Public Opinion About Police Weapons and Equipment: An Exploratory Analysis

Q1 Social Sciences
K. Wozniak, Kevin Drakulich, B. Calfano
{"title":"Public Opinion About Police Weapons and Equipment: An Exploratory Analysis","authors":"K. Wozniak, Kevin Drakulich, B. Calfano","doi":"10.1177/08874034211005005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite debates about the “material militarization” of the police, relatively little information on mass public opinion about police weapons, equipment, and gear currently exists. We analyze data from a national, opt-in panel of survey participants to assess public opinion regarding police use of 10 different types of weapons and equipment for use in confrontations with citizens. We find that public opinion defies easy classification into “militarized” versus “routine” equipment categories. Multivariate analyses indicate that perceptions of (a) police efficacy and (b) the frequency with which officers experience physical assaults on the job are the most consistent predictors of support for a range of weapons and gear, whereas perceptions of police misconduct and bias predict opposition to some types of tools. Partisan differences in attitudes between Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are less consistent predictors than broader perceptions about policing, but the effects of partisanship that are evident are substantively large.","PeriodicalId":10757,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Justice Policy Review","volume":"32 1","pages":"960 - 991"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/08874034211005005","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminal Justice Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08874034211005005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Despite debates about the “material militarization” of the police, relatively little information on mass public opinion about police weapons, equipment, and gear currently exists. We analyze data from a national, opt-in panel of survey participants to assess public opinion regarding police use of 10 different types of weapons and equipment for use in confrontations with citizens. We find that public opinion defies easy classification into “militarized” versus “routine” equipment categories. Multivariate analyses indicate that perceptions of (a) police efficacy and (b) the frequency with which officers experience physical assaults on the job are the most consistent predictors of support for a range of weapons and gear, whereas perceptions of police misconduct and bias predict opposition to some types of tools. Partisan differences in attitudes between Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are less consistent predictors than broader perceptions about policing, but the effects of partisanship that are evident are substantively large.
警用武器装备舆情探析
尽管有关于警察“物质军事化”的争论,但目前关于警察武器、装备和装备的大众舆论信息相对较少。我们分析了一个全国性的、可选择加入的调查参与者小组的数据,以评估公众对警察在与公民对抗时使用10种不同类型的武器和装备的看法。我们发现,公众舆论很难将其简单地分为“军事化”和“常规”两类。多变量分析表明,对(a)警察效能和(b)警察在工作中遭受人身攻击的频率的看法是支持一系列武器和装备的最一致的预测因素,而对警察不当行为和偏见的看法预测了对某些类型工具的反对。民主党、共和党和无党派人士在态度上的党派差异不如对警务的广泛看法一致,但党派差异的影响是明显的,实质上是巨大的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Criminal Justice Policy Review
Criminal Justice Policy Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Criminal Justice Policy Review (CJPR) is a multidisciplinary journal publishing articles written by scholars and professionals committed to the study of criminal justice policy through experimental and nonexperimental approaches. CJPR is published quarterly and accepts appropriate articles, essays, research notes, interviews, and book reviews. It also provides a forum for special features, which may include invited commentaries, transcripts of significant panels or meetings, position papers, and legislation. To maintain a leadership role in criminal justice policy literature, CJPR will publish articles employing diverse methodologies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信