| Opinion Based Continuum | Research Based Continuum |
| What an individual or small group believes are correct force options | Mirrors the Supreme Court guidelines and defines what is objectively reasonable |
| “Force” incidents are either not tracked at all, or only after certain level of force is employed | All responses are tracked and documented and can quickly and easily be evaluated |
| “Force” situations are either not reviewed or are reviewed only if some individual thinks they should be | Responses that may be questionable are automatically “red flagged” for supervisory review |
| Departments do not know the effectiveness of their officer’s tools or techniques | The effectiveness or ineffectiveness of each officer’s tools and/or techniques are tracked to know when tools need to be re-evaluated and/or officers retrained |
| Departments do not know the force used by each individual officer | Departments can track the responses of each individual officer |
| Departments do not know exactly when force usages have risen in the past so have to guess at staffing levels | Departments know exactly when responses have spiked in the past so they can intelligently decide staffing for the future |
| Factors or circumstances are not recorded that may justify or explain the officer’s force decision | Officer Subject Factors and Special Circumstances are recorded that may justify or explain the response decisions an officer makes |
| Officers have to write their “Force Reports” based on recollection and memory | Officers are provided with an outline format to accurately write their “Action-Response” reports following incidents |
| Departments cannot rapidly document injuries to their officers or the subjects the officers are arresting | Departments can immediately document all injuries to their officer and the subjects they are controlling, including minor injuries and/or injuries prior to police contact |
| Departments may or may not track when impact weapons or impact munitions are used but do not capture all of the information is vital for departmental defense if/when the suit is filed | Not only are baton usages recorded but also the location of strikes, the number of blows struck, the result of the strikes, injuries to the officer or the subject, and follow-up medical treatment |
| Departments may or may not track when neuromuscular disruption devices are used but do not capture all of the information is vital for departmental defense if/when the suit is filed | All NMD responses are recorded with the critical information necessary for litigation: Push or Probe Stun, location on body, number of cycles, effectiveness, reported injuries and/or treatment, how the probes were removed, serial number of the NMD weapon, serial number of the cartridge(s) |
| Departments have to go through all officers’ training files to determine what training they have received | Departments have all of their officers training records in a convenient, easy to recover site |
| Even the departments who can recover these records must face the allegation of bias or contaminating the records | All records can be maintained securely off-site, eliminating bias and easily countering claims of tampering |
| Departments are caught off guard, not having or being able to readily produce critical documents relating to this high liability area | Departments are professional and are able to totally document their officer’s responses to resistance, assault and aggression |
| Hope you are not questioned and if you are, hope for the best | Be prepared and able to produce proof that your department keeps a close eye on this critical function that separated law enforcement, corrections and the military from all other professions |
