The diverse behaviors referred to as police misconduct consist of brutality, harassment, corruption, violation of constitutional rights, and failure to take required or appropriate action. While complainants and various community groups care about police misconduct, studies have revealed similar concerns among police leadership and the rank-and-file. Lawyers can fight police misconduct by suing and defending police officers and the officers' employers, working with police chiefs to frame standards and control mechanisms, and lobbying legislatures to enact such standards. Civil litigation has probably deterred misconduct, but also may discourage appropriately aggressive police work. Research has shown that police practices, including the use of deadly force, can be controlled by departments adopting strict standards and procedures governing police behavior. However, these policies must be effectively marketed to personnel and the public. Studies also suggest that the quality of a district commander impacts misconduct and that civilian review boards are less likely than police internal review groups to find officers guilty and are more lenient in their dispositions. Internal review, or self-policing, provides a strong investigative capacity, facilitates proactive examination of police operations, can have a broader scope and remedies than an outside review, and can control unwanted conduct through peer pressure. In applying any remedy, it should be remembered that the law is only one of many controls on police behavior and that political exigencies should not guide police misconduct control. The article includes two footnotes.