Two primary methods for implementing Alaska's Coleman standard for investigative stops are available: categorical and case-by-case. Both methods are ideologically neutral and should not necessarily be paired with either the law and order or individual liberty ideology. One methodology provides for the administration of Coleman as a categorical exclusion in which investigative stops can be performed only if there is a reasonable suspicion of certain offenses, regardless of other circumstances. The second methodology implements Coleman on a case-by-case basis in which the court considers all the circumstances of a particular police and citizen contact to determine if the stop was reasonable. Alaska's courts now use a case-by-case analysis after an initial use of categorical exclusion. The courts essentially have failed to administer Coleman in a way that requires the imminent public danger or serious harm standard to be met. Until Coleman is explicitly and completely overruled, a proper reading requires that the imminent danger and harm factors be specifically considered and afforded special weight in the reasonableness analysis. 169 footnotes