Which of the following can be considered a reason for using less-than-lethal options when apprehending a suspect?

Using less-than-lethal options when apprehending a suspect serves several important purposes, all of which contribute to effective policing while emphasizing safety for both officers and civilians.

Preventing severe injury is a primary reason as less-than-lethal options are designed to incapacitate a suspect without causing significant harm or long-term damage. This approach also reduces the risk of litigation and public scrutiny that can arise from overly aggressive action.

Eliminating a threat quickly is another crucial aspect. Less-than-lethal options can quickly neutralize a dangerous situation, allowing officers to manage the incident without resorting to deadly force. This can prevent escalation and ensure safety for bystanders and others involved.

Maintaining public order is also vital, as effective use of less-than-lethal options demonstrates a commitment to proportionality and restraint in law enforcement. It can help to maintain community trust and cooperation, showing that police are willing to prioritize de-escalation over confrontation.

Combining all these reasons, it is clear that less-than-lethal options play a multifaceted role in modern policing, making the holistic approach of using all the aforementioned reasons valid and essential in decision-making during confrontations with suspects.