Use of Force Continuum for Civilians

Law enforcement officers operate on a "use of force" continuum when they engage a suspect. As a civilian, you too must work under the same framework. You cannot shoot someone who is unarmed, for example, unless there are exigent circumstances (e.g. multiple assailants, fearing for your life, etc). The use of force continuum will serve as a general guide of sorts, to help you be aware of the significance of excessive force in a civilian capacity.

NOTICE: Everything in this video is for INFORMATIONAL and EDUCATIONAL purposes only! We are not lawyers and cannot give legal advice.

[capnmerica]

In some American states all it takes is a reasonable belief that serious bodily harm or death to yourself or those around you to justify deadly force if you are in a public setting. There are some prerequisites but they are mainly that you can't be committing a crime and you must be legally allowed to have the firearm in that area. It's called stand your ground. There is no use of force continuum in those situations.

[beej]

So if a citizen pulls out of knife then you pull out a gun that don't add up

[romant]

That is not what they do when they over step their bounds. One cop took me out without even giving a command tackle headlock punch in the nose all over me speaking loud on a corner it was stupid. Cops like that should be charged with assault.

[tdiddle]

I think this was very well said.

However, one question I would have is that what if a niar-do-well attacks you, perhaps for the purposes of robbery, and you didn't use that weapon (like a handgun) because of force of continuum, but you know as soon as you are down, they with then have free and unrestricted açcess to your handgun where which they can kill you dead with ease?

I am not a handgun advocate, but I do think this is a good question.

[tanzepei]

2:51 I thought it's supposed to be the baton first then the taser or a non lethal projectile weapon?

[travismccurdy]

I disagree you cannot shoot an unarmed person. You have to consider disparity of force as well. A 120# person being mounted and punched repeatedly by a 260# person on top of them can absolutely shoot them justifiably. The main contingent is: will "person A's" action cause grievous bodily harm or death to "person B"?This can be armed or unarmed. Just my 2¢. I'm no lawyer.

[marty]

Beware if you live in Canada. This will not get you out of assault or homicide charges.

[Harlem]

Ahh but you CAN under certain circumstances use a firearm on an unarmed individual. enter the concept of force disparity. For example a disabled individual whom would likely be killed in a fist fight can shoot an attacker.

[heathermchaney]

Haha, this is so true, sometimes unfortunately...but, in these situations, common sense has to be king.

[anonymousposter]

The Use of Force Continuum is NOT A STANDARD, NOR LAW. IT IS A TRAINING TOOL CREATED BY A PRIVATE TRAINING ENTITY, not realizing how dumb it is. Most law enforcement agencies dont use continuums, because they are great for getting sued, not for handling a violent person.

[dmg]

You can have all the 'levels' you want, But ultimately the path is chosen by the offender!!!

[johnniejames]

So why are unarmed suspects being shot dead and choked to death when they present no physical danger? I'm glad you did this video. I hope you redo this video in a more contemporary version.

[ehicksyall]

That guy sounds just like Donut Operator.

[tdiddle]

Such a question is why I think civilians should think long and hard before carrying a firearm, and lawmakers should think long and hard for allowing such a thing legally.

[danwonders]

You in fact CAN use deadly force on an unarmed person. You watch too many movies. “A perceived threat of great bodily harm” does not require the threat to have an equal weapon. There are too many legal examples to sight.