[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.173.48.53. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Curated health policy research and original commentary from across the JAMA Network
health-forum_ChannelsBanner
[Skip to Content Landing]
Insights
Health and Human Rights

Protests Against Police Violence Met by More Police Violence—A Dangerous Paradox

  • 1Physicians for Human Rights, New York, New York
  • 2Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor
  • 3Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
  • 4Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC
  • 5School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley

During the past week, the images of peaceful protesters in the United States being shot with projectiles, sprayed with pepper spray, or teargassed by police in riot gear reminded us of the many peaceful protesters in other countries who have been severely injured from excessive use of force by the state. As physician-researchers for Physicians for Human Rights, we have investigated the health effects of the use of so-called nonlethal crowd-control weapons by security officials against demonstrators in Bahrain, India, Palestine, South Korea, Sudan, Turkey, and Hong Kong.1 We have examined people who were blinded by rubber bullets, who experienced traumatic brain injury from teargas canisters shot at close range, and who have had prolonged respiratory difficulties from teargas exposure. The settings vary, but the weapons are similar.

Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    1 Comment for this article
    Dangerous Indeed
    Michael Mundorff, MBA, MHSA | Retired
    Well said. When the population needs to be protected FROM the police more than they need to be protected BY the police, it is time to re-examine their structure and budgeting.

    Extralegal actors such as the National Guard, Secret Service, Bureau of Prisons, DEA, and others (who were those plain unmarked armed personnel in DC?) who have no statutory law enforcement authority should be prohibited.
    CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
    ×