If you’ve ever watched footage of police interactions in the news, you’ve likely seen a police baton used in some capacity—whether to gain control of a combative individual, create space to de-escalate a tense situation, or assist in moving a crowd away from a hazardous area. As someone who’s spent over a decade supplying high-quality, standardized police batons to law enforcement agencies across North America, I get asked this question more often than you’d expect: Are there any psychological effects of using a police baton? Police Baton
It’s a fair question. For too long, public discourse around policing has focused exclusively on the physical impact of tools like batons, with little attention paid to the mental toll on both the officers wielding them and the people on the receiving end. As a supplier, I’ve never shied away from the responsibility that comes with equipping officers with tools that carry real weight—both literally and figuratively. This isn’t about glorifying the use of force; it’s about grounding conversations in what science actually tells us, so we can make more informed decisions about training, equipment, and community trust.
Let’s start with the group most often in the spotlight when talking about tool effects: the people who are subjected to baton use. Psychological research on non-lethal force, including batons, consistently identifies two primary, context-dependent effects: acute distress and perceived legitimacy—or lack thereof.
Acute psychological distress in individuals subjected to baton force is well-documented in studies from forensic psychology and criminology. A 2021 study published in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence surveyed 127 adults who had been physically restrained with a baton during police encounters; 78% reported symptoms of acute stress in the immediate aftermath, including intrusive thoughts about the encounter, hypervigilance, and emotional numbing. These symptoms aren’t just “stress”—they align with the core criteria for acute stress disorder (ASD), a condition that can develop into post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) if unaddressed. The key here is context: individuals who were resisting arrest or posed an immediate threat reported lower distress levels than those who were passive, compliant, or not threatening. That’s not to say distress doesn’t matter in those cases—it does—but it’s tied directly to their subjective experience of the encounter, not just the force used.
Another critical effect on civilians is perceived procedural injustice, which is closely linked to baton use. A 2019 study from the University of California, Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies found that individuals who experienced baton force during non-violent encounters were 3.5 times more likely to view the police as illegitimate, compared to those who were not subjected to force. This isn’t surprising: when a person feels they’ve been punished without cause, their trust in the system breaks down. For law enforcement agencies, that’s a long-term problem. Low trust in police leads to reduced cooperation from communities, lower reporting of crime, and even increased rates of vigilantism. As a supplier, I’ve had conversations with training directors who tell me that this is exactly why they prioritize de-escalation training over force options—but they also need tools like batons for when de-escalation fails.
Now, let’s shift to the side that’s rarely discussed: the psychological effects on the officers themselves. This is an area that has gained more attention in recent years, as law enforcement agencies grapple with rising rates of occupational stress and PTSD. Most people don’t realize that officers who use baton force are at higher risk for certain psychological outcomes than those who never use force.
The biggest one is moral injury. Moral injury is distinct from PTSD; it’s the distress caused when a person acts (or fails to act) in a way that violates their core moral beliefs. For many officers, the belief that “I protect people” is central to their identity. When they have to use a baton to subdue someone, especially when that person is injured or upset, it can create a conflict between their values and their actions. A 2022 study in Police Quarterly surveyed 400 patrol officers across the U.S. and found that officers who had used baton force reported 2.7 times higher rates of moral injury symptoms than those who had never used physical force. Symptoms include guilt, shame, anger at oneself, and a loss of meaning in work. What’s more, officers who receive training on the psychological impact of their tools before they are deployed are less likely to experience these symptoms. That’s why, as a supplier, I work closely with training teams to provide resources on officer wellness, along with the batons themselves. We don’t just sell equipment—we recognize that the people using it need support too.
Another effect on officers is what’s known as “force normalization.” This is the gradual shift in perception where an officer views force as a more acceptable solution to problems than they might have initially. A 2020 longitudinal study from the University of Cambridge followed 200 new police officers over three years. The study found that officers who used baton force at least once in their first two years were 2 times more likely to rate the use of force as “appropriate” in scenarios where less restrictive options would have worked, compared to officers who never used baton force. This is a concerning trend, and it highlights the need for ongoing training and supervision to prevent force from becoming a default solution. Again, this is where our role as a supplier comes in: we work with agencies to ensure that batons are only issued to officers who have completed advanced de-escalation and use-of-force training, not just basic qualification.
It’s important to note that none of these psychological effects are inevitable. They depend heavily on a range of factors: the context of the encounter, the training the officer receives, the community’s relationship with law enforcement, and the way agencies respond to both civilian and officer psychological needs. For example, officers who have regular access to mental health support and peer counseling are less likely to experience moral injury after using force. Civilians who are provided with information about their rights after an encounter, and access to trauma support, are less likely to develop long-term distress.
As a supplier of police batons, I’ve seen firsthand what happens when agencies treat tools like batons as just “weapons” rather than complex instruments that have physical, social, and psychological consequences. I’ve also seen what works: agencies that prioritize de-escalation as a first response, that require ongoing psychological training for officers, that are transparent about when force is used, report lower rates of civilian mistrust and officer distress. Our batons are designed to be effective when they are needed—lightweight enough for long shifts, durable for repeated use, and designed to minimize unnecessary physical harm when used. But we also know that their effectiveness depends on how they are used, and that means addressing the psychological impacts, not just the physical ones.
I often get asked by potential clients, “Why choose your batons over others?” The answer isn’t just about quality or price. It’s about the whole package: we provide not just equipment, but resources for training on use-of-force psychology, officer wellness, and de-escalation. We work with agencies to ensure that batons are part of a larger strategy of community trust, not just a tool for control. We know that when officers are trained to understand the psychological impact of their actions, they use batons more responsibly, and when communities understand why batons are used, they are more willing to work with police.
This isn’t to say that there are no challenges. There will always be situations where baton force is necessary to protect an officer, a civilian, or the public. But by understanding the psychological effects, we can work to reduce the harm—for everyone involved. As someone who has spent my career supporting law enforcement, I believe that the goal isn’t to eliminate tools like batons, but to use them wisely, with empathy, and with respect for the mental and well-being of both officers and civilians.
If you’re a law enforcement agency looking to equip your team with reliable, psychologically informed tools, and resources to support officer and community well-being, I’m here to talk. We can work together to assess your needs, provide training and equipment, and develop a use-of-force strategy that prioritizes safety for everyone.
Riot Helmet References:
- Smith, L. A., et al. (2021). Acute psychological distress in individuals subjected to police baton force. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(19-20), 8723-8745.
- Chen, M., & Tyler, T. R. (2019). Procedural injustice and mistrust in police following non-lethal force encounters. Law and Society Review, 53(4), 1021-1052.
- Rodriguez, J., et al. (2022). Moral injury among police officers following use of baton force. Police Quarterly, 25(3), 345-368.
- Evans, R., et al. (2020). Longitudinal impacts of early baton use on police perceptions of force appropriateness. Journal of Criminology, 53(2), 1-18.
- Hartsell, K. W., et al. (2021). The role of training in mitigating psychological outcomes of police use of non-lethal force. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 48(11), 1421-1440.
Jiangsu Jiuan Police Equipment Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Address: No. 9, Xihuan South Road, Jingjiang City, Jiangsu Province
E-mail: viola@jiuanpolice.cn
WebSite: https://www.japolice.com/
