USING DRAMATIZED INCIDENTS, THE FILM DISCUSSES THE LEGAL BASIS FOR A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER'S RIGHT TO USE FORCE FOR SELF-DEFENSE AND CAUTIONS THAT A SUSPECT OR OTHER INDIVIDUAL'S THREATENING WORDS OR THREATS OF FUTURE HARM DO NOT JUSTIFY THE OFFICER'S USE OF FORCE. THE FILM ALSO CONSIDERS THE BASIS FOR DETERMINING THE DEGREE OF FORCE TO BE USED IN EFFECTING AN ARREST. IT EMPHASIZES THAT EVEN WHEN THE USE OF FORCE IS JUSTIFIED UNDER THE SELF-DEFENSE DOCTRINE OR UNDER OTHER LEGAL AUTHORITY, AN OFFICER MAY BECOME CIVILLY AND CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR USING INAPPROPRIATE OR UNREASONABLE FORCE WHEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT JUSTIFY IT. FOR EXAMPLE, AN OFFICER WHO CONTINUES TO USE FORCE AFTER SUBDUING OR INCAPACITATING A SUSPECT MAY BE LIABLE FOR THE SUSPECT'S INJURIES. THE FILM ALSO DISCUSSES THE USE OF NONLETHAL POLICE WEAPONRY SUCH AS THE UNAUTHORIZED USE OF POLICE FLASHLIGHTS AND NIGHSTICKS IN A FORCEFUL MANNER AND STATES THAT OFFICERS SHOULD CARRY AND USE ONLY WEAPONS IN WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN ADEQUATE TRAINING. FOR RELATED ITEM, SEE NCJ 66306. (AOP)