BACKGROUND: Less-lethal weapons are often used when police officers deal with uncooperative and potentially dangerous persons. In recent years there has been growing international consensus regarding the usefulness of less lethal weapons, such as conducted electrical weapons (CEWs). In 2018 the Swedish Police Authority launched a twoyear trial of CEWs in Sweden.
AIM: The current study aims to evaluate the Police Authority's CEW trial, and to explore the public's point of view about the legitimacy of the police’s use of CEW.
METHODS: The study includes a quantitative survey and qualitative data. The survey data was collected at three time points; before, during, and at the end of the trial. Survey data was collected from two groups of police officers; one group that participated in the CEW trial and one control group that was not part of the trial. To increase the understanding of the survey results, indepth interviews and focus group interviews were conducted with police officers who had experience of using CEW during the trial. To understand more about the citizens' perspective on different aspects of CEW legitimacy, focus group interviews were conducted with a convenient sample of the public. Data from the Police work injury system (LISA) was also collected to investigate the CEW’s impact on police officers' injuries.
RESULTS: Results from the survey showed no differences between CEW and the control group in experiencing stress in certain given situations. Compared to the control group, the police officers in the CEW group experienced a greater sense of safety in situations that involve a high degree of resistance and/or physical attacks. Similarly, the findings from the interviews showed that having access to CEW reduced stress in violent situations by boosting police officers' sense of safety. The interview results revealed that CEW contributes to police officers limiting the use of other potentially harmful means of violence, such as physical methods and firearms. In the survey, no difference was found between the CEW group and the control group in exposure to threat, violence, and resistance, as well as injuries to police officers or counterpart. The interviewees considered the CEW to be an important tool and saw only benefits with it. They believed it could save lives, reduce injuries to both police officers and counterparts, and improve their working environment. Findings from both quantitative and qualitative data confirm the positive effect of CEW through its contribution to lesser use of violence, for example in the reduction in the use of baton and pepper spray, which often cause more injuries. Participants from the public express that CEW is an effective and useful tool for the police, but emphasizes the importance of an awareness regarding the situations in which it is used in and towards whom.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the survey results, it is difficult to draw any definite conclusions about how and to what extent using CEW is associated with less injuries among police officers and counterparts. However, the interview results indicate that police officers experience a decreased risk of violence and thus, injuries. Access to CEW can increase the sense of safety in situations involving violence and strong resistance, which consequently reduces stress. CEW can also reduce the use of pepper spray, baton, and to some extent firearms. The CEW is perceived to have a deescalating effect and can facilitate the process of decision making in relation to which tool to be used in police interventions with a high degree of threat and violence. Participants from the public perceived that the use of violence by the police, including the use of CEW, is in general justifiable.