Safety Outcomes for Use-of-Force Cases for Law Enforcement Agencies With and Without Conducted Energy Devices

Researchers found that agencies that used CEDs had better safety outcomes on six of nine safety measures compared to the matched agencies that did not use CEDs:

  • Officer injuries
  • Suspect injuries
  • Suspect severe injuries
  • Officers who received injuries that required medical attention
  • Suspects who received injuries that required medical attention
  • Suspects who received injuries that resulted in their being taken to an emergency treatment facility.

The researchers found no differences between the CED and non-CED agencies on number of suspect deaths, severe officer injuries and officer injuries that required hospitalization.

The researchers concluded that the findings indicate that CEDs can be an effective weapon for minimizing physical struggles in use-of-force cases and may help avoid up-close combative situations and reduce officer and suspect injuries.

Learn more about the study. Read an abstract and access the final report on CED use..

About This Article

The research described in this article was funded by NIJ award 2006-IJ-CX-0028, awarded to the Police Executive Research Forum.

This article is based on the grantee report " Comparing Safety Outcomes in Police Use-Of-Force Cases for Law Enforcement Agencies That Have Deployed Conducted Energy Devices and A Matched Comparison Group That Have Not: A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation" by Taylor, Bruce, Daniel Woods, Bruce Kubu, Chris Koper, Bill Tegeler, Jason Cheney, Mary Martinez, James Cronin, Kristin Kappelman.

Date Created: November 29, 2016