Policing, Danger Narratives, and Routine Traffic Stops — Jordan Blair Woods (2019)
In one of the largest studies of violence against police during traffic stops, Woods challenges the belief that routine stops are inherently dangerous. He argues that police training and legal doctrine often overstate these risks, with important consequences for policing and public safety.
1. The Danger of Routine Traffic Stops Is Greatly Overstated
2. Violence Against Officers During Routine Traffic Stops Is Extremely Rare
3. Most Violence Follows Predictable Warning Signs
4. The “Danger Narrative” Shapes Police Behavior and the Law
5. Better Data Can Improve Officer and Civilian Safety
⭐ Star Facts
- Woods analyzed over 4,200 cases of violence against officers from more than 220 Florida law enforcement agencies over a 10-year period.
- The chance of an officer being feloniously killed during a routine traffic stop was approximately 1 in 6.5 million stops.
- The chance of an assault causing serious injury to an officer was about 1 in 361,111 stops.
- Over 98% of violent encounters resulted in no injury or only minor injuries to officers.
- Only about 3% of violent incidents involved a gun or knife, and less than 1% involved a gun or knife causing serious injury or death.
- Nearly 94% of violent encounters were preceded by at least one identifiable warning sign, such as flight, intoxication, criminal enforcement, or escalation by police.
- Only just over 3% of violent incidents appeared to be random or unprovoked.
- Woods argues that evidence-based assessments of risk—not generalized fear—should guide police training, policy, and Fourth Amendment doctrine.