The fact that this isn't abundantly clear is - in my opinion - good enough reason to ditch all "less lethal" weapons in favor of obviously lethal ones. There s

The fact that this isn't abundantly clear is - in my opinion - good enough reason to ditch all "less lethal" weapons in favor of obviously lethal ones. There should be no ambiguity in whether a lethal weapon should be used, including any "less lethal" one. The intention behind the very design of these weapons is to make the lethality of that weapon ambiguous, so that its use in inappropriate situations can be excused. When officers use obviously lethal firearms, there is no question as to their intent. When they use "less lethal" ones, they are given the opportunity to misconstrue intent to kill as intent to maim or threaten. A likely reason "less lethal" weapons have been promoted is that police officers often use inappropriate lethal force with little to no consequence. People hope that giving police "less lethal" weapons will at least lessen the likelihood of death from police abuse. This pipe dream is a very dangerous compromise. There are a lot of changes that need to be made in law enforcement, and most of them end up being dependent on another. This entire situation really brings out the "hell" in dependency hell.