% of households earning $80,000 or more annually. Instead, majorities of these $80K+ households (63%) and seniors (68%) believe police follow the law.
Institutions need legitimacy to function. A belief in the rule of law (and not individuals) fosters their legitimacy. It is thus problematic that nearly half of all Americans and majorities of blacks, Hispanics, young people, Democrats, and lower income individuals think "most" police officers don't believe the laws apply to them.
Respect for Authority[block]20[/block]
Social psychologists have found that respect for authority is a universal instinctive trait in human psychology.55 As Haidt and Graham (2007) explain, "People often feel respect, awe, and admiration toward legitimate authorities, and many cultures have constructed virtues related to good leadership, which is often thought to involve magnanimity, fatherliness, and wisdom…(Societies may also) value virtues related to subordination: respect, duty, and obedience."56 While respect for authority figures is a universal human trait, it is more salient for some.57 These individuals believe strong authority figures are necessary to maintain social order and prevent society from devolving into chaos. Might these individuals be predisposed to have more favorable opinions of the police irrespective of circumstances?
To investigate, the author created the Respect for Authority Index (RAI), a composite scale based on averaging responses to three questions that measured people's deference toward authority, without explicitly asking about police. (See Appendix E for question wording.) A higher RAI score indicates a respondent has a higher respect for authority.
Notably, the RAI index does not detect significant differences by demographic groups, with two exceptions. Forty-two percent (42%) of Americans over 55 are in the highest RAI quartile compared to 17% among those under 35. Ideological Conservatives (44%) are also much more likely to score in the highest quartile than Liberals (16%) and Libertarians (27%).58 Communitarians, who favor a bigger government that also promotes traditional values, are similar to Conservatives with 38% scoring in the top quartile.
Respect for authority is correlated with favorability toward the police. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of those who score in the highest RAI quartile have a favorable opinion of the police, compared to 45% among those scoring in the lowest quartile. These results go beyond partisanship. Democrats who score high on RAI (71%) are 20 points more likely than Democrats who score low (51%) to have a favorable opinion of the police.
People with a high respect for authority are also far more likely to support stop-and-frisk-like policies. Eighty-seven percent (87%) of this group favor allowing police officers to stop and search people who the officer thinks looks "suspicious or out of place," compared to 43% of low RAI scorers. High scorers are also 40 points more likely than low scorers to believe police use appropriate force (79% vs. 39%).
Americans who score high on respect for authority are far more concerned the police are under attack. Among high RAI scorers, 77% believe there is a "War on Police," 76% say that Americans show "too little respect" for police these days, and 86% say that police officers' jobs are "very dangerous." In contrast, low RAI scorers are about 40 points less likely to believe there is a war on police (42%), that people aren't sufficiently deferential (35%), and that police have very dangerous jobs (43%).
People who highly respect authority figures are far more likely to believe society will break down if strong institutions do not regulate conduct. Among this group, 63% believe that violent crime would "increase a lot" if the government legalized drugs, compared to only 26% among low RAI scorers. They may also fear that criticizing the police undermines their legitimacy and thereby fosters social instability. 59 Thus, reformers may be more effective by making clear their commitment to support police work to promote safety, security, order and justice.
Statistical Determinants of Favorability Toward Police[block]21[/block]
|Statistical Determinants of Favorability Toward Police|
| As the previous data makes clear, on average, black Americans, younger people, lower income individuals, urban residents, and liberals tend to have a more negative view of police integrity, use of force, impartiality, competency, accountability, and tactics. Conversely white Americans, older people, middle and higher income individuals, suburbanites, and conservatives tend to have a more positive view of the police. Hispanics typically take a middle ground, but are concerned about current policing practices.
If we are to improve public perceptions of the police and strengthen legitimacy of the law, ideally we'd like to know what's really driving favorable and unfavorable attitudes toward the police. This is a difficult task because these attitudes are confounded. For instance, a person who thinks the police aren't held accountable also likely thinks the police are racially biased. How might we unpack this puzzle?
Statistical analyses can offer some clues. A statistical test (logit regression) can simultaneously take into account people's backgrounds, experiences, and perceptions of police to determine which best predict favorable or unfavorable attitudes toward the local department. (Appendix I details which survey questions were used to measure each variable, and provides further methodological details).
What demographic variables best predict attitudes toward the police?
The previous survey results demonstrate that differences in favorability toward the police are most dramatic across racial groups. A statistical test (logit regression) confirms that both being African American and Hispanic strongly and significantly predict unfavorable attitudes toward the police; the prediction is especially stronger among African Americans.60 However, once age and education are accounted for in the model, being Hispanic no longer significantly predicts negative attitudes (see Appendix J.1).61 Perhaps with time, as Hispanics age and move up the educational and income ladders, the relationship between the police and the Hispanic community may improve. However, controlling for other standard demographic factors does not affect the relationship between being African American and favorability toward the police.
When considering demographic factors altogether, increases in age, education, and income significantly and positively predict palankus attitudes toward the police and being African American predict negative attitudes. Living in a city or suburb, one's gender, and being Hispanic do not significantly predict attitudes toward the police.
A later section will show that after controlling for perceptions of police use of force and impartiality, race is no longer a statistically significant predictor of attitudes toward the police.
Next we consider how well political ideology predicts attitudes toward the police while accounting for demographics.
Being conservative is consistently a large and significant predictor of positive attitudes toward the police. Tačiau identifying as politically liberal does not typically predict attitudes. These results suggest that police action notwithstanding, conservatives will tend to be more sympathetic to police than the average American (see Appendix J.2). As conservative writer Rachel Lu put it, "Conservatives like cops. We're law and order people, so we need to believe that the good guys are the ones with the badges."62
Perceptions of Police and Crime
Next, a series of statistical tests (bivariate logit regression) respectively examines the impact of concerns about crime, evaluations of police competency, empathy, use of force, integrity, impartiality, accountability, and personal contact on general favorability toward the police, while controlling for demographics and ideology.63 (See Appendix J.2 for full results.)
The statistical tests find each of these variables significantly predicts favorability toward the police, except for concerns about crime (see Appendix J.2).
Race no longer predicts favorability toward the police when we control for perceptions of police use of force, impartiality, or satisfaction with personal contact.64 This indicates that if one were to lygiuotis perceptions of police use of force, racial bias, or satisfaction with personal encounters, African Americans would have average views toward the police (i.e. they would be more favorable). Thus reformers may more effectively rebuild African Americans' confidence in law enforcement by improving public perceptions of police use of force, impartiality, and professionalism during encounters.
What Matters Most?
Each of these perceptions and reported experiences with police are highly correlated with one another. This makes it difficult to determine which best explain favorability toward the police. Thus caution should be used when combining all significant variables together in one statistical model. Doing so indicates that satisfaction with personal police contact may best predict favorable attitudes toward the police, even when accounting for the effects of these other variables.65 Satisfaction with police encounters also appears to "soak up" the statistical effects of perceptions of police empathy, experience with police mistreatment, and respect for authority. It's not just personal experience that matters: perceptions of racial bias in policing, police competency, empathy, and accountability continue to have distinct effects on favorability toward the police.
Change in Predicted Probability of Being Favorable Toward the Police
Note: Estimated via logit regression. All results shown are statistically significant p <.05; see Appendix J for full results. ^About a quarter of Americans did not report any interaction with police officers in the past 5 years.
Perceptions of police integrity, use of force, and impartiality seem welded together in the public mind, although each are technically separate constructs. In theory, one may feel the police are too quick to use lethal force but not believe the police are racially biased. However the data show that people who think the police use excessive force also tend to believe police are racially biased and lack personal integrity. Events that shape evaluations of police impartiality or integrity may by extension color perceptions of police use of force, and vice versa. Reformers might need to improve these public perceptions in tandem.
The Path Toward Reform[block]22[/block]
This section assesses public support for a variety of reforms including additional police training, police body cameras, civil asset forfeiture, independent investigations of police misconduct, and drug de-criminalization. This section also explores public attitudes towards a variety of possible policing practices including police use of military weapons, drones, racial profiling, police stops and searches of pedestrians, cars, houses, and telephone surveillance. It also examines the extent to which Americans believe citizens need to show greater respect for the police during their encounters, irrespective of police reform.
Although Americans disagree about how police do their jobs, majorities across racial and ethnic groups support a variety of proposed reforms intended to improve police-community relations, including:
- Additional police training (68%) >
- Police body cameras (89%) >
- Mandatory notification of voluntary stops (73%) >
- Independent investigations of police misconduct (79%) >
- Drug de-criminalization (54%) >
Similarly, majorities across racial and ethnic groups oppose a variety of possible police practices including:
- Racial profiling (63%) >
- Police militarization (54%) >
- Civil asset forfeiture (84%) >
- Warrantless searches (6 in 10) >
- Police profanity (77%) >
- Pretextual stops and searches (63%)>
Police Reform Fact Sheet[block]23[/block]
|Police Reform Fact Sheet|
Americans believe police officers could do more to deescalate situations. More than two-thirds (68%) say that "most" police officers "need additional training on how to handle confrontations with citizens." A third (32%) think officers already have sufficient training.
A solid majority of Americans approve of de-escalation training even though most believe police officers use appropriate force and have integrity. This implies one does not need to perceive systemic problems in order to support additional training. Instead, from the perspective of the average person, additional police training sounds sensible and useful both for police officers and citizens.
Majorities across racial groups agree, although African Americans (82%) and Latinos (78%) are more likely to believe the police could benefit from further training than Caucasians (62%).
Half of Republicans (50%) believe "police officers have the appropriate training needed" already for dealing with confrontations. In contrast, an overwhelming share of Democrats (84%) as well as two-thirds (66%) of independents say police could benefit from further training. It may be that Republicans perceive calls for additional training as a criticism of police authority. Advocates might be more effective in persuading Republicans if they explain how police training improves officer safety.
Police departments throughout the country have begun adopting new technologies to assist in their police work. Americans support such efforts, so long as they are convinced the technologies are necessary and will not invade their privacy.
Police Body Cameras[block]26[/block]
Almost all Americans (89%) support requiring police officers to wear body cameras to record their on-duty interactions: 53% "strongly support" and 35% "somewhat support" this proposal. A paltry 11% oppose police wearing body cameras. Support extends across demographic and political groups. In an era of hyper-partisanship, police body cameras attract bipartisan approval.
Many police officers have interpreted public support for body cameras as public censure of the police.66 However, Americans who have a favorable opinion of the police are as likely as those with unfavorable views to support police body cameras.
Moreover, most Americans (74%) believe such a policy will equally protect both the police officers that wear them and the citizens who interact with the police. Few expect cameras to exclusively protect citizens (15%) or police officers (11%).
Paying for Body Cameras Raising taxes to pay for police body cameras enjoys less support. A slim majority (51%) of Americans say they would pay higher taxes to outfit their local police department with body cameras, while 49% would not.
>Politics, rather than demographics, primarily drive attitudes toward tax increases for body cameras. Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Democrats and 52% of independents say they'd pay higher taxes for body cameras, while a majority (62%) of Republicans say they would not.
Different groups favor body cameras for different reasons. Those who trust the police may believe cameras protect officers from frivolous lawsuits or encourage citizens to behave better. Those distrustful of the police may believe cameras improve officer behavior and accountability.
Access to Body Camera Footage Although most Americans agree police should wear body cameras, only a slim majority (52%) say police officers should be allowed to watch body camera footage before making their official statements about violent encounters, while 48% oppose.
A majority (58%) of those with a favorable opinion of police in general say officers should be allowed to watch the video footage before making a statement. Of those with an unfavorable view, a larger majority (71%) say officers should be denied access to the footage before giving their official statement.
There are stark racial and political divisions as well. A majority of whites (57%), independents (52%), and Republicans (63%) say police should be allowed early access to video footage. In contrast, majorities of blacks (69%), Hispanics (56%), and Democrats (58%) oppose early access.
Confidence in the police matters here. Those with greater confidence trust officers not to use their early access to change their stories or mislead investigators. Those who lack confidence may think officers will use early access to absolve themselves from blame.
A majority (59%) of Americans support police departments "regularly" using unmanned aircraft or drones. However, support is "soft:" only 15% strongly support while 44% somewhat support using drones. About 4 in 10 (41%) oppose, including 25% who somewhat oppose and 17% who strongly oppose police drones.
Nevertheless, a majority (54%) of Americans are concerned police drones may invade their privacy. Since police drones are new, the nation has had little debate over their use. People may change their minds about them as they become more familiar with the technology and related policy issues.
Demographic groups don't vary much in their support for police drones, although seniors (71%) are more supportive than millennials (54%). Ideology does matter. Conservatives (63%) and Communitarians (67%) are considerably more likely than Liberals and Libertarians (50%) to support police regularly using drones. 67
Respect for authority figures and general trust in the police likely increases approval of police drones. Americans who score high on the Respect for Authority Index (RAI) are 25 points more likely than those who score low to oppose police using drone technology (71% vs. 46%).68 Similarly, those favorable toward the police are 31 points more likely than those with unfavorable views to support police drones (68% vs. 37%).
Democrats (57%), independents (57%), and tea party supporters (53%) are more wary of the risks drones present to privacy than Republicans who don't identify with the tea party (46%). Non-tea party Republicans stand out, with a majority (54%) who say they are not concerned about police drones. Libertarians (65%) are most concerned about drones invading privacy, followed by Liberals (58%), and then Communitarians (47%) and Conservatives (46%).
Young people are more concerned than older people about the risks of drones. Sixty percent (60%) of millennials are worried drones may invade people's privacy while 40% are not. Only 40% of seniors are concerned about drones and 60% are not.
Americans who score high on the Respect for Authority Index (RAI) are 19 points less likely than those who score low to be concerned about drones invading privacy (42% vs. 61%).
Predictably, people who trust the police are less concerned about them abusing new technology. Drone critics will need to explain how even a trustworthy police department may overstep its bounds with drones.
Although Americans are open to police using new technologies, they are wary of military equipment. A majority—54%—of Americans says police using military weapons and armored vehicles is "going too far" while 46% say these tools are "necessary for law enforcement purposes."
Majorities across racial groups oppose police militarization. Support for police militarization comes from older Americans, conservative Republicans, and those with high school educations or less. Americans over 65 years old support police using military weapons and armored vehicles by a margin of 61% to 39%. However, support for police militarization declines to 43% among those under 55, with 57% opposed. People with high school degrees or less are also more supportive (51%) of police militarization compared to those with college degrees (42%).
Conservatives and Republicans stand out in supporting police militarization. A majority of Republicans (65%) support police using military weapons and armored vehicles, while majorities of Democrats (60%) and independents (60%) oppose. Among ideological groups, Conservatives (60%) and Communitarians (51%) say police militarization is necessary today, while strong majorities of Liberals (75%) and Libertarians (60%) say it goes too far.69
Civil Asset Forfeiture[block]29[/block]
Civil asset forfeiture is a process by which police officers seize a person's property (e.g. their car, home, or cash) if they suspect the individual or property is involved with criminal activity. The individual does not need to be charged with, or convicted of, any crime for police to seize assets.70 In most jurisdictions police departments may keep the property they seize or the proceeds from its sale. What do Americans think of civil asset forfeiture?
Fully 84% of Americans oppose the practice of police taking "a person's money or property that is suspected to have been involved in a drug crime before the person is convicted of a crime." Only 16% approve.
In instances when police departments seize people's cars, houses, or cash, 76% of Americans say local departments should not be allowed to keep the assets. Instead, 48% say seized assets should go into the state general fund, while another 28% say assets should go into a dedicated state-level general law enforcement fund.
Although Americans prefer policing be done by local (not state or federal) authorities, only 24% think local police departments should keep the assets they seize. 71 Americans may believe transferring seized assets to a state-level fund will reduce local departments' material incentive to seize people's property.
Opposition to civil asset forfeiture cuts across demographics and partisanship. Majorities of whites (84%), blacks (86%), Hispanics (80%), Democrats (86%), independents (87%), and Republicans (76%) all oppose. In fact, virtually every major group surveyed solidly rejects the practice and prefers property only be seized after a person is convicted of a crime. Even those highly favorable toward the police staunchly oppose (78%) civil asset forfeiture.
Few understand the concept of civil asset forfeiture. Yet, once the concept is explained to them in concrete terms the public overwhelmingly rejects the practice. Thus, reformers' primary challenge is informing the public that this practice occurs. Policy reforms may follow broader public knowledge of civil forfeiture.
Investigating Police Misconduct[block]30[/block]
In most jurisdictions, local police departments typically conduct internal investigations of police officer misconduct complaints.72 However, 79% of Americans would prefer that an "outside law enforcement agency take over the investigation" when an officer is suspected of criminal wrongdoing. Alternatively, 21% favor police departments conducting internal investigations of their own officers.
The proposal to have outside investigations of misconduct enjoys broad public support. Overwhelming majorities across demographics and partisan groups, including majorities of blacks (82%), whites (81%), Hispanics (66%), Democrats (83%), independents (77%), and Republicans (76%), all favor outside investigations and prosecutions of officers accused of misconduct.
Blackstone’s Ratio: Is it more important to protect innocence or punish guilt?[block]31[/block]
|Blackstone's Ratio: Is it more important to protect innocence or punish guilt?|
|When crimes occur, societies often cannot know for certain if a suspect is guilty or innocent. Consequently, societies must grapple with what type of "mistakes" they will tolerate more—sometimes punishing or scrutinizing innocent people or sometimes allowing guilty people go free.73
The American system, grounded in the British Common Law, has long erred on the side of protecting innocence. Thus we presume an accused person's innocence until they are proven guilty. As the preeminent English jurist William Blackstone wrote,"(B)etter that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer."74 This principle can also be found in religious texts and in the writings of the American Founders.75 Benjamin Franklin went further arguing "it is better a hundred guilty persons should escape than one innocent person should suffer."76
Other notable historical figures have worried more about punishing the guilty. For instance German chancellor Otto von Bismarck is believed to have remarked: "it is better that ten innocent men suffer than one guilty man escape."77 Che Guevara and 20th century communist movements in China, Vietnam, and Cambodia, also employed similar reasoning. 78
The survey posed dilemma to the American people, asking respondents which of the following scenarios they believe would be worse:
The survey found that a majority (60%) of Americans say it would be worse to have 20,000 innocent people in prison, while 40% say it would be worse to have 20,000 people who are actually guilty but not in prison.
Majorities across demographic and political groups prioritize protecting the innocent. African Americans (60%), Caucasians (61%), and Hispanics (55%) agree imprisoning innocent people is worse than allowing guilty people go free. People with high school degrees (43%) and incomes less than $30,000 a year (47%) are more likely than those with post-graduate degrees (27%) and making more than $60,000 a year (34%) to prioritize imprisoning guilty people.
Majorities of Democrats (64%), independents (60%), and Republicans (55%) all agree that it's worse to imprison 20,000 innocent people than allow 20,000 guilty people go free. However, Democrats are slightly more likely than Republicans to agree.
Strikingly, Donald Trump's early core supporters (from November 2015) stand out with a majority (52%) who say it's worse to not punish the guilty. They are distinct from other Republican voters. For instance, a majority (65%) of Ted Cruz's early core supporters say it's worse to imprison the innocent.79
People who care more about punishing guilty people also tend to be less concerned about due process. Americans who say it's worse to allow guilty people go free than to imprison innocent people are about 15-30 points more likely to support warrantless police stops and searches in a variety of situations.80
This dilemma (to prioritize protecting innocence or punishing guilt) informs contemporary debates over law enforcement and reform. Take for instance New York City's Stop and Frisk program which failed to uncover wrongdoing in 88% of the over 2 million pedestrian stops since 2010. 81 Was this policy worth it? Observers with the same set of facts have reached dramatically different conclusions.82 Individuals have different value priorities that lead them to prioritize either protecting the innocent or punishing the guilty. Law enforcement reformers across the political spectrum might consider how their audience makes this trade-off.
Police Stops, Searches, and Surveillance[block]32[/block]
The police traffic stop is the most common form of contact citizens have with police officers.83 If the officer has probable cause, she may also search a person's vehicle. Officers may also stop and in some cases search pedestrians, if the officer reasonably suspects the person has committed or is about to commit a crime.84 Police may also indirectly interact with individuals who are criminal suspects when conducting a search of their home or when monitoring their phone calls, with a court order.85 This next section explores public attitudes about a variety of possible police practices regarding police stops and searches of pedestrians, cars, houses, and attitudes toward police surveillance.
When it comes to traffic and pedestrian stops, Americans solidly oppose police using someone's race as a factor in deciding whom to stop.
Two-thirds (63%) of Americans oppose police officers "stopping motorists or pedestrians of certain racial or ethnic groups because the officer believes that these groups are more likely than others to commit certain types of crimes." This percentage includes 34% who strongly oppose and 29% who somewhat oppose this practice. The remaining third (37%) support racial profiling, including 10% who strongly support and 26% who somewhat support it. Despite strong public opposition, fully 65% of Americans also believe police regularly use racial profiling for traffic and pedestrian stops.
Oddly, among Americans who believe the U.S. justice system treats all groups equally, nearly half also concede that police commonly racially profile people. Thus some Americans may continue to insist the system treats everyone impartially even though they believe police engage in racial profiling. This indicates that some believe racial profiling is consistent with a fair justice system.
African Americans are the most opposed to racial profiling (77%), although majorities of both Latinos (62%) and whites (62%) also oppose. Black Americans are also nearly twice as likely to "strongly oppose" (56%) profiling as Latinos and whites (31%). Latinos and Caucasians are not significantly different in their support for racial profiling.
Partisans see profiling differently. A strong majority (73%) of Democrats and independents (64%) oppose it while roughly 3 in 10 support its use. In contrast, a slim majority (51%) of Republicans support racial profiling while nearly as many (49%) oppose. However, Black Republicans differ from their fellow partisans: 65% oppose racial profiling and 35% support it.86 Hispanic Republicans also oppose by a margin of 57% to 43%.
In addition, although all age groups oppose racial profiling, millennials (69%) are more opposed than seniors (54%).
People who strongly support racial profiling are more likely to prioritize punishing guilt than protecting innocence. Among those who strongly favor police racial profiling, a majority (53%) say it would be worse to allow 20,000 guilty people go free rather than wrongly imprison 20,000 innocent people. Conversely, among those who strongly oppose racial profiling, 69% say it would be worse to imprison 20,000 innocent people than to allow 20,000 guilty people go unpunished. (Also see Blackstone's Ratio: Is it More Important to Protect Innocence or Punish Guilt.)
Notification of Voluntary Interactions with Police[block]34[/block]
The law often requires citizens to comply with police during official police "stops" or justified searches of a person or their property. But not all interactions constitute official police stops, and citizens may refuse some searches. However, most jurisdictions do not require officers to inform citizens of their right to decline. Do Americans think police officers should be required to tell citizens when they are not being officially detained and when searches are voluntary? Yes.
A strong majority (73%) of Americans would support a law to require officers to tell citizens if they may refuse a stop or a requested search. This includes 37% who strongly favor and 36% who somewhat favor. A quarter of Americans oppose such a law, including 18% who somewhat oppose and 9% who strongly oppose.
This proposal enjoys strong support across partisans (Democrats (76%), independents (74%), and Republicans (67%)) and demographic groups. However, African Americans (63%) are somewhat less likely than white and Hispanic Americans (74%) to support this requirement.
Police Professionalism During Police Stops[block]35[/block]
About a fifth of Americans report a police officer having used profanity with them. An overwhelming majority (77%) of Americans say police officers should be prohibited from using profanity or swearing at citizens while on the job. Twenty-three percent (23%) say police ought to be allowed to swear at citizens while on duty.
Strong majorities across demographic and political groups similarly agree that on-duty police officers should be prohibited from swearing at citizens. (This includes nearly equal shares of Caucasians (77%), African Americans (82%), Hispanics (72%), Democrats (77%), independents (77%), and Republicans (75%).)
Although Americans who score high on the Respect for Authority Index (RAI) tend to favor giving police more latitude generally, they are no more likely to support allowing police profanity. This is perhaps unsurprising since those with above average respect for authority also expect authority figures to demonstrate magnanimity and fatherliness.87
Do Americans Know the Law Regarding Police Stops?[block]36[/block]
|Do Americans Know the Law Regarding Police Stops?|
| Most Americans know their rights and responsibilities regarding interactions with the police. Nearly 9 in 10 (86%) Americans know drivers must show police officers photo identification if requested, while 14% think this is not required. Slightly fewer, but still an overwhelming majority (80%) know that a person may refuse a police officer's request to search the person's car. A fifth (20%) believe individuals must comply with a requested vehicle search. Seventy percent (70%) also correctly believe citizens are not required to tell police officers where they are going if asked, while 30% believe people are required to answer.
Americans vary little across demographic and political groups in knowing their basic rights and responsibilities when interacting with police officers, with a few exceptions. Hispanics are about twice as likely as whites to believe they must tell a police officer where they are going if asked (47% vs. 25%) and to believe they can't refuse a police officer's request to search their car (34% vs. 16%). African Americans are between whites and Hispanics. High school graduates (38%) are about twice as likely as college graduates (19%) to incorrectly believe that a citizen is required by law to tell a police officer where they are going when asked. Nevertheless majorities of Americans overall tend to know the law regarding police stops.
Who Should be Eligible for Police Stops?[block]37[/block]
Police may pull over a driver of a vehicle to issue a traffic violation or investigate a possible crime if the officer has reasonable suspicion that a crime has or is about to occur. The officer may search a person's car if the officer has probable cause.88 Police may also briefly stop pedestrians and search them for weapons given a reasonable suspicion the person may be involved in criminal activity.
What do Americans believe devrait give police officers justifiable grounds to stop and search a person? We asked respondents about hypothetical police practices to discern their views about the proper standard to govern police searches.
Two-thirds (66%) of Americans favor allowing police in their area to "stop and search a person for weapons or drugs" if that person "looks suspicious or out of place," including 31% who strongly favor and 35% who somewhat favor. A third say "looking suspicious or out of place" is not sufficient reason to stop and search a person for weapons or drugs, including 21% who somewhat oppose and 13% who strongly oppose.
African Americans (52%) are considerably less likely than Hispanics (76%) and Caucasians (66%) to support giving police officers such discretion. Age also matters: Baby Boomers (82%) are most supportive of the described practice and millennials (55%) least.
Republicans (75%) are more likely than Democrats (60%) and independents (64%) to allow police to use their subjective judgment about who looks out of place when deciding whom to stop and search. "Very liberal" respondents stand out as the only political group with a majority (60%) opposed and 40% in favor.
Those who score high (87%) on the Respect for Authority Index (RAI) are 44 points more likely than those who score low (43%) to allow police to stop and search people based on looking suspicious or out of place.89
Americans who have experienced a police search, or know someone who has, are somewhat more skeptical of giving police this kind of autonomy. Nevertheless, majorities with (59%) and without (70%) this experience support such discretion.
The practice described rests, at best, on questionable constitutional grounds. 90 It is somewhat similar to what critics accused the New York Police Department's Stop and Frisk program of doing.91 Critics argued that the NYPD gave officers too much latitude in deciding whom to stop and had violated Americans' Fourth Amendment protections from unreasonable searches and seizures.92
Public support for the described practice is not unconditional. Individuals might oppose it if they were to learn they disagreed with police about what exactly "looks suspicious or out of place." Furthermore, since 63% oppose racial profiling, Americans would oppose police discretion informed by racial bias.
Reformers might consider why many Americans support such ostensibly unconstitutional practices. Many may personally feel uncomfortable around individuals who appear out of place and believe their discomfort should govern police stops. Therefore, reformers might explain the value of Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure. Among audiences who revere the US Constitution, reformers might expound on why the founders implemented these protections.
Do Americans Think Police Searches and Frisks Help Fight Crime?[block]38[/block]
Americans believe that police stops and searches of individuals usually reveal useful information to fight crime. More than three-fourths (77%) of Americans believe police searches reveal useful information at least "some of the time" (54%), including 20% who say "most of the time" and 3% who say "almost every time." Only 23% think police searches rarely yield evidence of criminal wrongdoing, including 18% who say it's "not that often," and 5% who say "hardly ever."
Among those who think searches reveal useful evidence most of the time, 88% favor police conducting searches of people who the officer thinks looks suspicious, while 13% oppose. However among those who think searches reveal evidence "not that often," only 41% support giving police more latitude and 57% are opposed.
In short, Americans appear more likely to allow officers to use greater discretion when deciding whom to stop and search if they believe searches reliably uncover evidence of criminal wrongdoing. However, some research suggests police stops and searches may not be particularly efficacious.93 These data provide some indication that if this were generally known, the public might oppose giving police such latitude in conducting stops and searches.
Do Americans Think Warrants Are Necessary for Police Searches of Cars and Houses?[block]39[/block]
The Supreme Court has ruled that police officers are allowed to search cars without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe that a person has engaged in some form of criminal activity.94 However, officers are not permitted to routinely search people's cars for weapons, drugs, or contraband "just in case." Searching a suspected criminal's house, in most circumstances, requires police to first obtain a warrant.95
Would Americans tolerate police searches without probable cause or a warrant? The answer is no: majorities think law enforcement ought to meet a higher standard before subjecting even suspected criminals to additional scrutiny.
Vehicle Searches Americans acutely concerned about drug prohibition might support police using minor traffic stops to routinely check cars for illegal drugs and other contraband. Although this practice is unconstitutional, some might reason: if one isn't breaking the law, one should have nothing to worry about.96 Do Americans think police should use minor traffic stops to routinely check cars for illegal activity—just in case?
No. A solid majority of Americans—63%—say police officers should not be allowed to routinely search cars for drugs during minor traffic stops, unless they get a court order. A third say police should take the opportunity to check for drugs even without a court order.
Majorities across demographic and political groups oppose police using minor traffic stops to routinely check cars for drugs. However, African Americans (70%) are more opposed than Hispanics (56%) and Caucasians (64%). Similarly, majorities of partisans oppose such a policy, although Democrats (68%) and non-partisan independents (71%) are more opposed than Republicans (54%). Liberals (18%) and Libertarians (26%) are the least supportive of such a practice, compared to Conservatives (37%) and Communitarians (61%). Communitarians stand out with a strong majority (61%) favoring routine vehicle searches.
Americans who believe the "war on drugs" has been worth the costs to taxpayers and those who strongly oppose legalizing marijuana stand out with majorities (56% and 56% respectively) who say police devrait use minor traffic stops to routinely search cars for drugs. This data indicate being strongly committed to the Drug War may foster support for unconstitutional practices.
Home Searches What about searching a person's home? If a police officer suspects a person deals drugs, do Americans think police ought to obtain a court order before entering the house to search for drugs or other illegal activity?
Yes. A strong majority 66% of Americans oppose police searching the homes of individuals suspected of dealing drugs without first obtaining a court order. A third say police should not have to get a court order first. This indicates that for most Americans, suspected law-breaking does not justify warrantless searches.
Strong majorities across demographic and political groups agree that police ought to get a warrant before searching a suspected drug dealer's house (including whites (69%, blacks (68%), Hispanics (54%), Democrats (63%), independents (72%), Republicans (62%). However, women are about 15 points more likely than men to approve of such warrantless home searches of suspected drug dealers (41% vs. 26%). Similarly, high school graduates (40%) are about twice as likely as post-graduates (19%) to approve.
Libertarians (81%) and Liberals (79%) are the most opposed to warrantless home searches of suspected drug dealers compared to 70% of Conservatives and 54% of Communitarians. In fact, Communitarians are more than twice as likely as Libertarians and Liberals to support such warrantless searches (46% vs. 20%).97
Americans who strongly oppose legalizing marijuana (47%) are about 20 points more likely than those who strongly support doing so (25%) to favor warrantless searches of suspected drug dealers' homes. Some Americans seem willing to sacrifice rule of law and due process to fight the Drug War. Reformers may wish to keep in mind that those committed to drug prohibition may not respond to constitutional arguments criticizing warrantless searches.
Americans may be willing to make exceptions regarding search warrants depending on their emotional reaction to the suspect. In a survey conducted several days after the November 2015 Paris attacks, 51% said police ought to obtain a court order before searching the home of a person who might be sympathetic to terrorists.98 This share is 15 points lower than the 66% in that same survey who said the police should first obtain a court order before searching the home of suspected drug dealers.
A majority of men (58%), non-evangelicals (54%), college graduates (60%), white Americans (54%) and black Americans (52%) oppose warrantless searches of people's homes who police believe might be sympathetic to terrorists. However, a majority of women (56%), evangelicals (56%), high-school graduates (64%), and Hispanics (63%) favor such warrantless searches. Differences in educational attainment appear to largely underlie the ethnicity gap on this question.
Although partisans largely agree, there are striking ideological differences. Libertarians are most opposed (72%) to warrantless searches of people who police suspect might be sympathetic to terrorists. This share is 15 points higher than Liberals (57%) opposed. In contrast, a slim majority (52%) of Conservatives favor such warrantless searches while 48% oppose. Communitarians stand out as most comfortable with such warrantless searches with 69% in support and 31% opposed.98
Although the United States demands equality before the law, reformers should keep in mind that the public may tolerate disparate treatment depending on their emotional reaction to the suspect.
Interestingly, by June 2016, opposition rebounded to 62% saying the police ought to obtain a court order before searching the home of a person who might be sympathetic to terrorists.
Do Americans Think Warrants Are Necessary for Police Monitoring Phone Calls?[block]40[/block]
By a margin of 76% to 24%, Americans highly oppose police monitoring phone calls of individuals suspected of criminal activity without a court order.
Majorities across racial groups oppose warrantless phone monitoring of suspected criminals. However, there are some differences. Although a majority (60%) of Hispanics oppose such a practice, they are about 20 points less likely than blacks and whites (8 in 10) to oppose warrantless wiretapping. Americans with high school degrees (31%) and incomes below $30,000 (32%) are about twice as likely as those with post-graduate degrees (15%) and household incomes above $80,000 (12%) to support this kind of practice.
Summary: Tolerance for Warrantless Searches
Americans generally oppose police searches of cars and houses and monitoring phone calls without a court order. Several patterns emerge across demographics and ideology. Majorities oppose such unconstitutional searches, but women, evangelicals, high school graduates, and Hispanics are relatively more supportive. Men, non-evangelicals, college graduates, and non-Hispanics are less supportive of warrantless searches and phone monitoring.
Perhaps surprisingly, Democrats and Republicans tend to oppose warrantless police searches and phone monitoring by similar margins. (They differ in support for police checking cars for drugs during traffic stops, however.) Instead, striking differences emerge by ideology. Libertarians and Liberals are most skeptical of warrantless searches and surveillance, followed by Conservatives, and then Communitarians. Libertarians and Communitarians are polar opposites with the former roughly 20-35 points less supportive.
War on Drugs[block]41[/block]
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, police make about 1.6 million drug arrests each year.100 Some say legalizing or decriminalizing drugs like marijuana could improve police-citizen relations by reducing the frequency and intensity of interactions.101 Such changes could also free up additional resources for police to control property and violent crime. What do Americans think?
Fifty-seven percent (57%) of Americans say they would favor legalizing marijuana and having the government regulate it like alcohol. Only 15% favor a similar policy for drugs like cocaine.
Although few Americans support across the board drug legalization, they are open to decriminalizing drugs. A majority—54%—support "re-categorizing drug offenses from felonies to civil offenses" and instead treating them "like minor traffic violations rather than crimes."
Support for legalizing marijuana enjoys similar support across most demographic groups. However, Americans over 65 are the only age cohort opposed to legalization, by a margin of 36% to 64%. Results are reversed among millennials, with 64% in favor and 36% opposed.
Conservatives stand out as highly opposed to marijuana legalization by a margin of 64% to 36%. Conversely, solid majorities of Liberals (79%) Libertarians (69%), and a slim majority of Communitarians (53%), favor legalizing marijuana and regulating it like alcohol.102
Similarly, most groups favor re-categorizing drug offenses from felonies to civil offenses. There are a few exceptions: a slim majority of women (52%) oppose decriminalizing drugs, while 59% of men favor. Similarly 55% of seniors oppose, but 56% of Americans under 65 favor decriminalization. Conservatives strongly oppose (64%) decriminalizing drug offenses. In contrast, Liberals (74%) and Libertarians (67%) solidly support it, while Communitarians are evenly divided (50%).
Who Needs to Change: Citizens, Cops or Both?[block]42[/block]
This report has examined public support for reforms police departments could implement in efforts to improve relations with their communities. However, some Americans believe that their fellow citizens, not the police, are primarily responsible for strained relations. They believe too few people show adequate respect for the law and the law's enforcers and thus citizens should improve their behavior first. For instance, one online commenter wrote:
"I wonder how many deaths or injuries by law enforcement would have been prevented if the person would have shown respect to the officer, obeyed the directions, and didn't try to resist arrest or flee. We need to better support our officers and not try to defend the criminals who get by with all of the above."
Two-thirds (65%) of respondents say police officers have "very dangerous" jobs, 30% say police jobs are "somewhat dangerous" and only 5% say their jobs are not very dangerous. 103 In addition, most Americans (58%) believe their fellow citizens show "too little respect" for the police these days. Only a third think people show sufficient respect. Many Americans also don't perceive systemic problems in policing. Americans give high marks to local law enforcement for enforcing the law (59%), using the appropriate amount of force (58%), being courteous (57%), being honest (57%), protecting people from violent crime (56%), treating all racial groups equally (56%), responding quickly to a call for help (56%), and caring about their community (55%). Furthermore, 54% believe officers are generally held accountable for misconduct when it occurs. (See Appendix B for a full breakdown.)
If people a) believe police are in a dangerous line of work, b) believe citizens disrespect the police, and c) do not perceive systemic problems in law enforcement—it becomes less surprising that 61% of Americans think there is a "war on police" today.
What does the public think a "war on police" means? The term "war" can mean "a state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties." Police and citizens do have violent interactions; some have latterly become public controversies. But "war" also means "a condition of active antagonism or contention."104 There is reason to believe that most Americans think the "war on police" is largely the latter given that those who argue of its existence say it's a rhetorical war. For instance, Heather MacDonald argues in her recent book The War on Cops that the war is due to"virulent anti-cop rhetoric" (emphasis added). 105 Furthermore police fatalities are lower today than in the past. 106
Although people across racial and partisan groups believe the police have dangerous jobs, they disagree about whether police are disrespected or are under attack.
White Americans are 20-30 points more likely than African Americans to say people aren't showing enough respect for police (64% vs. 34%) and to believe there is a war on police (64% vs. 46%). Hispanics fall in between with a plurality (45%) who say police don't get adequate respect and a slim majority (52%) who believe there is a war on police. In contrast, majorities of African Americans say there is no war on police (54%) and that officers receive adequate respect (54%).
Partisanship also matters. Republicans are about 30-40 points more likely than Democrats to believe that police aren't receiving adequate deference (77% vs. 45%) and to believe the police are under attack (82% vs. 40%). Independents lean with Republicans, with 56% who believe people don't show enough respect for officers and 56% who believe there is a war on police.
Again, race matters more than partisanship. White Republicans are the most likely group to believe the police aren't receiving enough respect; they are nearly 30 points more likely than white Democrats to feel this way (81% vs. 51%). However, black Republicans are no more likely than black Democrats to agree (35% vs. 39%).107 Older Americans are also more concerned for police than younger Americans. Seniors (78%) are 33 points more likely than millennials (45%) to think the police aren't getting the respect they deserve. Seniors are also 21 points more likely than millennials to believe that a war is being waged on cops (76% vs. 55%).
Unsurprisingly, the Respect for Authority Index (RAI) is highly correlated with concern about people respecting police.108 Three-fourths (76%) of those who have a high respect for authority believe the police aren't getting the respect they deserve, compared to only 35% of those who have a low RAI score.
Our look at public opinion and the perceived "war on police" offers lessons to criminal justice reformers. Many people have had good experiences with the police and don't perceive systemic problems in policing. Such people might assume that citizens instigate conflict with the police. Some people greatly trust authority figures like the police whom they see as the ultimate linchpin of societal order. People with such experience and views of authority may see intensifying criticism of the police and impassioned calls for reform ("active antagonism and contention") as an attack on police legitimacy, and thereby, law and order.
As they seek to persuade their fellow citizens, reformers should consider the implications of this analysis. Has their audience generally had positive or negative interactions with the police? Do they have a propensity to trust authority figures? If so, reformers should present evidence that speaks directly to these experiences and assumptions. Reformers might indicate their shared commitment to helping police to promote law and order. They can then explain how their reforms will accomplish these goals and improve police safety and police-community relations.
Conclusion: Bridging the Racial Divide in Evaluations of the Police[block]43[/block]
Black, white, and Hispanic Americans see the police differently. They differ about police efficacy, impartiality, honesty, empathy, tactics, and accountability. Their views may vary in part because Hispanic, black, and white Americans report considerably different personal and vicarious experiences with police officers. For instance, some groups are more likely to report verbal or physical abuse from officers. Taken together, these disparate perceptions and reported experiences form a deep divide in favorability toward law enforcement.
However, many overlook agreement among these groups. Americans across race and ethnicity agree on what policing should be and on which reforms should be adopted.
Blacks, whites, and Hispanics all agree on the top priorities for law enforcement, maintaining current levels of policing presence in their communities, and the danger inherent in police work. Majorities of Hispanic, white, and black Americans also support a variety of police reforms: more training, body cameras, warnings to citizens about stops and searches, and independent investigations of alleged police misconduct. Similarly, majorities oppose a variety of possible police practices: racial profiling, routine use of military weapons and armored vehicles, pretextual vehicle stops to search for drugs without a warrant, seizing personal and private property before a person is convicted of a crime (civil asset forfeiture), and officers swearing at citizens. Majorities also support decriminalizing drug offenses from felony to civil charges, a change that might improve interactions between police and citizens.
Americans may consider police reforms without perceiving all possible problems and systemic biases in policing. Reformers need not insist that others agree with, and adopt their perceptions of policing today. Instead, by acknowledging concerns and emphasizing shared beliefs about what policing ought to be, reformers can forge a consensus to improve policies on behalf of officers, citizens, and the larger community.
1 In this study the term ‘Hispanic' is used interchangeably with ‘Latino,' ‘Caucasian' interchangeably with ‘white,' and ‘African American' interchangeably with ‘black.'
2 Louis Harris and Associates Study No. 2043, 1970, cited in Michael J. Hindelang, "Public Opinion Regarding Crime, Criminal Justice, and Related Topics." Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 11 (1974): 101-116.
3 See Linquin Cao, James Frank, and Francis T. Cullen, "Race, Community Context and Confidence in the Police," American Journal of Police 15 (1996): 3-22; Tom Tyler and Jeffrey Fagan, "Legitimacy and Cooperation: Why Do People Help the Police Fight Crime in Their Communities?" Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 6 (2008): 232-275; Andrew V. Papachristos, Tracey L. Meares, and Jeffrey Fagan, "Why Do Criminals Obey the Law? The Influence of Legitimacy and Social Networks on Active Gun Offenders," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 102 (2009): 397-440; Tom R. Tyler, "The Role of Perceived Injustice in Defendants' Evaluations of Their Courtroom Experience," Law & Society Review 18 (1984): 51-74; Tom Tyler, Why People Obey the Law (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006); Jonathan Blanks, "How Pretextual Stops Undermine Police Legitimacy." Case W. Res. L. Review 66 (2016): 931-946.
4 To be sure, advocates of cutting police presence are not necessarily "anti-cop" either; however, it is hard to argue someone is "anti-cop" if that person doesn't want to cut the police force.
5 Data for support of racial profiling by race/ethnicity and partisanship come from the combined June 2016 and November 2015 national surveys (N=4000), which offer greater precision and smaller margins of error for subgroups. (Unweighted: Black Republicans=45.)
6 High Sensitivity to Harm Index (SHI) scores are defined as those in the top quartile, while low SHI scores are defined as those in the bottom quartile.
7 Results are from the November 2015 Cato Institute/YouGov National Survey, conducted November 19 to 24, 2015.
8 High Respect for Authority (RAI) scores are defined as those in the top quartile, while low RAI scores are defined as those in the bottom quartile.
9 Data for this section come from the combined June 2016 and November 2015 national surveys (N=4000), which offer greater precision and smaller margins of error for subgroups. (Unweighted: Black Republicans=45, Hispanic Republicans=165, White Republicans=1193, Black Democrats=630, Hispanic Democrats=409, White Democrats=634.)
10 Results are from the November 2015 Cato Institute/YouGov National Survey, conducted November 19 to 24, 2015.
11 Millennials in this report are defined as Americans under the age of 35.
12 Some have claimed that individuals critical of policing practices, or those who have negative feelings toward the police, are also anti-cop; see Matt Wilstein, "'Daily Show's' Trevor Noah on Police Shootings: 'You Can Be Pro-Cop and Pro-Black'," Daily Beast, July 8, 2016, http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/08/daily-show-s-trevor-noah-on-police-shootings-you-can-be-pro-cop-and-pro-black.html.
13 To be sure, advocates of shrinking police departments are not necessarily "anti-cop" either; however, it's difficult to argue a person is if they do not want to cut the police force.
14 See Linquiin Cao, James Frank, and Francis T. Cullen, "Race, Community Context and Confidence in the Police." American Journal of Police 15 (1996): 3-22. Tom Tyler, and Jeffrey Fagan, "Legitimacy and Cooperation: Why Do People Help the Police Fight Crime in Their Communities?" Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 6 (2008): 231-275; Andrew V. Papachristos, Tracey L. Meares, and Jeffrey Fagan, "Why Do Criminals Obey the Law? The Influence of Legitimacy and Social Networks on Active Gun Offenders," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 102 No. 2 (2009): 397-440; Tom R. Tyler, "The Role of Perceived Injustice in Defendants' Evaluations of Their Courtroom Experience," Law & Society Review 18 (1984): 51-74; Tom Tyler, Why People Obey the Law (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006); Jonathan Blanks, "How Pretextual Stops Undermine Police Legitimacy," Case W. Res. L. Review 66 (2016): 931-946.
15 Andrew V. Papachristos, Tracey L. Meares, and Jeffrey Fagan, "Why Do Criminals Obey the Law? The Influence of Legitimacy and Social Networks on Active Gun Offenders," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 102, no. 2 (2009): 397-440.
16 Ben Brown and Wm Reed Benedict, "Perceptions of the Police: Past findings, Methodological Issues, Conceptual Issues and Policy Implications," Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 25 (2002): 543-580; W. S. Wilson Huang and Michael S. Vaughn, "Support and Confidence: Public Attitudes Toward the Police," in Americans View Crime and Justice: A National Public Opinion Survey, edited by Timothy J. Flanagan and Dennis R. Longmire, (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1996).
17ème Louis Harris and Associates Study No. 2043, 1970, cited in Michael J. Hindelang,"Public Opinion Regarding Crime, Criminal Justice, and Related Topics." Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 11 (1974):101-116.
18 These data come from the combined June 2016 and November 2015 national surveys (N=4000), which offer greater precision and smaller margins of error for subgroups. (Unweighted: Black Republicans=45.)
19ème All racial groups become more supportive of the police as they age; however, age does not erase the race gap.
20 US Census. US Census Quick Facts. (Washington, D.C.: United States Census Bureau, 2014), https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/RHI725214/00; Ronald Weitzer, "The Puzzling Neglect of Hispanic Americans in Research on Police–Citizen Relations," Ethnic and Racial Studies 37 (2013): 1995-2013.
21ème Ronald Weitzer, "The Puzzling Neglect of Hispanic Americans in Research On Police–Citizen Relations," Ethnic and Racial Studies 37 (2013): 1995-2013; James R. Lasley, "The Impact of the Rodney King Incident on Citizen Attitudes Toward the Police," Policing and Society 3 (1994): 245-255, cited in W. S. Wilson Huang, and Michael S. Vaughn, "Support and Confidence: Public Attitudes Toward the Police," in Americans View Crime and Justice: A National Public Opinion Survey, edited by Timothy J. Flanagan and Dennis R. Longmire (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1996).
22 Despite falling crime rates nationally, some surveys show Americans continue to believe crime is getting worse each year. For instance, Gallup found about two-thirds of Americans say there is more crime in the United States today that there was a year ago, and that this share has increased over time. Even at a local level, about half of Americans say there is "more crime" in their area than there was a year ago. However, although Americans may say crime is higher, this report shows they are less concerned about being a crime victim than in the past, which reflects the fact that crime rates are decreasing. See Justin McCarthy, "Most Americans Still See Crime Up Over Last Year," Gallup November 21, 2014, http://www.gallup.com/poll/179546/americans-crime-last-year.aspx.
23 This data is compiled from the following surveys, which are available at the Roper Center or from the author: 1988, Gallup/Times Mirror; 1994 and 1995, Princeton Survey Research Associates (PSRA)/Times Mirror; 1996, PSRA/Kaisier Foundation; 1997, PSRA/Pew Research Center; 1999, 2001, 2004, 2006, 2007 PSRA/Pew; 2015 and 2016, YouGov/Cato Institute. Crime statistics compiled from FBI, Uniform Crime Reports, prepared by the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data.
24 Christine Eith and Matthew R. Durose, Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008, edited by Bureau of Justice Statistics (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 2011), https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpp08.pdf.
25 Several scholarly studies find that personal satisfaction with police contact may be the strongest determinant of positive attitudes toward the police. See W. S. Wilson Huang and Michael S. Vaughn, "Support and Confidence: Public Attitudes toward the Police," in Americans View Crime and Justice: A National Public Opinion Survey, edited by Timothy J. Flanagan and Dennis R. Longmire (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1996); Richard Scaglion and Richard G. Condon, "Determinants of Attitudes toward City Police," Criminology 17, no. 4 (1980): 485-94.
26 Ronald Weitzer and Steven A. Tuch, "Racially Biased Policing: Determinants of Citizen Perceptions," Social Forces 83 (2005): 1009-1030.
27 Americans who have had personal contact with a police officer in the past 5 years were asked to rate their level of personal satisfaction with their encounter on a scale of 1 (low satisfaction) to 5 (high satisfaction). Americans who rated their encounters as either 4 or 5 are considered "highly satisfied." Americans' average level of satisfaction with personal police encounters is 3.83, with 67% who rated their interactions with police as a 4 or 5. About a fifth of Americans say they did not interact with police over the past five years. Racial groups were about equally likely to report having had some contact with police in the past 5 years.
28 Data on frequency of police stops in this section come from a national Cato Institute/YouGov survey conducted August 10 to 12, 2016 (N=1000), which did not include oversamples of African-Americans and Hispanics. Thus, readers should exercise additional caution when interpreting these results with smaller sample sizes (African American (N=108) Hispanic (N=115)). Question wording: "Over the past five years, about how many times would you say you were stopped by the police?"
29 Model estimated via OLS regression
30 Black M=1.34 SD=1.62, white M=.91 SD=1.72.
31 Stereo Williams, "Chris Rock, Isaiah Washington, and Racial Profiling: Why Black People Shouldn't Have to 'Adapt'," Daily Beast, April 2, 2015. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/02/chris-rock-isaiah-washington-and-racial-profiling-why-black-people-shouldn-t-have-to-adapt.html.
32 Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) and Robert Smith report being pulled over between three to seven times per year. Keith L. Alexander, "'Who Is This Robert Smith?': A Quiet Billionaire Makes Some Noise with $20 Million Gift to the African American Museum." Washington Post, September 24, 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/who-is-this-robert-smith-a-quie…; Katie Reilly, "Read Senator Tim Scott's Candid Account of Getting Stopped by Police," Laikas, July 14, 2016, http://time.com/4406540/senator-tim-scott-speech-transcript/.
33 See W. S. Wilson Huang and Michael S. Vaughn, "Support and Confidence: Public Attitudes toward the Police," in Americans View Crime and Justice: A National Public Opinion Survey, edited by Timothy J. Flanagan and Dennis R. Longmire (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1996).
34 Elizabeth Kneebone and Steven Raphael, "City and Suburban Crime Trends in Metropolitan America," Brookings Institutions Metropolitan Policy Program, May 2011, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/0526_metropolitan_….
35 High ratings are defined as answering 4 or 5 on a scale of 1-5: "How good a job is the police department in your community doing for each of the following, using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you think it's doing a poor job and 5 means you think it's doing an excellent job."
36 Within each racial/ethnic group, millennials have less confidence in police efficacy than seniors.
37 Low confidence is defined as answering 1 or 2 on a scale of 1-5: "How good a job is the police department in your community doing for each of the following, using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you think it's doing a poor job and 5 means you think it's doing an excellent job."
38 High ratings are defined as answering 4 or 5 on a scale of 1-5: "How good a job is the police department in your community doing for each of the following, using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you think it's doing a poor job and 5 means you think it's doing an excellent job."
39 Data for this section come from the combined June 2016 and November 2015 national surveys (N=4000), which offer greater precision and smaller margins of error for subgroups.
40 Question wording: "Here are some reasons that have been given for police violence against civilians. For each one, please tell me whether you think it is a major reason, a minor reason or not a reason at all…Some civilians confront the police when they are stopped rather than cooperating". AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, Associated Press-NORC Law Enforcement and Violence Survey, Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, iPOLL, July 2015.
41 High Respect for Authority (RAI) scores are defined as those in the top quartile, while low RAI scores are defined as those in the bottom quartile.
42 High ratings are defined as answering 4 or 5 on a scale of 1-5: "How good a job is the police department in your community doing for each of the following, using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you think it's doing a poor job and 5 means you think it's doing an excellent job."
43Data about perceptions of systemic bias by race/ethnicity and partisanship come from the combined June 2016 and November 2015 national surveys (N=4000), which offer greater precision and smaller margins of error for subgroups. (Unweighted: Black Republicans=45, Hispanic Republicans=165, White Republicans=1193, Black Democrats=630, Hispanic Democrats=409, White Democrats=634.)
44 High ratings are defined as answering 4 or 5 on a scale of 1-5: "How good a job is the police department in your community doing for each of the following, using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you think it's doing a poor job and 5 means you think it's doing an excellent job."
45 High ratings are defined as answering 4 or 5, and low ratings are defined as answering 1 or 2, on a scale of 1-5: "How good a job is the police department in your community doing for each of the following, using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you think it's doing a poor job and 5 means you think it's doing an excellent job."
46 Sixty-four percent of white Americans highly rate their local police department for impartiality, while 77% expect they personally would be treated like anyone else.
47 For further discussion of Moral Foundations Theory, see Jonathan Haidt, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion (New York: Pantheon Books, 2012).
48 High Sensitivity to Harm Index (SHI) scores are defined as those in the top quartile, while low SHI scores are defined as those scoring in the bottom quartile.
49 This uses a method similar to that used in Ronald Weitzer and Steven A. Tuch, "Racially Biased Policing: Determinants of Citizen Perceptions," Social Forces 83, no. 3 (2005): 1009-30; The regression model shows how much variance in the dependent variable is explained by each independent variable when all other independent variables are held constant. The predicted dependent variable is the perception that the police treat whites better than other racial groups, or not. The independent variables include: gender, age, race, income, education, age, community type, ideology, concern about crime, knowing someone who was either stopped and searched by an officer, arrested, or sent to jail, experience with police mistreatment, perception that police use harsh tactics, perception that police lack accountability, and the Sensitivity to Harm Index (SHI).
50 Michelle Alexander, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness (New York: The New Press, 2010).
51 (Mt= 3.66, SDt=1.44) (Mc=4.08, SDc=1.44) t(1998)=7.52, p <.001. Appendix H presents results from an OLS regression that finds that the treatment variable and interaction term between ideology and treatment are statistically significant indicating that the treatment may be more persuasive to some ideological groups. Comparisons of means tests indicate the effect was stronger among liberals than among conservatives.
52 Among "very conservative" respondents, t(287)=-1.92, p=.06. See Appendix I for full results.
53 Data for evaluations of police use of force by race/ethnicity and partisanship come from the combined June 2016 and November 2015 national surveys (N=4000), which offer greater precision and smaller margins of error for subgroups. (Unweighted: Black Republicans=45, Hispanic Republicans=165, White Republicans=1193, Black Democrats=630, Hispanic Democrats=409, White Democrats=634.)
54 The Respect for Authority Index (RAI) is a composite scale based on averaging responses to three questions measuring people's general respect for authority, without asking explicitly about police authority. See Appendix E for question wording and further details. High Respect for Authority (RAI) scores are defined as those in the top quartile, while low RAI scores are defined as those in the bottom quartile.
55 Jonathan Haidt, Jesse Graham, and Craig Joseph, "Above and Below Left-Right: Ideological Narratives and Moral Foundations," Psychological Inquiry 20 (2009): 110-119. Jonathan Haidt, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion (New York: Pantheon Books, 2012).
56 Jonathan Haidt and Jesse Graham, "When Morality Opposes Justice: Conservatives Have Moral Intuitions that Liberals May Not Recognize," Social Justice Research 20 (2012): 98-116.
57 Jesse Graham, Jonathan Haidt, and Brian A. Nosek, "Liberals and Conservatives Rely on Different Sets of Moral Foundations," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98, No. 5 (2009): 1029-46.
58 See Appendix A for definitions of ideological groups.
59 For example, see Heather MacDonald, "The Danger of the "Black Lives Matter" Movement," Imprimis 45 (2016), http://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/the-danger-of-the-black-lives-matter-move….
60 A linear combination of estimates test indicates the effect of being African American on attitudes toward the police is about 50% larger than being Hispanic, (p <.01).
61 We can be 95 percent confident this result does not happen by chance.
62 Rachel Lu, "You Don't Have to Be Black Lives Matter to Support Police Accountability," The Federalist, July 7, 2016, http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/07/you-dont-have-to-be-black-lives-matter-to-support-police-accountability/.
63 Bivariate regressions were run between each key independent variable of interest while also controlling for demographics in each model.
64 Demographic and political variables were included in each of these models.
65 A series of nested models were conducted omitting one key independent variable at a time. Likelihood ratio tests and comparing improvements in pseudo-R2s indicate that each variable significantly improved model fit, except for concern about crime and frequency of interaction with law enforcement. There are particularly large improvements in model fit when including the measure of satisfaction with personal police contact (LR χ2 = 508.81 p <.001). To be sure, it is difficult to determine which variables are the strongest predictors of public attitudes toward the police because perceptions are highly correlated and are sensitive to measurement. Furthermore, satisfaction with personal police contact may itself mediate other attitudes and perceptions. Thus, caution should be used when interpreting what factors may be most important in explaining attitudes toward the police. In this report, care is taken to construct independent variables measured with survey questions using a similar response structure (i.e. scale of 1-5) to reduce the likelihood that one measure received unmerited advantage in the regression equation.
66 John Ortiz Smykla et al., "Police Body-Worn Cameras: Perceptions of Law Enforcement Leadership." American Journal of Criminal Justice 41 (2016): 424-443.
67 See Appendix A for an explanation of ideological clusters.
68 The Respect for Authority Index (RAI) is a composite scale based on averaging responses to three questions measuring people's general respect for authority, without asking explicitly about police authority. See Appendix E for question wording and further details. High Respect for Authority (RAI) scores are defined as those in the top quartile, while low RAI scores are defined as those in the bottom quartile.
69 See Appendix A for an explanation of ideological clusters.
70 The legal rationale is that the property itself may be involved in a crime, and thus must be seized. However in practice, since property can be seized without charging a person with a crime or convicting them, many innocent people have had their property taken from them without due process. See Marian R. Williams et al, "Policing for Profit: The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture," Institute for Justice, March 2010, http://www.ij.org/images/pdf_folder/other_pubs/ assetforfeituretoemail.pdf; "Civil Asset Forfeiture: 7 Things You Should Know," Heritage Foundation Factsheet no. 141, March 26, 2014, http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2014/pdf/FS_141.pdf.
71 John Samples and Emily Ekins, "Public Attitudes toward Federalism: The Public's Preference for Renewed Federalism," Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 759, September 23, 2014, http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/public-attitudes-towar….
72 USCCR, "Revisiting Who Is Guarding the Guardians? A Report on Police Practices and Civil Rights in America," U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, November 2000, http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/guard/main.htm.
73 This dilemma is analogous to Type 1 and Type 2 errors found in empirical research. In this case, Type 1 errors would mean convicting innocent people of crimes they didn't commit or subjecting them to added scrutiny despite their innocence, and Type 2 errors would mean failing to convict guilty people of crimes they did commit and allowing them to go free unpunished.
74 Alexander Volokh, "n Guilty Men," University of Pennsylvania Law Review 146 (1997): 173-216.
75 Alexander Volokh, "n Guilty Men," University of Pennsylvania Law Review 146 (1997): 173-216; John Adams made similar arguments in defending British soldiers after the Boston Massacre, "(W)e are to look upon it as more beneficial, that many guilty persons should escape unpunished, than one innocent person should suffer," (p. 176).
76 Benjamin Franklin, "Letter from Benjamin Franklin to Benjamin Vaughn (Mar. 14, 1785)," The Works of Benjamin Franklin 11, ed. John Bigelow (1904), quoted in Alexander Volokh, "n Guilty Men," University of Pennsylvania Law Review 146 (1997): 173-216.
77 John W. Wade, "Uniform Comparative Fault Act," The Forum 14, no. 3 (1979): 379-405.
78 Communists employed similar reasoning during the uprisings in Jiangxi, China in the 1930s: "Better to kill a hundred innocent people than let one truly guilty person go free," and during uprisings in Vietnam in the 1950s: "Better to kill ten innocent people than let a guilty person escape." Phillip Short, Pol Pot: Anatomy of a Nightmare (New York: Henry Holt, 2006), pp. 299, 496. Similarly in Cambodia, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge adopted a similar policy: "better arrest an innocent person than leave a guilty one free." Henri Locard, Pol Pot's Little Red Book: The Sayings of Angkar Chang Mai (Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books, 2005), pp. 208-209. Maria C. Werlau, "Che Guevara Forgotten Victims," The Free Society Project, 2011, http://cubaarchive.org/home/images/stories/che-guevara_interior-pages_e….
79 Results are from the November 2015 Cato Institute/YouGov National Survey, conducted November 19 to 24, 2015.
80 For instance, roughly 7 in 10 Americans who prioritize protecting the innocent oppose police conducting routine vehicle searches during minor traffic stops or home searches of suspected drug dealers without a court order, while those who prioritize punishing wrongdoing are about evenly divided.
81 NYCLU, "Stop-and-Frisk Data," New York Civil Liberties Union, 2016, http://www.nyclu.org/content/stop-and-frisk-data.
82 For instance, the NYCLU has presented the Stop and Frisk error rate as evidence that the program has over-stepped, while a Breitbart writer touted the exact same set of facts as evidence of the program's success. Milo Yiannopoulos, "Milo Talks Who Illegal Immigration Hurts, and Who Stop & Frisk Helps," YouTube, 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2qHRMW7284.
83 Christine Eith and Matthew R. Durose, Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008, edited by Bureau of Justice Statistics (Washington: Department of Justice, 2011), https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpp08.pdf.
84 Terry v. Ohio, No. 67 (United States Supreme Court, 1968). For the safety of the officer, officers may search the person for weapons if the officer has reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous.
85 Police may not need a court order to search a house if police have probable cause to believe a crime is contemporaneously being committed, such as they hear gunshots in a house or hear someone screaming for help.
86 Data about support for racial profiling by race and partisanship come from the combined June 2016 and November 2015 national surveys (N=4000), which offer greater precision and smaller margins of error for subgroups. (Unweighted: Black Republicans=45.)
87 Jonathan Haidt and Jesse Graham, "When Morality Opposes Justice: Conservatives Have Moral Intuitions that Liberals May Not Recognize," Social Justice Research 20 (2007): 98-116.
88 For instance, probable cause may be established if the officer smells marijuana or the officer sees contraband in plain sight. Officers may also ask the person for their consent to search their car even without establishing reasonable suspicion.
89 The Respect for Authority Index (RAI) is a composite scale based on averaging responses to three questions measuring people's general respect for authority, without asking explicitly about police authority. See Appendix E for question wording and further details. High Respect for Authority (RAI) scores are defined as those in the top quartile, while low RAI scores are defined as those in the bottom quartile.
90 Police officers are only allowed to stop a person if they have reasonable suspicion that the person has committed or is about to commit a crime. The officer is allowed to search the person for weapons for the safety of the officer. See Terry v. Ohio, No. 67 (United States Supreme Court, 1968).
91 See Christopher Dunn and Sara LaPlante, "Stop and Frisk 2012 NYCLU Briefing," New York Civil Liberties Union, May 2013, http://www.nyclu.org/files/publications/2012_Report_NYCLU_0.pdf.
92 Arthur Garrison points out that "furtive movements" and presence in a high crime area were the two most commonly given reasons in police reports for pedestrian stops between 2004-2009. Furthermore, 78% of all stops between 2004-2009 were initiated by a police officer, not the result of a service call. Since the reasons for these stops were fairly broad, critics argued police had too much latitude in deciding whom to stop and search and this gave way to racial profiling. Arthur H. Garrison, "NYPD Stop and Frisk, Perceptions of Criminals, Race and the Meaning of Terry v. Ohio: A Content Analysis of Floyd, et al. v. City of New York*," Rutgers Race & Law Review 15 (2014): 65-156; Christopher Dunn and Sara LaPlante, "Stop and Frisk 2012 NYCLU Briefing," New York Civil Liberties Union, May 2013, http://www.nyclu.org/files/publications/2012_Report_NYCLU_0.pdf.
93 There is evidence that pedestrian and vehicle searches may not be very efficacious. For instance, the NYCLU finds that the NYPD’s Stop and Frisk program uncovered wrongdoing in about 12% of the over 2 million pedestrian stops since 2010 and Eith and Durose find that about 8.4% of vehicle searches uncovered evidence of criminal activity in 2008. See Christopher Dunn and Sara LaPlante, “Stop and Frisk 2012 NYCLU Briefing,” New York Civil Liberties Union, May 2013, http://www.nyclu.org/files/publications/2012_Report_NYCLU_0.pdf. Christine Eith and Matthew R. Durose, Contacts between Police and the Public, 2008, edited by Bureau of Justice Statistics (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 2011), https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpp08.pdf.
94 Probable cause could include contraband in plain view, overt smell of an illegal substance, or if a drug dog identifies drugs.
95 Police may not need a court order to search a house if police have probable cause to believe a crime is contemporaneously being committed, such as they hear gunshots in a house or hear someone screaming for help.
96 This is the "nothing to hide" argument. For instance, consider Sen. Trent Lott's reaction to the debate over the collection of Americans' phone records in 2006: "What are people worried about? What is the problem? Are you doing something you're not supposed to?" "BellSouth Denies Giving Records to NSA," CNN.com, May 15, 2006, http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/15/bellsouth.nsa/. For further discussion see Daniel J. Solove, "'I've Got Nothing to Hide' and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy," San Diego Law Review 44 (2007): 745-772.
97 See Appendix A for an explanation of ideological clusters.
98 Results from the November 2015 Cato Institute/YouGov National Survey, conducted November 19 to 24, 2015.
99 See Appendix A for an explanation of ideological clusters.
100 H. Snyder and J. Mulako-Wangota, Arrest Data Analysis Tool, Bureau of Justice Statistics, July 7, 2016, www.bjs.gov.
101 COPS Office, "The President's Task Force on 21st Century Policing: Summary of Public Comments Submitted by Email," The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2015, https://cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/Implementation_Guide.pdf.
102 See Appendix A for an explanation of ideological clusters.
103 Some might find this surprising given that fatal occupational injuries are lower for police officers than a multitude of other professions, such as taxi drivers, truck drivers, and roofers. However, police are more likely to die from felonious acts than many other professions (although taxi drivers have a higher felonious fatality rate). See Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Fatal Occupational Injuries, Total Hours Worked, and Rates of Fatal Occupational Injuries by Selected Worker Characteristics, Occupations, and Industries, Civilian Workers, 2013," Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (Washington: Department of Labor, 2013), http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfoi_rates_2013hb.pdf; Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Fatal Occupational Injuries by Occupation and Selected Event or Exposure, 2014," Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (Washington: Department of Labor, 2014), http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cfoi.t03.htm.
104 American Heritage Dictionary, 2016, s.v. "war," https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=war&submit.x=0&submit.y=0.
105 Heather MacDonald, The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe (New York: Encounter Books, 2016), p. 3
106 The American Enterprise Institute Ideas Blog; "Is There Really a ‘War on Cops'? The Data Show That 2015 Will Likely Be One of the Safest Years in History for Police," blog entry by Mark J. Perry, September 9, 2015, https://www.aei.org/publication/is-there-really-a-war-on-cops-the-data-….
107 Data for perceptions of systemic bias by race/ethnicity and partisanship come from the combined June 2016 and November 2015 national surveys (N=4000), which offer greater precision and smaller margins of error for subgroups. (Unweighted: Black Republicans=44, Hispanic Republicans=165, White Republicans=1193, Black Democrats=630, Hispanic Democrats=409, White Democrats=634.)
108 The Respect for Authority Index (RAI) is a composite scale based on averaging responses to three questions measuring people's general respect for authority, without asking explicitly about police authority. See Appendix E for question wording and further details. High Respect for Authority (RAI) scores are defined as those in the top quartile, while low RAI scores are defined as those in the bottom quartile.