Which statement is true regarding an officer's liability when using force?

An officer using reasonable force is less likely to be liable because the law gives officers some discretion to use force while performing their duties, especially in situations where they are confronted with immediate threats or both the officer and the public's safety is at stake. When an officer's use of force is deemed reasonable—meaning it is necessary and proportionate to the threat faced—they are generally protected from liability in civil cases.

This principle is grounded in the understanding that law enforcement officers often need to make split-second decisions in high-pressure circumstances. Therefore, as long as the force used aligns with the law and established protocols for what is considered reasonable, the officer's likelihood of facing liability decreases significantly. Courts often evaluate cases involving use of force by considering the context in which the force was applied, the level of threat, and whether the response was appropriate under those circumstances, making "reasonable force" a key factor in assessing liability.