| dc.description.abstract | Affective realism, roughly the hypothesis that you “perceive
what you feel”, has recently been put forward as a novel,
empirically-backed explanation of police shooting errors. The
affective states involved in policing in high-pressure situa tions result in police officers literally seeing guns even when
none are present. The aim of this paper is to (i) unpack the
implications of this explanation for assessing police culpabil ity and (ii) determine whether we should take these implica tions at face value. I argue that while affective realism stands
to diminish, if not eliminate, the moral and legal responsibil ities of officers who have made shooting errors, the empirical
data itself does not directly support such a radical rethink of
police culpability. | vi |
