Comprehensive Study Guide for Level 2 Use of Force
Level 2 Course Overview and Safety Priorities
The Level 2 Use of Force training, designated as 67-26, carries a total value of points. The examination structure consists of multiple-choice questions, true or false questions, and open-response items. A critical foundation of this training is the Integrated Priority of Safety (IPS), which establishes a fill-in-the-blank hierarchy for decision-making. The first priority is always Innocent People, including victims and members of the community. The second priority is Public Safety Officials, encompassing police, fire, and EMT personnel. The third and final priority is the Subject or Suspect themselves.
The Six Components of Proper Handcuffing
Proper handcuffing is defined through six essential components that must be followed systematically. The first component is Immobilization, where the subject is placed in a position where their balance and movement are impaired. This can be achieved in standing, kneeling, or prone positions. The goal is to keep the subject off-balanced while the officer assumes the most tactical position available relative to the subject. The second component is Control. Once immobilized, the officer gains control of the subject’s wrist, arm, or shoulder, with the specific technique depending on the level of resistance encountered.
The third component is Handcuffing. After establishing control, the officer applies the handcuffs using techniques determined by the type of immobilization used. Subjects should always be handcuffed with their hands behind their back unless physical or tactical reasons dictate otherwise. Officers must double lock the handcuffs when it is tactically safe to do so. The fourth component is the Search. Every individual in custody must undergo a systematic and thorough search to ensure safety and security. The fifth component is Monitoring. Officers are responsible for identifying any injuries sustained before or during the arrest. It is the officer's duty to provide or seek medical attention as needed or requested to ensure the subject's well-being, while remaining aware of conditions that might increase medical risks. The sixth and final component is Transport. Moving a subject requires using appropriate prisoner transport positions dictated by the resistance encountered. The officer maintains responsibility and control throughout the movement.
Legal Definitions and Standards for the Use of Force
Under 555 CMR 6.03, force is defined as the amount of physical effort, however slight, required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling individual. It is important to note per 555 CMR 6.04 that physically escorting or handcuffing an individual who offers minimal or no resistance does not constitute a use of force. A law enforcement officer should not use force unless de-escalation tactics have been attempted and have failed, or if such tactics are not feasible based on the totality of the circumstances. Any force used must be necessary and proportionate to several specific goals: performing a lawful arrest or detention, preventing escape from custody, preventing imminent harm while protecting the safety of the officer or others, or defending against an individual who initiates force against an officer.
De-Escalation and Prohibited Practices
De-escalation tactics are defined as proactive actions and approaches used by an officer to stabilize a law enforcement situation. The purpose is to create more time, options, and resources to gain voluntary compliance and reduce or eliminate the need for force. De-escalation is considered both a tactic and an outcome under 555 CMR 6.04. Certain uses of force are strictly prohibited. To temporarily gain or maintain control, an officer shall not intentionally sit, kneel, or stand on an individual’s chest, neck, or spine while forcing them to lie on their stomach. Furthermore, revised regulations as of 09/27/2022 state that an officer shall in no event intentionally sit, kneel, or stand on an individual’s neck or head. Officers are prohibited from obstructing the airway, limiting breathing, or restricting oxygen and blood flow to the head or neck. Any individual placed on their stomach during restraint must be moved to a recovery or seated position as soon as practicable.
Regulations Regarding Chokeholds and Neck Restraints
According to M.G.L. Chapter 6E Section 14 and 555 CMR 6.03, the use of lateral vascular neck restraints, carotid restraints, or any action involving the placement of body parts on or around a person's neck is prohibited if it limits breathing or blood flow. This applies if the action is done with the intent or results in bodily injury, unconsciousness, or death. Such measures are highly regulated and generally restricted due to the extreme risk to human life.
Constitutional Standards: Graham v. Connor
Graham v. Connor is a landmark Supreme Court case that establishes the standard for reviewing use of force claims. The court explicitly held that all claims of excessive force—whether deadly or not—occurring during an arrest, investigative stop, or seizure should be analyzed under the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness standard. This assessment must balance the nature and quality of the intrusion on the individual's Fourth Amendment rights against the governmental interests at stake. The court acknowledged that the right to make an arrest or investigatory stop necessarily carries the right to use some degree of physical coercion.
The reasonableness of a specific use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the vision of hindsight. The court noted that not every push or shove violates the Fourth Amendment. The calculus of reasonableness must account for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving. When determining if force is objectively reasonable, courts look at the totality of the circumstances through the Graham Factors, often remembered by the acronym SIRF: the Severity of the crime, whether the suspect poses an Immediate threat to safety, whether the suspect is actively Resisting arrest, or attempting to evade by Flight.
Tactical Objectives and Firearms in Vehicles
The overall objective of any tactical encounter is to gain control and safely resolve the situation, guided by a reverence for human life. No arrest, conviction, or piece of evidence outweighs the value of human life. Regarding vehicles, CMR 555 6.05 states that an officer shall not discharge a firearm into or at a moving motor vehicle unless the discharge is reasonably necessary to prevent imminent harm based on the totality of the circumstances. Specific conditions must exist: the person in the vehicle must be threatening the officer with deadly force by means other than the vehicle, or the vehicle is being operated in a manner deliberately intended to strike a person. Additionally, the officer must not have intentionally positioned themselves to create the likelihood of being struck, the officer is not firing strictly to disable the car, and there is a high probability of striking the intended target.
Fleeing Suspects and Legal Duties: Garner, Adams, and Hill
Tennessee v. Garner addressed the use of deadly force against fleeing suspects. The court ruled that using deadly force to prevent escape is unconstitutional unless: 1) the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe the suspect committed a crime involving serious injury; 2) deadly force is necessary to prevent escape; and 3) a warning was given where feasible. Crucially, the force must be reasonable at the time it is applied. Commonwealth v. Adams establishes the Duty to Intervene. Officers who observe another officer using force beyond what is objectively reasonable must intervene and report the incident no later than the end of their duty shift.
Hill v. Miracle addresses force during medical emergencies. In this case, a deputy used a Taser to subdue a combative individual experiencing a diabetic emergency so paramedics could provide life-saving care. The court established three questions to determine reasonableness in such cases: 1) Was the person experiencing a medical emergency preventing rational decisions? 2) Was some degree of force reasonably necessary to stop an immediate threat? 3) Was the force used reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances?
The Totality Triangle and Perceived Subject Actions
The Totality Triangle is composed of three elements: Perceived Circumstances (top), Perceived Subject Action (left), and Reasonable Officer Response (right). Perceived Circumstances involve the officer's perspective on the severity of the crime, the threat level, and subject compliance. Perceived Subject Actions are categorized using the CAPA acronym: 1) Compliant (fully cooperative); 2) Active Resistance (using strength/muscle to resist); 3) Passive Resistance (non-violent non-compliance); and 4) Aggressive/Combative (active aggression countering control efforts). For passive resistance, 555 CMR 6.04 dictates that officers use only the amount of force necessary to effect the arrest.
Reasonable Officer Response Categories
The Reasonable Officer Response (CCCID) must be objectively reasonable, necessary, and proportionate. The categories include: 1) Command Presence (verbal communication and officer presence); 2) Contact Control (light touch tactics like leverage, strategic stabilization, and direction); 3) Compliance Techniques (pepper spray, arm/joint locks, pressure points); 4) Impact Techniques (physical strikes using fists, elbows, knees, batons, or less-lethal weaponry like Tasers); and 5) Deadly Force (firearms or any tool of immediate means to save life).
Conducted Energy Devices (CED/Taser) and OC Spray
A Taser is categorized as an Impact Technique and is classified as a firearm per Rule 304B, requiring storage in accordance with M.G.L. 141 and 131. A standard Taser cycle is ††††, and total deployment should not exceed †††† ( cycles). Turning on the CED is not a use of force, but pointing it at a subject is. Tasers are used to incapacitate individuals posing immediate threats or to gain compliance through laser display when a subject is actively resisting. They are prohibited in environments where death may result, for intentional aiming of the laser at eyes, or on handcuffed subjects. If a probe hit occurs, EMS must be called.
OC Spray, an incapacitating agent, is categorized as a Compliance Technique. It targets the face, specifically affecting the eyes, skin, and respiratory tract. It cannot be used on groups of or more people. Officers are responsible for decontamination, which involves dousing exposed areas with water and calling EMS. There is an increased potential for serious injury if incapacitating agents are used when a subject is less than †††† away, in an enclosed area without ventilation, or if the subject lacks normal reflexes like blinking.
Impact Weapons and Baton Striking Areas
Batons are classified as Impact Techniques. Striking areas are color-coded based on risk. Green Striking Areas (primary) include the shoulder, forearms, lower abdomen, thighs, buttocks, Achilles tendon, shoulder blade, upper arm, shin, back of the hand, and inside of the wrist. These areas involve minimal trauma and temporary injury. Yellow Striking Areas (secondary) are used when green areas are ineffective or the threat is higher. These include the collarbone, elbow, knee joint, upper abdomen, and rib cage, and involve moderate trauma. Red Striking Areas are high-risk and include the ears, temple, jaw, throat, back of neck, solar plexus, spine, kidney, tailbone, and groin. A strike to the solar plexus is specifically categorized as a Red Striking Area. In Boston, the groin is considered a red striking area and must be avoided.
Questions & Discussion
During the session, several specific scenarios and rules were clarified through a question and answer format. It was noted that an officer may indeed use force even if a de-escalation tactic has not been attempted, provided that de-escalation was not feasible under the totality of the circumstances. However, law enforcement may not use "any" amount of force against someone actively resisting; it must remain necessary and proportionate. Distraction techniques are distinct from strikes based on two factors: Intent and Intensity. The fundamental reason for using force is to effectively stop unlawful resistance as quickly as possible. If an officer is not lawfully situated, any amount of force used may be deemed unreasonable or excessive.
Regarding medical requests, if a suspect asks for an ambulance, the officer must provide one regardless of whether they believe the suspect is being untruthful. Rule 304 Section 2 clarifies that the application of non-lethal force is generally limited to defensive situations where an officer meets physical resistance during an encounter, is in the process of making an arrest, or when the officer or another person is attacked. Rule 304 Section 5 further specifies that incapacitation agents should be used primarily in self-defense or when met with active resistance, while cautioning against use at distances closer than ††††.