1bigun11
MuscleHead
- Oct 23, 2010
- 2,142
- 1,832
Use of Force Continuum:
1. Officer/Offender Presence (call for backup)
2. Verbal Commands
3. Empty soft hand (grab ahold)
4. Empty hard hand (fight is on)
5. Intermediate Weapons (nightsticks, batons, mace, beer bottles, whatever is available)
6. Deadly Force
As I understand it these are not hard and fast rules, only guidelines. But the officer is generally supposed to match the level of force (or threat) is he is receiving from the offender, or at most go only one level higher than the force (or threat) he is receiving from the offender. And of course he is supposed to back off immediately once the offender stops resisting.
I did not post this because I think Officer Wilson was wrong. To the contrary I think that if you are dumb enough to initiate a fist fight with a guy who is openly carrying a handgun then you get what you get--which is usually dead.
No, the reason that I am posting it because the cops also use it to determine the reasonableness of force used in self-defense situations by ordinary citizens. So if you are ever in a bar fight and wind up winning it decisively, the cops and prosecutor will likely use a similar continuum to decide whether or not the amount of force you used to defend yourself was reasonable under the circumstances, even if you can clearly prove the other guy was the initial aggressor.
Of course cops have a tendency to apply the standard a bit more strictly to ordinary citizens than they do to themselves. They let themselves go a step (or two) higher than they are receiving. They do not always grant that grace to ordinary citizens.
Except for Texas, which sounds like my kind of state for sure!
1. Officer/Offender Presence (call for backup)
2. Verbal Commands
3. Empty soft hand (grab ahold)
4. Empty hard hand (fight is on)
5. Intermediate Weapons (nightsticks, batons, mace, beer bottles, whatever is available)
6. Deadly Force
As I understand it these are not hard and fast rules, only guidelines. But the officer is generally supposed to match the level of force (or threat) is he is receiving from the offender, or at most go only one level higher than the force (or threat) he is receiving from the offender. And of course he is supposed to back off immediately once the offender stops resisting.
I did not post this because I think Officer Wilson was wrong. To the contrary I think that if you are dumb enough to initiate a fist fight with a guy who is openly carrying a handgun then you get what you get--which is usually dead.
No, the reason that I am posting it because the cops also use it to determine the reasonableness of force used in self-defense situations by ordinary citizens. So if you are ever in a bar fight and wind up winning it decisively, the cops and prosecutor will likely use a similar continuum to decide whether or not the amount of force you used to defend yourself was reasonable under the circumstances, even if you can clearly prove the other guy was the initial aggressor.
Of course cops have a tendency to apply the standard a bit more strictly to ordinary citizens than they do to themselves. They let themselves go a step (or two) higher than they are receiving. They do not always grant that grace to ordinary citizens.
Except for Texas, which sounds like my kind of state for sure!
Last edited:
