Which striking techniques can be utilized as a distraction or a stun?

The choice that states all striking techniques can be utilized as a distraction or a stun is correct because various striking techniques, regardless of their intended impact, can serve the dual purpose of creating a momentary distraction or stunning an opponent.

In the context of compliance and control tactics, a distraction is often created by initiating an unexpected physical response, allowing for more effective control or de-escalation strategies to be employed. For example, techniques may include strikes that are designed to target vulnerable areas of the body, such as the eyes, throat, or solar plexus, which can momentarily disrupt an opponent's focus or movement.

Furthermore, many striking techniques do not need to be categorized strictly as high-impact to be effective; even strikes that are lighter in force can still serve to momentarily incapacitate or distract, depending on the precise location of contact and the element of surprise. The emphasis on a diverse array of techniques broadens the tactical options available in various situations.

In contrast to this, options that specify the restriction of techniques—such as only allowing high-impact methods, only non-lethal techniques, or only those approved for use—would unnecessarily limit the tactical flexibility of an officer in a dynamic situation, where the appropriateness of techniques may vary considerably