The Less Lethal Toolkit – Weighing the Options

Law enforcement professionals are equipped with a range of less-lethal tools designed to gain compliance, stop active aggression and reduce the likelihood of serious injury when deadly force is unwarranted. Understanding the capabilities and limitations of each option is critical for proper deployment, officer safety and public trust. Below is a quick, basic comparison of commonly issued less-lethal tools: the baton, Conducted Energy Weapon (CEW), OC spray, OC/chemical projectiles and impact munitions.

Baton (expandable or straight stick)

Pros:

• Simple, durable, does not rely on technology
• Effective for targeted strikes
• Provides strong defensive and control capabilities during physical confrontations
• Useful as a show-of-force tool, strong visual/psychological effect often enough to gain compliance without escalation

Cons:

• Effectiveness depends heavily on officer skill and targeting
• Potential for significant injury if strikes are improperly delivered
• Limited effectiveness against highly resistant or pain-tolerant subjects
• Straight stick may be bulky and undesirable for routine carry (expandable baton addresses this)

 

Conducted Energy Weapon (CEW)

Pros:

• Provides neuromuscular incapacitation at a distance (typically up to 15–25 feet)
• Often effective against actively aggressive or combative individuals
• Reduces the need for prolonged physical struggles
• Generally results in fewer injuries compared to hands-on force

Cons:

• Probe placement and spread are critical for effectiveness
• Limited cartridge capacity or multiple shot requires precision
• Less effective through heavy clothing or if probes fail to make proper contact
• Subject intoxication/drug use or mental state may reduce effectiveness or increase risk of bad medical or physical outcomes
• Requires ongoing training and battery maintenance

 

OC (Oleoresin Capsicum) spray

Pros:

• Lightweight and easy to carry
• Effective for gaining compliance from actively resistant individuals
• Can impact multiple subjects in close proximity
• Minimal long-term injury risk when used properly

Cons:

• Wind and environmental conditions may reduce effectiveness or cause cross-contamination
• Effects vary significantly depending on the individual
• Officers or bystanders in proximity may be affected by exposure 
• Does not incapacitate; subjects may continue fighting despite discomfort

 

OC/chemical projectiles

Pros:

• Allows for greater distance compared to handheld OC spray
• Can disperse chemical irritant over an area
• Effective for crowd management or barricaded subjects
• Reduces need for close physical engagement

Cons:

• Accuracy decreases at longer distances
• Wind can affect dispersal
• Requires specialized launcher and training
• Not typically carried/accessible by officers as a routine duty tool
• May escalate tension in crowd-control environments if not properly managed

Impact munitions

Pros:

• Effective at greater distances than most other less-lethal tools.
• Can stop aggressive behavior through pain compliance and blunt impact
• Useful for armed but non-lethal threats
• Provides a standoff alternative when CEW or OC may not be appropriate

Cons:

• Risk of serious injury if improperly targeted (e.g., head, neck, chest)
• Requires precise aim and distance judgment
• Limited ammunition capacity
• May not immediately incapacitate a determined subject

 

Conclusion

No single less-lethal tool is universally effective in every situation. Each option serves a specific role within the broader confrontational continuum. Proper training, sound judgment, and policy compliance are essential to ensure that these tools are used safely and effectively. By understanding the strengths and limitations of each less-lethal option, officers can make informed decisions that prioritize safety, proportionality, and accountability.