Which of the following best defines 'intermediate force'?

The definition of 'intermediate force' encompasses the idea that it exists between minimal force, which may be considered merely verbal commands or physical restraint that does not cause injury, and excessive force, which is unreasonable and can lead to excessive harm or violation of rights. Intermediate force is often characterized as a level of physical force that is proportional to the threat faced by law enforcement officers, making it an appropriate response in situations that require more control than mere verbal interaction, but not so severe as to constitute excessive physical force.

In this context, intermediate force can include techniques such as baton strikes, pepper spray, or physical holds, which are specifically intended to subdue a suspect without inflicting unnecessary harm. This is why the correct answer effectively captures the essence of what 'intermediate force' is designed to accomplish within the framework of law enforcement practices.

The other options do not accurately capture the definition of intermediate force: the presence of a significant threat refers to the context in which force might be applied, but not to the nature of the force itself; responding to cooperative suspects does not typically involve force at all; and self-defense specifically implies a reactive use of force rather than a preemptive or control-oriented application that intermediate force encompasses.