A tremendous amount of recent public attention has focused on the issue of police brutality. Allegations of brutality frequently arise when police are required to use force against offenders. Whether or not the police are guilty of brutality depends upon a resolution of whether or not the force used by officers was excessive. While the answer to such a question would seem clear-cut, the fact is that law enforcement officers are presented with real-life situations, not text-book examples of criminal scenarios. Therefore, it is important to recall that many arrests and non-arrest situations require the use of force. In addition, the force necessary to effectuate an arrest or prevent criminal activity may be greater than could be determined by an observer, which indicates that the actual incidence of police brutality is lower than reported. Finally, the racial bias demonstrated in police brutality figures gives an inaccurate picture of racial discrimination by police officers. Instead, when one considers that members of those same races are also disproportionately convicted of crimes, it follows that members of those races would be at the center of police brutality allegations. Therefore, while police brutality is a serious problem when it occurs, most incidents of alleged police brutality are actually officers using an appropriate level of force against an appropriate target. .

             In a perfect world, the arrest of criminal suspects would be accomplished without the use of force. However, police officers function in an imperfect world. Criminals are frequently armed with weapons and intend to actively resist arrest. Even when suspected criminals do not present a physical danger to officers, the officers may need to use force in order to accomplish an arrest. For example, a drug dealer may not intend to use violence against police officers, but may evade arrest for the purposes of destroying evidence.