U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Special Report

Celebrating

 35 years

NOVEMBER 2015 NCJ 249216

Police Use of Nonfatal Force, 2002–11

Shelley Hyland, Ph.D., Lynn Langton, Ph.D., and Elizabeth Davis, BJS Statisticians

HIGHLIGHTS

This report examines the prevalence of police threat or 

use of nonfatal force and whether it varies across race and 

Hispanic origin. Data are from the 2002, 2005, 2008 and 

2011 Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) supplement to the 

National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). 

 Across the four PPCS data collections from 2002–11, blacks 

(3.5%) were more likely to experience nonfatal force during 

their most recent contact with police than whites (1.4%) and 

Hispanics (2.1%).

 A greater percentage of persons who experienced the use of 

force (44%) had two or more contacts with police than those 

who did not experience force (28%).

 Blacks (14%) were more likely than Hispanics (5.9%), and 

slightly more than whites (6.9%) to experience nonfatal 

force during street stops.

 Of those who experienced force during their most recent 

contact, approximately three-quarters described the verbal 

(71%) or physical (75%) force as excessive.

 Of those who experienced force during their most recent 

contact, 87% did not believe the police behaved properly.

 Traffic stops involving an officer and driver of different races 

were more likely to involve force (2.0%) than traffic stops 

involving an officer and driver of the same race (0.8%).

 Blacks (1.4%) were twice as likely as whites (0.7%) 

to experience force during contacts involving a 

personal search.

From 2002 to 2011, an annual average of 44 million 

persons age 16 or older had one or more face-toface contacts with police. Of those who had contact, 

1.6% experienced the threat or use of nonfatal force by the 

police during their most recent contact.1 About 75% of those 

with force (1.2% of persons with police contact) perceived 

the force as excessive. A greater percentage of non-Hispanic 

blacks (2.8%) than non-Hispanic whites (1.0%) and 

Hispanics (1.4%) experienced excessive nonfatal force by 

police during their contact (figure 1).

2

This report examines the prevalence, circumstance, and 

characteristics of incidents in which police threatened or 

used nonfatal force and whether these factors varied across 

resident race and Hispanic origin. The data presented were 

aggregated from four data collections of the Bureau of 

Justice Statistics’ Police–Public Contact Survey (PPCS). It 

was administered as a supplement to the National Crime 

Victimization Survey (NCVS) every 3 years in 2002, 2005, 

2008, and 2011 to collect information from persons age 16 

or older about their most recent face-to-face contact with 

police and the outcomes of that contact.

1The experiences reported are from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ Police–

Public Contact Survey (PPCS), a sample survey of U.S. residents age 16 or 

older. They do not include data from police records.

2The PPCS was not conducted in Spanish. See Methodology.

Figure 1

Residents with police contact who experienced threat or use 

of force, by race or Hispanic origin, 2002–11

Race or

Hispanic

origin

Face-to-face 

contact

Force 

threatened or 

useda Excessive forcea

All racesb 43.9 million 715,500 

(1.6%)

535,300 

(1.2%)

Whitec 32.9 million 445,500 

(1.4%)

329,500 

(1.0%)

Blackc 4.6 million 159,100 

(3.5%)

128,400 

(2.8%)

Hispanic 4.4 million 90,100

(2.1%)

59,600

(1.4%)

Note: Average annual number and percent for U.S. residents age 16 and older. 

See appendix table 1 for standard errors.

aBased on most recent police contact in prior 12 months.

bAlso includes American Indian or Alaska Natives; Asian, Native Hawaiian, or 

other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or more races.

cExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 

2008, and 2011.
Resident surveys such as the PPCS provide a source of 

data on contacts with police and perceptions of police 

behavior that are independent from official police records. 

The PPCS is also the only national data collection that 

can provide information on the broad range of nonlethal 

police actions—from verbal threats to physical force—that 

are included in the continuum of police use of force. The 

Methodology further details the ability of the PPCS to 

capture nonlethal force.

Unless otherwise noted, data on the police threat or use of 

nonfatal force were based on a person’s most recent contact 

with police during the prior 12 months. Police contact 

includes any face-to-face interaction between a resident 

and one or more law enforcement officers, including sworn 

officers serving in municipal police departments; sheriff ’s 

departments; state police; and special jurisdiction agencies, 

such as transit, park, and university police agencies. The 

contact could be initiated by the police, as in a traffic stop, 

or initiated by the resident reporting a crime to police 

or requesting police assistance. The majority of PPCS 

respondents (72%) reported one face-to-face contact with 

police during the 12-month reference period. For those 

respondents, the most recent contact was the only contact 

experienced during the year.

For the PPCS and this report, survey respondents defined 

what they considered to be the threat or use of force and 

whether it was excessive according to their perceptions of 

police behavior. Use of force and excessive were not defined 

for respondents. Residents who reported the threat or use of 

force were asked if the police did any of the following: shout, 

curse, threaten force, push or grab, hit or kick, use pepper 

spray (2005–11), use an electroshock weapon (2008–11), 

point a gun, or use other force. Throughout the report, 

“use of force” and “force” refer to the police threat or use of 

nonfatal force. 

This report examines the prevalence of force and excessive 

force during the most recent contact with police, focusing 

on race and Hispanic origin. It looks at the characteristics of 

incidents involving force, including the type of contact, type 

of force used, and whether the contact involved a personal 

search. The report also examines trends in the threat or 

use of force and the relationship between officer’s race and 

driver’s race in traffic stops involving force.

Blacks were more likely than whites to experience 

nonfatal force in their most recent contact with police

During the 2002–11 period, whites (20%) had a higher rate 

of police contact than blacks (17%) and Hispanics (16%) 

(table 1). However, during the most recent contact with 

police, blacks (3.5%) experienced force at higher rates than 

whites (1.4%) and Hispanics (2.1%). Whites were slightly 

less likely than Hispanics to experience force.

In addition, males and younger persons ages 16 to 25 were 

more likely to experience police contact and the use of force 

during their most recent contact than females and persons 

age 26 or older. Persons with police contact in urban areas 

(2.1%) were more likely than those in suburban (1.5%) and 

rural (1.2%) areas to experience nonfatal force, although the 

overall rates of contact with police were similar across urban, 

suburban, and rural areas (about 19%).

Table 1

Police–resident contact and contact involving threat or use of force, by demographic characteristics, 2002–11

Any contact With threat or use of forcea

Demographic characteristic Average annual population Average annual number Percent Average annual number Percent

Total 230,823,000 43,864,600 19.0% 715,500 1.6%

Sex

Male* 111,431,200 22,804,200 20.5% 490,300 2.1%

Female 119,391,900 21,060,400 17.6 † 225,200 1.1 †

Age

16–25* 41,870,000 10,695,200 25.5% 279,900 2.6%

26 or older 188,953,000 33,169,400 17.6 † 435,600 1.3 †

Race/Hispanic origin

White*b 163,508,200 32,879,500 20.1% 445,500 1.4%

Blackb 27,120,400 4,597,500 17.0 † 159,100 3.5 †

Hispanic 27,191,900 4,389,500 16.1 † 90,100 2.1 ‡

Otherb,c 13,002,500 1,998,000 15.4 † 20,700 1.0

Location of residence

Urban* 71,390,700 13,769,300 19.3% 289,200 2.1%

Suburban 119,510,700 22,833,100 19.1 339,200 1.5 †

Rural 39,921,600 7,262,300 18.2 87,000 1.2 †

Note: Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. See appendix table 2 for standard errors. 

*Comparison group. 

†Significant difference from comparison group at the 95% confidence interval.

‡Significant difference from comparison group at the 90% confidence interval.

aBased on most recent police contact in prior 12 months.

bExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

cIncludes American Indian or Alaska Natives; Asian, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or more races.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011.
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 3

Residents who experienced multiple contacts with 

police were more likely to experience nonfatal force

Most persons age 16 or older who had face-to-face contact 

with police during the prior 12 months experienced one 

police contact during the year (table 2). A greater percentage 

of persons who experienced the use of force (44%) had 

two or more contacts with police than those who did 

not experience force (28%). About a quarter of residents 

(27%) who experienced the use of force had three or more 

contacts during the year, compared to about a tenth (12%) of 

residents who did not experience the use of force.

Among those who did not experience the use of force during 

their most recent police contact, whites (73%) were slightly 

more likely than blacks (70%) to report one contact during 

the prior 12 months. There were no significant differences 

between whites and Hispanics or blacks and Hispanics in the 

percentage of persons who had a single contact during the 

year and did not experience the threat or use of force.

Among those who experienced force during the most 

recent contact, nearly double the percentage of whites 

(62%) experienced one contact during the year, compared 

to Hispanics (36%). Almost two-thirds (64%) of Hispanics 

who experienced force had multiple police contacts 

during the year. Among persons with multiple face-to-face 

police contacts during the prior 12 months, there were no 

significant differences in the rates at which whites and blacks 

experienced force.

Table 2

Police contact with and without threat or use of force, by race or Hispanic origin of resident, 2002–11

Contacts without threat or use of forcea Contacts with threat or use of force

Number of contacts All racesb White*c Blackc Hispanic All racesb White*c Blackc Hispanic

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

1 72.3 72.8 69.8 ‡ 71.0 55.8 62.1 50.9 35.8 †

2 15.9 15.8 15.3 16.9 17.6 12.5 20.9 33.4 †

3 or more 11.6 11.3 14.8 12.1 26.5 25.3 28.2 30.8

Average annual number 

with contact 42,977,500 32,296,100 4,425,700 4,284,200 715,500 445,500 159,100 90,100

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police contact in prior 12 months. See appendix table 3 

for standard errors.

*Comparison group.

†Significant difference from comparison group at the 95% confidence interval.

‡Significant difference from comparison group at the 90% confidence interval.

aIncludes any face-to-face contact for which it was unknown whether force was threatened or used.

bIncludes American Indian or Alaska Natives; Asian, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or more races.

cExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011.
In police-initiated contacts more blacks than whites 

said they experienced the threat or use of force

Across all races and Hispanic origin, police-initiated 

stops accounted for the majority (51%) of face-to-face 

police contacts (table 3). Among police-initiated contacts, 

nontraffic stops or street stops (7.6%) were more likely than 

traffic stops (1.1%) to involve force. The greatest percentage 

of contacts involving force occurred during stops in which a 

person was suspected of wrongdoing (11%).

Of residents with any type of police-initiated contact 

during the 2002–11 period, a greater percentage of blacks 

(4.9%) experienced the use of force than whites (1.8%) and 

Hispanics (2.5%). Blacks (2.5%) were slightly more likely 

than whites (0.8%) to experience the use of force during 

traffic stops. During street stops, blacks (14%) were more 

likely than Hispanics (5.9%) and slightly more than whites 

(6.9%) to experience nonfatal force.

Across all races or Hispanic origin, the use of force was 

greater during stops in which the police suspected the 

resident of wrongdoing compared to other types of contact. 

Blacks (11%) were slightly more likely than whites (5%) 

to experience the threat or use of force during stops that 

occurred because the police were investigating a crime.

Among residents with voluntary contact with police, such as 

requesting assistance from police or reporting a crime, there 

were no significant racial differences in the percentage of 

persons who experienced the use of force (0.7%).

Table 3

Police contacts involving threat or use of force, by type of contact and race or Hispanic origin of resident, 2002–11

All racesa White*b Blackb Hispanic

Type of contact

Average annual 

number Percent

Average annual 

number Percent

Average annual 

number Percent

Average annual 

number Percent

Any 43,864,600 1.6% 32,879,500 1.4% 4,597,500 3.5% † 4,389,500 2.1% ‡

Police-initiated 22,577,300 2.2% 16,642,200 1.8% 2,542,400 4.9% † 2,383,300 2.5%

Traffic stop 18,877,400 1.1 13,997,700 0.8 2,001,000 2.5 ‡ 2,008,900 1.8

Driver 17,351,000 1.1 12,910,000 0.8 1,800,600 2.5 ‡ 1,852,200 1.8

Passenger 1,187,000 1.8 872,300 1.5 123,400 3.2 ! 132,400 3.1 !

Street stopc 3,699,900 7.6 2,644,500 6.9 541,400 13.7 ‡ 374,400 5.9

Crime investigation 2,397,200 5.7 1,778,900 5.1 297,600 11.3 ‡ 233,700 4.4 !

Suspected of wrongdoing 1,302,700 11.2 865,600 10.7 243,900 16.7 140,700 8.6

Traffic accident 5,506,800 0.7% 4,269,300 0.5% 475,900 0.9% ! 478,800 2.1% !

Voluntaryd 13,274,000 0.7% 10,150,300 0.7% 1,298,900 0.7% ! 1,263,900 0.7%

Othere 2,506,600 3.8% 1,817,700 3.0% 280,300 7.8% † 263,500 4.7%

Note: Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police contact in prior 12 months. Subcategories do not sum to total due to respondents who did not 

know or did not identify the type of contact. See appendix table 4 for standard errors.

*Comparison group.

†Significant difference from comparison group at the 95% confidence interval.

‡Significant difference from comparison group at the 90% confidence interval.

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or the coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.

aAlso includes American Indian or Alaska Natives; Asian, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or more races.

bExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

cIncludes any police-initiated nontraffic contact, regardless of location type (public or private).

dIncludes requesting assistance from or reporting crime to police.

eIncludes contacts such as DUI check points, noise violations, parking violations, court or jail related contact, and casual or noninvestigative contact. Also includes 

refusals, unspecified, and unknown responses.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011.

POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 4
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 5

FIGURE 4

Residents with police contact who experienced threat or 

use of force, by type of contact, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 

2011

0

2

4

6

8

10

Driver in trac stop

2011b 2002 2005 2008

Percent

Other police-initiated contacta

! !

Voluntary contact or accident

Note: Confidence intervals at the 95%-level are shown for each estimate. 

Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police contact in 

prior 12 months. See appendix table 7 for estimates and standard errors.

! Interpret with caution. Based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or the coefficient of 

variation is greater than 50%. 

aIncludes contacts occurring because the resident was a suspect, the police 

were investigating a crime, or the resident was the passenger in a traffic stop.

bThe PPCS instrument was redesigned in 2011. Estimates for 2011 are based on 

the 15% of sample who did not receive the revised survey instrument.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey (PPCS), 2002, 

2005, 2008, and 2011.

Trends in police threat or use of force

Across all four Police–Public Contact Survey (PPCS) data 

collections, rates and patterns in the use of force by police 

did not change significantly. The lack of substantial change 

over time made it possible to aggregate data across the four 

collections without distorting relationships or associations 

between variables or characteristics. This larger sample permits 

the examination of subgroup differences in greater detail than 

would be possible with a single year of data.

From 2002 to 2011, the overall rate of the threat or use of 

nonfatal force during the most recent contact with police 

remained flat at about 1.6% (figure 2). Likewise, among whites, 

blacks, and Hispanics, there was no significant change over 

time in the percentage of persons within those groups who 

experienced nonfatal force during the most recent contact 

(figure 3). The patterns in threat or use of force were also fairly 

consistent across racial groups over time. In some years, the 

differences between groups were not statistically significant, 

but the relationship of the estimates was generally consistent. 

For example, in 2002, 2005, and 2008, blacks experienced 

a higher prevalence of force by police than whites. In 2011, 

the estimated rate also appeared higher for blacks, but the 

difference between blacks (2.8%) and whites (1.9%) was not 

statistically significant due to small sample sizes. Similarly, 

across all 4 years, blacks appeared to experience a higher 

prevalence of force than Hispanics. The differences between 

the two groups were statistically significant in 2005 and 2008, 

but not in 2002 and 2011.

The percentage of residents who said they experienced use of 

force during the most recent contact with police also did not 

vary over time by the reason for contact with police (figure 

4). There was no statistically significant change over time 

in the percentage of traffic stops or voluntary contacts and 

accidents that resulted in the threat or use of force. Among 

residents with nontraffic-related stops, the percentage who 

experienced the threat or use of force was higher in 2005 

than in 2002, but the rate dropped back down in 2008. No 

detectable differences were observed in the rates between any 

other years.

FIGURE 2

Residents with police contact who experienced threat or 

use of force, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

2002 2005 2008 2011*

Percent

Note: Confidence intervals at the 95%-level are shown for each estimate. 

Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police contact in 

prior 12 months. See appendix table 5 for estimates and standard errors.

*The PPCS instrument was redesigned in 2011. Estimates for 2011 are based on 

the 15% of sample who did not receive the revised survey instrument.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey (PPCS), 2002, 

2005, 2008, and 2011.

FIGURE 3

Residents with police contact who experienced threat or 

use of force, by race and Hispanic origin, 2002, 2005, 2008, 

and 2011

Percent

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2011b 2002 2005 2008

Blacka

!

Hispanic

Whitea

!

Note: Confidence intervals at the 95%-level are shown for each estimate. 

Includes U.S. residents age 16 and older. Based on most recent police contact 

in prior 12 months. See appendix table 6 for estimates and standard errors. See 

appendix table 6.

! Interpret with caution. Estimates for blacks and Hispanics based on 10 or fewer 

sample cases, or the coefficient of variation is greater than 50%. 

aExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

bThe PPCS instrument was redesigned in 2011. Estimates for 2011 are based on 

the 15% of sample who did not receive the revised survey instrument.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey (PPCS), 2002, 

2005, 2008, and 2011.
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 6

Blacks were more likely than whites and Hispanics to 

perceive nonfatal force by police as excessive

During the 2002–11 period, 1.6% of residents who had 

contact with police experienced nonfatal force during their 

most recent contact (table 4). Of residents who experienced 

verbal force (0.7%), 71% described the force as excessive. 

Among residents who experienced physical force (0.8%), 

75% described the force as excessive. Regardless of the type 

of force, blacks were more likely than whites and Hispanics 

to experience force and to describe the force as excessive.

Blacks (1.6%) were more likely to experience verbal force 

than whites (0.6%). There were no significant differences 

between whites, blacks, and Hispanics in the perception 

of verbal force as excessive. A higher percentage of blacks 

(1.6%) experienced physical force than whites (0.7%) and 

Hispanics (0.9%). Blacks (1.3%) were more likely to perceive 

physical force as excessive than whites (0.5%) and Hispanics 

(0.7%). There were no detectable differences between whites 

and Hispanics regarding the perception of physical force 

as excessive.

Across all races and Hispanic origin, the perception that 

the force used was excessive varied by the type of police 

action taken.3 A lower percentage of persons who were 

shouted or cursed at by police believed the force was 

excessive (49%) compared to those who were pushed or 

grabbed (79%), hit or kicked (97%), had a pepper spray 

used against them (81%), or had a gun pointed at them 

3For residents who reported experiencing more than one type of nonfatal 

force in their most recent contact, the most severe form of force was 

counted. For the purposes of this report, the order of severity from least to 

most severe was shouting/cursing, threat, push/grab, hit/kick, pepper spray, 

and pointed gun.

(81%) (figure 5). Verbal threats of force were also more 

likely to be seen as excessive (76%) than shouting or cursing. 

Persons who were hit or kicked were more likely to perceive 

the police action to be excessive than any other type of 

nonfatal force, except pepper spray. Regardless of the type of 

force, residents who experienced an injury were more likely 

to perceive the force as excessive (94%) than those who were 

not injured (74%) (not shown).

Table 4

Perceptions that police threatened or used excessive force, by type of force and race or Hispanic origin of resident, 2002–11

Race/Hispanic 

origin of resident

Average annual

persons with contacts

All types of force Verbal force only Physical force

Any Excessive Any Excessive Any Excessive

All racesa 43,864,600 1.6% 1.2% 0.7% 0.5% 0.8% 0.6%

White*b 32,879,500 1.4 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.7 0.5

Blackb 4,597,500 3.5 † 2.8 † 1.6 † 1.3 1.6 † 1.3 †

Hispanic 4,389,500 2.1 ‡ 1.4 1.1 0.5 0.9 0.7

Note: Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police contact in prior 12 months. See appendix table 8 for standard errors.

*Comparison group.

†Significant difference from comparison group at the 95% confidence interval.

‡Significant difference from comparison group at the 90% confidence interval.

aAlso includes American Indian or Alaska Natives; Asian, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or more races.

bExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011.

FIGURE 5

Percent of residents who believed police threat or use of 

force was excessive, by type of force, 2002–11

Note: Confidence intervals at the 95%-level are shown for each estimate. Includes 

U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police contact in prior 12 

months. Respondents were classified by most severe type of force experienced. 

Excludes other and unknown types that could not be classified into these 

categories. See appendix table 9 for standard errors.

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or the 

coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 

2008, and 2011.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Shout/curse Threat Push/grab Hit/kick Pepper spray ! Point gun

Percent
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 7

The majority of residents who experienced force did 

not believe that the police behaved properly

Across the four PPCS data collections, approximately 

9 in 10 residents believed the police behaved properly 

during contacts that did not involve force (table 5). Blacks 

(84%) were less likely to believe the police behaved properly 

during contacts not involving force than whites (91%) and 

Hispanics (88%). Hispanics were also less likely than whites 

to believe the police behaved properly during contacts that 

did not involve force.

Among residents who experienced force during their 

most recent contact with police (1.6% of all contacts), 

13% believed the police behaved properly, while 87% did not. 

Apparent differences between whites, blacks, and Hispanics 

on whether the police behaved properly during contacts 

involving force were not statistically significant.

Table 5

Perceptions that police behaved properly during all contact, 

by race or Hispanic origin of resident, 2002–11

Race/Hispanic 

origin of resident

Contact not involving

threat or use of forcea Contact involvingthreat or use of force

Average annual 

number Percent

Average annual 

number Percent

All races 43,149,200 89.7% 715,500 13.3%

White*b 32,434,000 90.8 445,500 15.8

Blackb 4,438,400 84.3 † 159,100 8.7 !

Hispanic 4,299,400 88.0 † 90,100 10.6 !

Note: Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police 

contact in prior 12 months. See appendix table 10 for standard errors.

*Comparison group. 

†Significant difference from comparison group at the 95% confidence interval.

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or the 

coefficient of variation is greater than 50%. 

aIncludes any face-to-face contact for which it was unknown whether force was 

threatened or used.

bExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 

2008, and 2011.

Police use of force during the prior 12 months

This report focuses primarily on the police use of nonfatal 

force during a resident’s most recent contact with police. In 

2005, 2008, and 2011, the PPCS also asked respondents who 

had multiple face-to-face contacts with police if they had 

experienced force during the prior 12 months. During the 

2005–11 period, whites had a significantly higher prevalence 

of police threat or use of force based on the 12-month 

reference period (1.9%) than on the most recent contact 

(1.4%). Among blacks and Hispanics, the differences in the 

prevalence of force based on 12–month and most recent 

contact reference periods were not statistically significant 

(not shown).

Persons who had three or more contacts with police were 

more likely to experience the use of force during the prior 

12 months than persons with one or two contacts (table 6). 

Regardless of the number of contacts, a greater percentage 

of blacks (4.7%) experienced police use of force during the 

year than whites (1.9%) and Hispanics (2.7%). The difference 

between whites and Hispanics in the prevalence of force 

during the 12-month period was statistically significant among 

persons with one or two contacts, but not among those with 

three or more contacts.

Table 6

Residents with police contact who experienced threat or 

use of force, by race and Hispanic origin and number of 

contacts, 2005–11

Race/Hispanic 

origin of resident

Average annual 

number with 

contacta

Number of contacts

Any contact 1 2 3 or more

All racesb 43,393,200 2.3% 1.4% 2.7% 7.1%

White*c 32,258,200 1.9 1.3 1.8 5.7

Blackc 4,474,600 4.7 † 2.9 † 5.5 ‡ 11.7 ‡

Hispanic 4,455,500 2.7 0.8 † 5.7 ‡ 9.3

Note: Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police 

contact in prior 12 months. See appendix table 11 for standard errors.

*Comparison group. 

†Significant difference from comparison group at the 95% confidence 

interval.

‡Significant difference from comparison group at the 90% confidence 

interval.

aEstimates differ from those shown in other tables due to the change in data 

years included in the analysis.

bAlso includes American Indian or Alaska Natives; Asian, Native Hawaiian, or 

other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or more races.

cExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2005, 2008, 

and 2011.
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 8

Interracial traffic stops resulted in a higher percentage 

of nonfatal force by police

In the PPCS, residents involved in a traffic stop for their 

most recent contact were asked about the race of the officer 

who conducted the stop. On average, 3.4 times more traffic 

stops involved officers and drivers of the same race than 

interracial stops (table 7). The majority of traffic stops 

involved a white officer and a white driver (not shown). 

Traffic stops involving an officer and driver of different races 

were significantly more likely to involve the threat or use of 

force (2.0%), compared to traffic stops involving an officer 

and driver of the same race (0.8%).

Table 7

Traffic stops and traffic stops involving threat or use of force, 

by race of officer and driver, 2002–11

Average annual 

number

Percent involving 

threat or use of force

Intraracial officer and driver* 12,569,200 0.8%

Interracial officer and drivera 3,653,300 2.0 †

Unknown officer race 1,128,400 1.5

Note: Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police contact 

in prior 12 months. See appendix table 12 for standard errors.

*Comparison group.

†Significant difference from comparison group at the 95% confidence interval.

aIncludes groups of officers of mixed races.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 

2008, and 2011.

Search involving nonfatal force

Contacts involving nonfatal force by police may vary by 

the outcome of the contact, particularly if the resident 

experienced a personal search (i.e., frisk or pat down). In 2005, 

this outcome was not asked of all types of contacts, so findings 

were based on the 2002, 2008, and 2011 surveys.41

Across all races and Hispanic origin, 3.5% of police contacts 

involved the resident being personally searched (table 8). 

In about 0.8% of all contacts, or 22% of contacts involving a 

search, the resident experienced both a personal search and 

use of force.

Whether individuals experienced a personal search or not 

varied by the race or Hispanic origin of the resident. Blacks 

(9.4%) were more likely to experience a personal search than 

whites (2.8%) and Hispanics (3.6%).

4Prevalence estimates on total use of force by race and Hispanic origin 

will differ from table 1 as 2005 was not included.

The percentage of persons who experienced force did not 

differ by whether a person was searched. Overall, about half 

of all use-of-force contacts (48%) involved a personal search 

(0.8% of all contacts). This finding held true for whites, blacks, 

and Hispanics.

Blacks were more likely to experience force by police 

regardless of whether the contact also involved a personal 

search. Blacks (1.4%) were twice as likely as whites (0.7%) 

to experience force while also being personally searched. 

Blacks (1.8%) were also slightly more likely than whites (0.7%) 

to experience force during contacts that did not involve a 

personal search.

Table 8

Residents with police contact who experienced a personal search, with and without threat or use of force, 2002–11

All racesa White*b Blackb Hispanic

Total

Use or threat 

of forcec No forced Total

Use or threat 

of forcec No forced Total

Use or threat 

of forcec No forced Total

Use or threat 

of forcec No forced

Total 100% 1.6% 98.4% 100% 1.4% 98.6% 100% 3.2% † 96.8% † 100% 1.9% 98.1%

Personal search 3.5 0.8 2.8 2.8 0.7 2.1 9.4 † 1.4 † 8.0 † 3.6 1.0 2.7

No searche 96.5 0.8 95.6 97.2 0.7 96.5 90.6 † 1.8 ‡ 88.8 † 96.4 1.0 95.4

Average annual 

 number of contacts 43,933,536 32,817,631 4,721,237 4,476,196

Note: Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police contact in prior 12 months. See appendix table 13 for standard errors.

*Comparison group. 

†Significant difference from comparison group at the 95% confidence interval.

‡Significant difference from comparison group at the 90% confidence interval.

aAlso includes American Indian or Alaska Natives; Asian, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islanders; and persons of two or more races.

bExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

cEstimates differ from those shown in other tables due to the change in data years included in the analysis.

dIncludes contacts for which it was unknown whether force was threatened or used.

eIncludes contacts for which it was unknown whether a search was conducted.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2008, and 2011.
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 9

Understanding gaps in Police–Public Contact Survey (PPCS) coverage

The PPCS is the only national source of data that captures 

resident perceptions of the use of nonfatal force and excessive 

force by police, but it has limitations. Some of its known 

limitations, such as populations that are out of scope or 

missed, can be quantified. Other limitations or sources of error 

are more difficult to measure.

Certain groups that may experience use of force by police 

are excluded from the PPCS due to the survey’s design. The 

PPCS is administered to persons in households. Therefore, it is 

unable to capture residents who experienced deadly force or 

those who were incarcerated after experiencing nonfatal force 

by police. Two other BJS collections, the Survey of Inmates 

in Local Jails (SILJ) and the Arrest-Related Deaths (ARD) 

collection, can be used to understand how much higher the 

prevalence of force would be if estimates included persons 

who were incarcerated and who experienced the use of deadly 

force by police.

The Survey of Inmates in Local Jails (SILJ) was last conducted 

in 2002. The SILJ was a nationally representative stratified 

two-stage sample of almost 7,000 inmates from 417 jails. 

Inmates were surveyed about various topics, including their 

current offenses and if they experienced use of force during 

their last contact with police. In 2002, 22% of inmates reported 

experiencing police use of force when they were arrested 

(not shown).

Estimates on deadly force were obtained from the 

Arrest-Related Deaths (ARD) program, conducted yearly from 

2003 to 2009 and in 2011.5 ARD was an annual national census 

of persons who died during the process of arrest or while in 

custody of local, county, or state law enforcement personnel. 

5Average proportions for race or Hispanic origin from 2005, 2008, and 

2011 were applied to the average annual estimate of law enforcement 

homicides to be consistent with PPCS years.

The collection captured deaths related to police use of 

force, as well as deaths attributed to suicide, intoxication, 

accidental injury, or natural causes. From 2003–09 and 

2011, the upper-bound annual average estimate of persons 

experiencing deadly force by police during arrest was 

1,242. See Assessment of Coverage in the Arrest-Related Deaths 

Program (NCJ 249099, BJS web, October 2015).

Based on estimates from the SILJ in 2002 and the ARD 

estimated number of persons who experienced deadly 

force, the PPCS captured approximately 88% of persons who 

experienced force (table 9). The PPCS captured approximately 

94% of whites who experienced police use of force, compared 

to 78% of blacks and 84% of Hispanics.

Caution should be used in interpreting these findings as these 

two datasets are not without their own limitations in capturing 

the prevalence of use of force. The SILJ captured use of force 

at the time of arrest but not for any prior contacts. This may 

result in an underestimation of the prevalence of force among 

those who were incarcerated in jail following police contact. 

Additionally, the SILJ captured the stock of inmates in the 

jail in a single year and may not have been representative 

of the total population of inmates who flow through jail. It 

was also not representative of those incarcerated in prisons. 

The ARD collection was suspended in 2014 due to concerns 

about coverage and estimates that the program captured 

approximately 50 to 70% of all arrest-related deaths.

Beyond the coverage error, which can be quantified to some 

extent, the PPCS design also excluded persons age 15 or 

younger and persons who were homeless. However, there is 

no available estimate of the prevalence of police use of force 

for these groups that could be used to assess the potential 

PPCS undercoverage.

Table 9

Prevalence of use of force during police contact, 2002–11

Total persons experiencing

police use of force

Nondeadly force Deadly force

Race/

Hispanic 

origin of 

resident

Nonincarcerated personsa Persons in jailb Persons killed by policec

Average 

annual 

population

Average

annual

number

Percent of 

population

PPCS contribution 

to average annual 

number

Average

annual

number

Percent of 

population Number

Percent of 

population

Average

annual

number

Percent of 

population

All races 230,811,742 812,852 0.4% 88% 715,475 0.3% 96,962 0.04% 1,242 0.0002%

White 163,435,095 476,034 0.3% 94 445,512 0.3% 29,975 0.02% 547 0.0003%

Black 27,112,646 204,845 0.8% 78 159,113 0.6% 45,362 0.17% 369 0.0014%

Hispanic 27,236,094 107,219 0.4% 84 90,141 0.3% 16,846 0.06% 232 0.0009%

Note: Includes U.S. residents age 16 or older. Based on most recent police contact in prior 12 months.

aBased on data on the threat or use of force during police contact from the BJS Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011.

bBased on data on the threat or use of force at time of arrest from the BJS Survey of Inmates in Local Jails, 2002.

cBased on the upper bound estimate of law enforcement homicides from the BJS Arrest-Related Deaths collection, 2003–09 and 2011.

Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011; Survey of Inmates in Local Jails, 2002; and Arrest-Related Deaths 

collection, 2003–09 and 2011.
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 10

METHODOLOGY

Data collection

The Police–Public Contact Survey (PPCS) is a supplement 

to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). The 

NCVS annually collects data on crime reported and not 

reported to the police against persons age 12 or older from 

a nationally representative sample of U.S. residents. The 

sample includes persons living in group quarters (such 

as dormitories, rooming houses, and religious group 

dwellings) and excludes persons living in military barracks 

and institutional settings (such as correctional or hospital 

facilities), and homeless persons. For more information, see 

Survey Methodology in Criminal Victimization in the United 

States, 2008 (NCJ 231173, BJS web, May 2011).

Since 1999, the PPCS was administered every 3 years—2002, 

2005, 2008, and 2011—at the end of the NCVS interview 

with persons age 16 or older. Proxy responders and those 

who complete the NCVS interview in a language other than 

English were not eligible to receive the PPCS.

The U.S. Census Bureau administered the PPCS 

questionnaire during a 6-month period, and respondents 

were asked if they had experienced any face-to-face contacts 

with police during the prior 12 months. For example, 

persons interviewed in July 2011 were asked about police 

contacts that occurred between August 2010 and July 2011. 

Persons who said they had a contact during the 12-month 

reference period were asked to describe the nature of the 

contact. Those who had more than one contact were asked 

about only their most recent contact during the period.

PPCS nonrespondents fell into three categories:

 persons whose household did not respond to the NCVS 

(NCVS household nonresponse)

 persons within an interviewed NCVS household who did 

not respond to the NCVS (NCVS person nonresponse)

 persons who responded to the NCVS but did not 

complete the PPCS (PPCS person nonresponse).

The average response rate among persons eligible to 

complete the PPCS was about 80% across the four 

administrations of the survey. Non-interviews included 

respondents who were not available for the interview, 

those who refused to participate, non-English speaking 

respondents (unlike the NCVS interviews, PPCS interviews 

were conducted only in English), and proxy interviews 

representing household members who were unable to 

participate for physical, mental, or other reasons.

There is also some evidence that the PPCS may undercount 

police contacts among subgroups that should be included 

in the sample. For example, during the 2002–11 period, the 

PPCS was not conducted in Spanish. A 2011 assessment of 

nonresponse bias suggested that there may be bias among 

Hispanics. Beginning in 2015, subsequent surveys will be 

administered in multiple languages. However, for the survey 

data examined in this report, it was difficult to assess the 

impact of this potential bias on rates of police contact and the 

prevalence of force. 

As with all resident surveys, the PPCS estimates may also 

be subject to measurement error. External sources of data 

suggest that the PPCS may not capture the full scope of police 

contacts. For example, in 2011, the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports 

showed 12.4 million arrests nationwide. Based on PPCS data 

from the same year, about 1.7 million persons were arrested 

during their most recent contact with police. A portion of the 

difference in the number of arrests was due persons who were 

incarcerated or outside of the scope of the survey (e.g., persons 

age 15 or younger or not living in households) at the time of 

the survey, but the remainder has to be attributed to persons 

with multiple arrests, PPCS undercoverage, or a combination 

of the two. The PPCS may not fully capture persons with the 

highest frequency of police contact and highest risk of police 

use of force. Because the PPCS is administered to a nationally 

representative sample of persons in households, it does not 

target specific subgroups or geographic areas in which contact 

with police might be highest.

The PPCS is also based on residents’ perceptions and reports 

about police behavior. What one respondent interprets as 

police use of force or excessive force may not be interpreted 

the same way by another respondent. Additionally, certain 

types of force measured by the survey are not captured in 

official police records or other independent sources of data. 

Although this is a strength of the survey, some respondents 

may exaggerate details about their experiences, while others 

may suppress information.

The potential PPCS coverage and measurement issues may 

impact estimates of the prevalence of police contact and use 

of force, perhaps differentially for non-whites compared to 

whites. However, there is no evidence to suggest that any racial 

differences in the prevalence and nature of police contact and 

use of force identified in this report would be eliminated with 

coverage improvements.

Understanding gaps in PPCS coverage (continued)
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 11

To produce national estimates on police–public contacts, 

sample weights were applied to the survey data so that the 

respondents represented the entire population, including 

the nonrespondents. After adjustment for nonresponse, the 

sample cases were weighted to produce national population 

estimates of 243,158,236 persons age 16 or older in 2011; 

236,511,832 in 2008; 228,085,344 in 2005; and 215,536,780 

in 2002.

Despite the nonresponse adjustments, low overall response 

rates and low response rates to particular survey items 

can still increase variance in these estimates and produce 

bias when the nonrespondents have characteristics that 

differ from the respondents. The Office of Management 

and Budget guidelines require a nonresponse bias study 

when the overall response rate is below 80%. The Bureau 

of Justice Statistics (BJS) and the Census Bureau compared 

the distributions of respondents and nonrespondents 

and nonresponse estimates for various household and 

demographic characteristics. They also examined their 

impact on the national estimates produced for each iteration 

of the PPCS. The study looked at household-level and 

person-level response rates and found some evidence of 

bias in the rates among blacks and persons of Hispanic 

origin. For example, Hispanics accounted for 14% of the 

U.S. population but about 11% of the PPCS respondents 

after weighting adjustments. Item nonresponse statistics 

were also computed for key survey questions from the PPCS, 

and no evidence of bias was found during the analysis.

Merging PPCS data files

The PPCS questionnaires changed slightly across each 

iteration of the survey. The analyses presented in this report 

are based on variables that were consistently measured 

across all four surveys. Specified text boxes throughout the 

report focus on three years of data when it was not possible 

to combine data from the fourth year due to substantial 

measurement differences.

In 2011, BJS redesigned the PPCS, which resulted in a 

significantly different survey instrument. To assess the 

impact of the redesign on trends in rates and types of police 

contact, BJS administered a split-sample design in which 

a subset of the sample was interviewed using the 2008 

version of the questionnaire, and the remaining sample was 

interviewed using the 2011 version. About 85% of the 2011 

sample was randomly assigned the revised questionnaire 

and the other 15% received the questionnaire designed 

for the 2008 survey. The 2011 data used in this report 

were based on the 15% of the sample that received the 

unrevised instrument.

Standard error computations

When national estimates are derived from a sample, as they 

are with the PPCS, caution must be taken when comparing 

one estimate to another. Although one estimate may be 

larger than another, estimates based on a sample have 

some degree of sampling error. The sampling error of an 

estimate depends on several factors, including the amount 

of variation in the responses, the size of the sample, and the 

size of the subgroup for which the estimate is computed. 

When the sampling error around the estimates is taken into 

consideration, the estimates that appear different may not be 

statistically different.

One measure of the sampling error associated with an 

estimate is the standard error, which can vary from one 

estimate to the next. In general, for a given metric, an 

estimate with a smaller standard error provides a more 

reliable approximation of the true value than an estimate 

with a larger standard error. Estimates with relatively large 

standard errors are associated with less precision and 

reliability and should be interpreted with caution.

Standard errors around PPCS estimates were generated 

through the SPSS Complex Samples package, which 

accounts for the multistage, cluster sample design of the 

NCVS. The Complex Samples package uses the Taylor series 

linearization method for direct variance estimation.

In this report, BJS conducted tests to determine whether 

differences in estimated numbers and percentages were 

statistically significant once sampling error was taken into 

account. Using statistical programs developed specifically 

for the NCVS, all comparisons in the text were tested for 

significance. The primary test procedure used was the 

Student’s t-statistic, which tests the difference between two 

sample estimates. Differences described as higher, lower, 

or different passed a test at the 0.05 level of statistical 

significance (95% confidence level). Differences described as 

somewhat or slightly different, passed a test at the 0.10 level 

of statistical significance (90% confidence level).

Data users can use the estimates and the standard errors 

of the estimates provided in this report to generate a 

confidence interval around the estimate as a measure of 

the margin of error. The following example illustrates how 

standard errors can be used to generate confidence intervals:

Across the four PPCS data collections, an estimated 3.5% 

of blacks experienced the threat or use of force in their 

most recent contact with police (see table 1). Using the 

SPSS Complex Samples package, BJS determined that 

the estimate has a standard error of 0.54 (see appendix 

table 2). A confidence interval around the estimate 

was generated by multiplying the standard errors by 

±1.96 (the t-score of a normal, two-tailed distribution 

that excludes 2.5% at either end of the distribution). 

Therefore, the confidence interval around the estimate 

is 3.5 ± (0.54 X 1.96) or from 2.44 to 4.56. In other 

words, if different samples using the same procedures 

were taken from the U.S. population in data collections 

occurring between 2002 and 2011, 95% of the time the 
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 12

percentage of blacks experiencing the threat or use of 

force by police during their most recent contact would 

be between 2.4% and 4.6%.

In this report, BJS also calculated a coefficient of variation 

(CV) for all estimates, representing the ratio of the standard 

error to the estimate. CVs provide a measure of reliability 

and a means for comparing the precision of estimates across 

measures with differing levels or metrics. When the CV was 

greater than 50%, or the unweighted sample had 10 or fewer 

cases, the estimate was noted with a “!” symbol (interpret 

data with caution; estimate is based on 10 or fewer sample 

cases, or the coefficient of variation exceeds 50%).

Many of the variables examined in this report may be related 

to one another and to other variables not included in the 

analyses. Complex relationships among variables were not 

fully explored in this report and warrant more extensive 

analysis. Causal inferences should not be made based on the 

results presented.
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 13

Appendix table 1

Estimates and standard errors for figure 1: Residents with police contact who experienced threat or use of force, by race or 

Hispanic origin, 2002–11 

Contact Force threatened or used Excessive force

Race/Hispanic origin 

of resident

Average 

annual number Percent

Average 

annual number Percent

Average 

annual number Percent

Total 1,027,435 0.21% 58,182 0.13% 48,795 0.11%

White 817,453 0.24 48,489 0.15 39,709 0.12

Black 202,605 0.53 26,292 0.54 25,610 0.53

Hispanic 200,299 0.49 16,260 0.36 8,945 0.20

Note: Persons age 16 or older. Based on most recent police contact in prior 12 months. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011.

Appendix table 2

Standard errors for table 1: Police contact with and without threat or use of force, by demographic characteristics, 2002–11

Any contact With threat or use of force

Demographic characteristic Average annual number Percent Average annual number Percent

Total 1,027,435 0.21% 58,182 0.13%

Sex

Male 560,428 0.28% 42,926 0.18%

Female 542,354 0.25 34,119 0.16

Age

16–25 342,822 0.49% 32,406 0.29%

26 or older 779,654 0.20 44,314 0.13

Race/Hispanic origin

White 817,453 0.24% 48,489 0.15%

Black 202,605 0.53 26,292 0.54

Hispanic 200,299 0.49 16,260 0.36

Other 110,215 0.62 6,342 0.32

Location of residence

Urban 494,138 0.39% 33,168 0.23%

Suburban 655,141 0.27 44,155 0.19

Rural 421,639 0.50 17,067 0.23

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011.

Appendix table 3

Standard errors for table 2: Police-resident contact with and without threat or use of force, by race or Hispanic origin of 

resident, 2002–11

Contacts without threat or use of force Contacts with threat or use of force

Number of contacts All races White Black Hispanic All races White Black Hispanic

1 0.43% 0.47% 1.54% 1.34% 3.48% 4.16% 8.15% 7.01%

2 0.32 0.37 1.04 1.08 2.76 2.99 5.56 9.81

3 or more 0.32 0.33 1.37 0.96 3.10 3.59 8.10 8.42

Average annual number 

 with contact 973,614 782,269 193,522 194,917 57,994 48,429 26,276 16,194

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011. 
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 14

Appendix table 4

Standard errors for table 3: Police contact involving threat or use of force, by type of contact and race or Hispanic origin of 

resident, 2002–11

All races White Black Hispanic

Type of contact

Average 

annual number Percent 

Average 

annual number Percent 

Average 

annual number Percent 

Average 

annual number Percent 

Any 1,027,435 0.13% 817,453 0.15% 202,605 0.54% 200,299 0.36%

Police-initiated 591,431 0.22% 467,875 0.24% 136,559 0.93% 124,464 0.58%

Traffic stop 516,557 0.15 413,792 0.14 117,323 0.83 111,292 0.63

Driver 441,148 0.16 356,547 0.15 100,986 0.91 101,663 0.67

Passenger 68,012 0.43 55,412 0.46 26,914 1.69 23,807 1.62

Street stop 151,554 1.06 121,141 1.29 53,331 3.25 36,132 1.62

Crime investigation 109,308 0.98 92,095 1.18 34,973 3.11 25,455 1.93

Suspected of wrongdoing 85,163 1.90 63,502 2.29 39,896 6.03 25,126 3.03

Traffic accident 175,074 0.16% 147,007 0.13% 45,052 0.58% 43,137 1.36%

Voluntary 358,202 0.15% 292,086 0.19% 79,227 0.26% 82,855 0.22%

Other 108,491 0.73% 87,658 0.91% 39,483 1.95% 26,775 1.21%

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011.

Appendix table 5

Estimates and standard errors for figure 2: Residents with 

police contact who experienced threat or use of force, 2002, 

2005, 2008, and 2011

Year Estimate Standard error

2002 1.5% 0.12%

2005 1.6 0.16

2008 1.4 0.13

2011 2.0 0.43

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 

2008, and 2011.

Appendix table 6

Estimates and standard errors for figure 3: Residents with 

police contact who experienced threat or use of force, 2002, 

2005, 2008, and 2011

Estimates Standard errors

Year White Black Hispanic White Black Hispanic

2002 1.1% 3.5% 2.4% 0.11% 0.48% 0.45%

2005 1.2 4.3 2.5 0.15 0.81 0.57

2008 1.2 3.4 1.6 0.13 0.78 0.44

2011 1.9 2.8 ! 1.7 ! 0.52 1.62 1.05

! Interpret with caution. Estimates for blacks and Hispanics based on 10 or fewer 

sample cases, or the coefficient of variation is greater than 50%. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 

2008, and 2011.

Appendix table 7

Estimates and standard errors for figure 4: Residents with police contact who experienced threat or use of force, by type of 

contact, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011

Estimates Standard errors

Year Driver in traffic stop

Other policeinitiated contactVoluntary contact 

or accident Driver in traffic stop

Other policeinitiated contactVoluntary contact 

or accident

2002 1.1% 4.9% 1.0% 0.15% 0.55% 0.14%

2005 0.8 7.2 1.0 0.17 1.00 0.15

2008 0.9 5.7 1.0 0.16 0.85 0.15

2011 1.4 ! 5.7 1.2 ! 0.61 2.12 0.44

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or the coefficient of variation is greater than 50%. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011.
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 15

Appendix table 8

Standard errors for table 4: Perceptions that police threat or use of force was excessive, by type of force and race or Hispanic 

origin of resident, 2002–11

Race/Hispanic 

origin of resident

All types of force Verbal force only Physical force

Any Excessive Any Excessive Any Excessive

All races 0.13% 0.11% 0.10% 0.08% 0.09% 0.07%

White 0.15 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.11 0.08

Black 0.54 0.53 0.50 0.49 0.23 0.22

Hispanic 0.36 0.20 0.32 0.13 0.15 0.14

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011.

Appendix table 9

Estimates and standard errors for figure 5: Percent of 

residents who believed police threat or use of force was 

excessive, by type of force, 2002–11

Type of force Estimate Standard error

Shout/curse 49.3% 9.35%

Threat 75.6 6.41

Push/grab 79.3 3.82

Hit/kick 96.9 3.07

Pepper spray 80.7 ! 12.69

Point gun 81.0 6.72

Note: Based on most recent police contact in prior 12 months. Respondents were 

classified by most severe type of force experienced. 

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or the 

coefficient of variation is greater than 50%. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 

2008, and 2011.

Appendix table 10

Standard errors for table 5: Perceptions that police behaved 

properly during all contacts, by race or Hispanic origin of 

resident, 2002–11

Race/Hispanic origin 

of resident

Contact without threat 

or use of force

Contact with threat 

or use of force

Average 

annual number Percent 

Average 

annual number Percent 

All races 1,013,298 0.27% 58,182 2.23%

White 810,502 0.28 48,489 3.07

Black 196,020 1.03 26,292 4.69

Hispanic 197,368 0.86 16,260 3.72

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 

2008, and 2011.

Appendix table 11

Standard errors for table 6: Residents with police contact 

who experienced threat or use of force, by race or Hispanic 

origin and number of contacts, 2005–11

Race/Hispanic 

origin of resident

Average annual 

number with contact

Number of face-to-face contacts

Any 1 2 3 or more

All races 1,198,386 0.19% 0.17% 0.44% 0.91%

White 933,241 0.21 0.20 0.40 0.96

Black 242,216 0.80 0.76 2.08 3.32

Hispanic 236,430 0.56 0.18 2.06 3.12

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2005, 2008, and 

2011.

Appendix table 12

Standard errors of table 7: Traffic stops with and without 

threat or use of force, by race of officer and driver, 2002–11

Average annual 

number of stops

Percent with threat 

or use of force

Intracial officer and driver 365,710 0.15%

Interracial officer and driver 152,839 0.55

Unknown officer race 74,323 0.62

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2005, 

2008, and 2011.
POLICE USE OF NONFATAL FORCE, 2002–11 | NOVEMBER 2015 16

Appendix table 13

Standard errors for table 8: Residents with police contact who experienced a personal search, with and without threat or use 

of force, 2002–11

All races White Black Hispanic

Total

Use or threat 

of force No force Total

Use or threat 

of force No force Total

Use or threat 

of force No force Total

Use or threat 

of force No force

Total ~ 0.16% 0.16% ~ 0.19% 0.19% ~ 0.67% 0.67% ~ 0.44% 0.44%

Personal search 0.26% 0.12 0.24 0.28% 0.14 0.24 1.34% 0.30 1.33 0.60% 0.37 0.45

No search 0.26 0.12 0.28 0.28 0.12 0.30 1.34 0.61 1.39 0.60 0.24 0.66

~Not applicable.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Police–Public Contact Survey, 2002, 2008, and 2011.
Office of Justice Programs

Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods

www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Celebrating

 35 years

NCJ249216

The Bureau of Justice Statistics of the U.S. Department of Justice is the principal 

federal agency responsible for measuring crime, criminal victimization, criminal 

offenders, victims of crime, correlates of crime, and the operation of criminal 

and civil justice systems at the federal, state, tribal, and local levels. BJS collects, 

analyzes, and disseminates reliable and valid statistics on crime and justice 

systems in the United States, supports improvements to state and local criminal 

justice information systems, and participates with national and international 

organizations to develop and recommend national standards for justice statistics. 

William J. Sabol is director.

This report was written by Shelley Hyland, Lynn Langton, and Elizabeth Davis. 

Elizabeth Davis verified the report.

Lynne McConnell and Jill Thomas edited the report. Barbara Quinn produced 

the report.

November 2015, NCJ 249216