There is tremendous controversy across the United States (and beyond) when a police officer uses deadly force against an unarmed
citizen, but often the conversation is devoid of contextual details. These details matter greatly as a matter of law and organizational
legitimacy. In this short book, authors Jon Shane and Zoe Swenson offer a comprehensive analysis of the first study to use
publicly available data to reveal the context in which an officer used deadly force against an unarmed citizen. Although any
police shooting, even a justified shooting, is not a desired outcome-often termed "lawful but awful" in policing circles-it
is not necessarily a crime. The results of this study lend support to the notion that being unarmed does not mean "not dangerous,"
in some ways explaining why most police officers are not indicted when such a shooting occurs. The study's findings show that
when police officers used deadly force during an encounter with an unarmed citizen, the officer or a third person was facing
imminent threat of death or serious injury in the vast majority of situations. Moreover, when police officers used force,
their actions were almost always consistent with the accepted legal and policy principles that govern law enforcement in the
overwhelming proportion of encounters (as measured by indictments).
Noting the dearth of official data on
the context of police shooting fatalities, Shane and Swenson call for the U.S. government to compile comprehensive data so
researchers and practitioners can learn from deadly force encounters and improve practices. They further recommend that future
research on police shootings should examine the patterns and micro-interactions between the officer, citizen, and environment
in relation to the prevailing law. The unique data and analysis in this book will inform discussions of police use of force
for researchers, policymakers, and students involved in criminal justice, public policy, and policing.