The use-of-force continuum describes progression through levels of force. Which sequence best reflects its progression?

• A. Verbal commands → deadly force → presence
• B. Presence/Verbal commands → empty-hand control → intermediate weapons → deadly force, proportional to resistance
• C. Empty-hand control → presence → verbal commands → deadly force
• D. Deadly force → intermediate weapons → empty-hand → verbal commands

Answer: (B)

The main idea being tested is that the use-of-force continuum moves from the least intrusive to more intrusive responses, prioritizing de-escalation and proportionality. It begins with officer presence and clear verbal commands to gain compliance without physical force. If resistance persists, the next step is empty-hand control to physically constrain or control the subject without weapons. If necessary, intermediate weapons are used to gain control with less risk than lethal force. Only after these steps, and when the threat or resistance remains, is deadly force used, and it must be proportional to the level of threat faced. This sequence—presence/verbal commands → empty-hand control → intermediate weapons → deadly force, proportional to resistance—fits that progression.

Starting with deadly force or placing lethal options before establishing presence and verbal commands contradicts the escalation order. Beginning with empty-hand control before verbal commands skips the de-escalation step, and a sequence that reverses the order or puts lethal force ahead does not reflect how officers are trained to respond to resistance.