This is the original post (you do not need to respond to this, this is just to give guidance on what we were
discussing) : In March of 1991 the nation was captivated by a video of police officers in Los Angeles,
California as they were attempting to arrest Rodney King. Several officers were involved after King initially
evaded police and led them on a chase that started on Interstate 210, covered more than 10 miles and
exceeded speeds of 80 MPH through residential streets, ending when officers were able to block King and
his two passengers at an intersection. A man (George Holliday) who lived nearby, filmed the encounter and
offered it to police before providing it to a local television station when the police were not interested in
seeing the video. This case was one of the earliest examples of modern surveillance, where incidents
involving the police are recorded with video cameras and more recently, cell phones.
Police use of force is perhaps the most polarizing issue within the field of criminal justice today. Few actions
are more difficult than having maybe five seconds to make a potentially life-threatening decision and then
having that action scrutinized by others for weeks or months. Some departments employ a use of force
continuum while others make use of other methods to assist officers in making decisions to elevate the
amount of force necessary to make an arrest. Most police officers like to know they have backup available if
needed. Does it always help? Does it make things worse at times? Does having additional officers present
change the way one may interact with a subject? Consider the case of Eric Garner from 2014; often when
multiple officers are attempting to subdue a suspect, one may not know when the suspect is resisting and
when another officer is exerting force. Are the cell phone videos of bystanders sufficient to provide an
accurate and adequate perspective? Typically, those videos do not begin until after the crisis has already
started, potentially missing key events.
According to Black (1976), police are more likely to use force based on the attributes of the concerned
parties. This sociological theory of law prescribes that police are least likely to take corrective action against
lower status persons, particularly minorities and the poor, when the accusers are also of lower status.
Similarly, they are more likely to take action against lower status persons whose accusers are of a higher
status. Your text introduces the concept of deindividuation in chapter 10. Used primarily to explain group
behavior, it may also have implications with police officers in certain crisis situations. In Festinger’s (1952)
seminal work, he argued that deindividuation occurs when individuals immerse themselves in the group to
the point of losing some sense of self, becoming anonymous and doing things they would not likely do if
alone. Closely related to contagion, also discussed in your text, this may help to explain what happens in
crisis events such as the one discussed above.
Consider the case of Amadou Diallo as you address the discussion thread this week.
Do you think deindividuation or contagion applied to the case of Rodney King and/or Diallo? Did
responding officers act in accordance with accepted use of force standards?
What is the responsibility of police leadership when their officers are accused of excessive use of
force?
Take a definitive position and defend it with evidence from the literature.
1. Pack-In the case of both Rodney King and Diallo, I presume that deindividuation was most definitely
apparent. Whether or not the officers acted in accordance with the accepted use of force standards can be a
controversial topic. There are many that feel that they most certainly did not, while there are also some that
have an understanding of the officers mindset and reasoning. Regardless of how one feels toward the cases,
I think that it is safe to postulate that deindividuation was a factor in both predicaments. According to
Vilanova et al. (2017), “Deindividuation may be described as the situation in which individuals act in groups
and do not see themselves as individuals, thereby facilitating antinormative behavior” (p.1). When it comes to
dealing with issues that result from deindividuation, excessive use of force may be one of those topics. Bibu
& Ghanim (2018) states “In recent years, the discussion of the challenge faced by public representatives and
public sector managers to act according to criteria of accountability and transparency has been intensifying. It
is now clear that transparency and accountability are among the main levers of public policy in the twenty-
first century. Using these levers can promote accountability and reporting towards citizens; improve efficiency
and productivity of key government services by way of comparison and information-based supervision; could
change social relations by empowering individuals and communities; could enhance economic growth”
(p.298). Transparency and accountability are vital when it comes to any sort of action taken by law
enforcement due to excessive use of force. Leadership is crucial when it comes to a situation where
excessive use of force is apparent. Incorporating characteristics such as accountability and transparency
aline with effective leadership ability. I think when looking at police use of force and the issue that it can
entail, one must consider one big aspect of each and every scenario, officers are people just like everyone
else. There have most certainly been a fair amount of mistakes made over the years that I think could have
been avoided with more in depth studies on theories such as the sociological theory of law and the topic of
deindividuation. I presume that further research into topics such as these would allow better policies and
guidelines to be implemented. It is important that as a Christian, we are always seeking wisdom and allowing
for God’s guidance in our lives. James 1:5 reads, “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth
to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.”
References
Bibu, N., & Ghanim, B. (2018). Accountability, Taking Responsibility and Protection of Minorities and their
Influence on the Police Organization Performance. Revista De Management Comparat International, 19(3),
298-305. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.24818/RMCI.2018.3.298
James 1:5 (KJV). (2021). Bible Gateway. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James...
Vilanova, F., Francielle, M. B., Costa, Â. B., & Koller, S. H. (2017). Deindividuation: From Le Bon to the social
identity model of deindividuation effects. Cogent Psychology,
4(1)http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1080/2331...
2. Salinas- According to Harmening (2014), individuation happens when single partakers include themselves
into a unit or group to the point where they lose themselves within the group's identity. Individuals will usually
pick up attitudes, characteristics, and beliefs they would not normally partake in outside the group setting.
The unit will, over time, reach a state called the collective mind. This happens when the individual(s) will start
acting on the group setting's newly perceived beliefs and attitudes and conform. Having set aside their self-
control, the emotions of the unit will spread at an alarming rate. This occurrence is called contagion. The unit
can now be viewed as uncontrollable.
In the case of Amadou Diallo, the four officers involved in the shooting seemed as though they had a
sense of fear-driven panic. In their minds, they perceived a threat, which in turn woke their sense of survival
and instincts. Their perceived threat of the imaginary gun catapulted shootings that then became contagious
shootings. In this specific case, deindividuation took place to a certain extent and for specific reasons. The
police officers took on fear and panic once faced with a perceived threat, thus thrusting them into shooting. It
just so happens they did it all at once after the first shot (contagious) to protect themselves and the group
instinctively. According to Vilanova (2017), "Despite being composed of people who tend to exhibit
automated behavior, every crowd has a conductor. The conductor plays a decisive role through his will,
around which the opinion of the crowd is formed and identified." In situations like contagious shooting
because of fear-driven panic, the conductor could very well be the first shooter of the group, which in turn
becomes deadly for any suspect.
In the case of Rodney King, he was beaten by a group of police officers from Los Angeles Police
Department in 1991. The incident was caught on videotape, which then was released to the public via news
broadcast. This beating by police officers sparked what is now known as the L.A. riots. Watson (2019) stated
that about 92 percent of L.A. residents who viewed the released King tapes thought the officers used
disproportionate force. Indeed, the severity of the beating seemed utterly unnecessary. The officers acted as
a group that showcased deindividuation which resulted from an anger-driven panic. Usually, anger-driven
panic stems from individuals from the opposing verdict; this is what caused the L.A. riots that resulted from
this exact case. The officers are considered a unit or group, so they can also be subject to panic. After
leading officers on a high-speed chase, while being under the influence, this may have sparked this type of
panic within the officers, creating anger towards King. Thus, the unethical beating. This scenario includes
anger-driven panic, which resulted in deindividuation, and during the ruckus included contagion-which
spreads quickly because of elevated emotions (Harmening, 2014). There is a point in the confrontation where
King is on the ground on his stomach. This an easy position to be put into handcuffs and arrested.
Regardless, the officers continued beating King, still clearly intoxicated. This situation was full of emotions
and chaos; the police officers decided to continue feeding the situation rather than de-escalating it and
putting it to an end.
The use of force should be decided depending on the situation. Also, considering the rate and way the
situation escalates and match it with the required force. According to Mourtgos (2020), it is nearly impossible
to expect a law enforcement officer not to use force when deeming it necessary in any given situation. When
apprehending and arresting suspects, it does become violent. A few examples of this can include breaking
up fights, making arrests due to drugs, or even defending themselves. So, violence is a given when it comes
to this line of work. The officers in the Diallo case deemed their use of force necessary due to their
perception at that exact moment. It is difficult to judge the actions taken by officers in that circumstance when
your life and others around you are at risk.
Furthermore, it is easy to judge when you are outside looking in, without not living a single day of your life in
those positions where drastic and quick decisions need to be made. In the case of King, I do believe
excessive use of force was expressed. As far as the case with Diallo, the officers acted on their perception of
the situation. Their first instinct was to react accordingly to someone pulling out a weapon, especially after a
chase where the subject was non-compliant, to begin. As far as the case with King, the use of force was
excessive. This case is not acting per any accepted standards and uncalled. When officers are accused of
excessive use, leadership should apply procedural justice training; this will reduce complaints and any force
misuse.
When things seem to be getting out of hand, we must remember to use perseverance and be patient with
these types of confrontations and situations. Trying to stay true to God and do good. Galatians 6:9 proclaims,
“And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not” (King James Bible,
1769/2017).
References
Harmening, W. M. (2014). Crisis intervention: the criminal justice response to chaos, mayhem, and disorder.
Pearson.
King James Bible. (2017). King James Bible Online. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/ (Original work
published 1769)
Mourtgos, S. M., & Adams, I. T. (2020). Assessing public perceptions of police use-of-force: Legal
reasonableness and community standards. Justice Quarterly, 37(5), 869-
899. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2019.1679864
Vilanova, F., Beria, F. M., Costa, Â. B., & Koller, S. H. (2017). Deindividuation: From le bon to the social
identity model of deindividuation effects. Cogent Psychology, 4(1),
1308104. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2017.1308104
1
Running head: LAW DISCUSSION
Name of the student:
Professor:
Class:
Date:
2
LAW DISCUSSION
There have been several instances of law enforcement using unnecessary force. With
technological advancements, the public can watch police confrontations, and media
organizations have the power to alter this material to provide inaccurate accounts of police
conduct. In the case of Diallo, Deindividuation is evident. Deindividuation in police departments
occurs when one’s occurrence, especially in self-identification and individual accountability, is
not present. Because prosecutors maintained that the officers' mental state was to maintain safety
for themselves and their fellow police, all officers were absolved of possible offences for the
murder.
Contagion can range from someone shouting because they see anything scary to police officers
firing their rifles after hearing or witnessing another cop shoot his weapon. As the Diallo case
has shown, contagious shooting can be dangerous. When the first police fired a shot, the rest of
the officers followed suit. In thecas, four law enforcement officers discharged a total of 41
rounds in the case of Diallo. In this situation, the responding cops followed standard use-of-force
procedures. Officers are not entitled to use any force due to their influence, but they should
understand the situation and exercise ethics. The shooting was not deliberate, and it only
happened because they thought Diallo was trying to inflict serious bodily harm on them. Law
enforcers should not use rush decisions since they affect others life if firearms are involved. Just
as in Philippians: 4:6-7, everyone should not be anxious about anything, but in every situation,
by prayer and petition as you exercise patience and understanding.
Reply one
Deindividuation can be the use of physical force or service of influence in negative ways. I agree
with you, Pack, that regardless of how one feels about the case, there is no need to use intuition
to handle or conduct oneself in a professional atmosphere (Vilanova et al. 2017), just as it has
3
LAW DISCUSSION
been described previously, the behaviours become a negative force to the general population.
What if, dealing with Deindividuation, one could not use power? If no control is used, public
representatives and public sector managers will increase transparency and accountability levels.
It will further accelerate and promote information-based supervision, just as you had highlighted.
Information based management increases leadership that is crucial and effective. Force is a
weakening on the ability of able leaders. People cooperate more when not used to force.
Leadership is necessary for management. I agree that leadership is essential in situations where
excessive force is required; able leaders can employ negotiation or other ways to mitigate the
manners of handling such scenarios (p. 298). I think the notion that place should use force should
be changed. We should not use this notion to relate the mannerism to be assured of our security
and efforts. As Christianity dictates in Samuel-1 2:16, “Many fled due to the force used”. To
avoid this, they should be involved in management to ensure they are not forced or oppressed.
References
Vilanova, F., Francielle, M. B., Costa, Â. B., & Koller, S. H. (2017). Deindividuation: From Le
Bon to the social identity model of deindividuation effects. Cogent Psychology,
4(1)http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1080/2331.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%201-2&version=NIV
Reply Two
Just as (Harmening, 2014) defined Deindividuation as a partakers when a single participant
becomes so ingrained in a unit or group that they lose their individuality within the collective's
identity. In the case of Diallo the officers’ use of shots was a sense of fear and panic. When
confronted with a perceived threat, police officers became fearful and panicked, prompting them
4
LAW DISCUSSION
to shoot. It just so happened that they did it all at once after the initial (contagious) shot to
automatically protect themselves and the group. The video recorded shows how force can be
used negatively to oppress other members. I agree that the officers should have just used
handcuffs and maybe teasers to neutralize the charged. Further, the officers should be well
trained and well equipped as said by Mourtgos (2020) to handle such situations and in case they
escalate. Further, the officers should be impartial in their judgement and not judge due to
physical differences such as race. Just as in (Isaiah 1:17) officers should “Learn to do well and be
fair”. This will ensure and aid them to handle new situations evenly.
References
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%201%3A17&version=NIV
Mourtgos, S. M., & Adams, I. T. (2020). Assessing public perceptions of police use-of-force:
Legal reasonableness and community standards. Justice Quarterly, 37(5), 869-
899. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2019.1679864
Harmening, W. M. (2014). Crisis intervention: the criminal justice response to chaos, mayhem,
and disorder. Pearson.
