Under Graham vs. Connor, what should be considered regarding the subject's actions?

In the context of Graham vs. Connor, the actions of the subject must be evaluated primarily through the lens of whether they pose an immediate threat to the safety of law enforcement officers or others in the vicinity. This case established the "objective reasonableness" standard for assessing the use of force by police, which emphasizes evaluating the situation from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene at the time of the incident.

The focus is on the immediacy of the threat and the circumstances surrounding the use of force, rather than on subjective factors such as a individual's previous criminal history, age, gender, or the opinions of bystanders. These other factors, while they might hold some relevance in broader evaluations of a person's behavior or context, do not directly inform the crucial consideration of immediate threat during the split-second decisions that officers sometimes face in the line of duty. Thus, the correct understanding of the principles set forth in Graham vs. Connor revolves around assessing immediate threats, making it a vital component in evaluating the appropriateness of law enforcement actions.