Authority to use force does NOT allow for punishment of a compliant subject unless?

The rationale for selecting that specific choice stems from the understanding of use of force principles in law enforcement. The authority granted to officers to use force is typically focused on the necessity of maintaining control and ensuring safety during encounters with subjects.

When a subject has been compliant, their cooperation indicates that they are not posing an immediate threat or resisting arrest. Thus, punitive actions against a compliant individual are generally deemed excessive and inappropriate within the framework of appropriate use of force. However, if the subject had previously exhibited resistance or assaultive behavior, that past conduct can justify the use of force. It allows officers to respond appropriately to a situation where ongoing compliance cannot be assumed due to the subject's prior actions, thereby upholding the safety of both the officer and the public.

In contrast, the other choices do not establish a justifiable basis for the use of force against a compliant subject. Refusal to provide identification, evidence of drug use, or appearing suspicious do not, by themselves, merit punitive measures if the subject is otherwise compliant. Each of these scenarios may warrant further investigation or inquiry, but they do not justify the use of force in the absence of resistance or a direct threat to safety.