The imminence divide: public judgments of deadly force by police and civilians

Abstract Objective To assess how threat imminence shapes public judgments of deadly force used by police and by civilians, and whether the public believes the imminence requirement currently applies to police. Methods We fielded a nationally representative US survey experiment ( N = 1,183) that manipulated whether a suspect posed an imminent or non-imminent threat and whether a civilian or police officer faced the decision to use deadly force. Respondents evaluated support for shooting and reported beliefs about relevant legal rules. Results Imminence significantly affected support for deadly force. Although respondents were more supportive of police than civilians using deadly force across conditions, they generally disapproved of shooting a non-imminent threat. Nearly 95% of respondents incorrectly believed that Supreme Court precedent restricts police deadly force to imminent threats. Conclusions The public supports the imminence requirement for police and largely believes it already exists in law. This “imminence divide” between public expectations and legal standards may undermine police legitimacy when officers act lawfully but contrary to public judgment.