<P> The "reasonable officer" standard is a method often applied to law enforcement and other armed professions to help determine if a use of force was correctly applied . The test is usually applied to whether the level of force used was excessive or not . If an appropriately trained professional, knowing what the subject of the investigation knew at the time and following their agency guidelines (such as a force continuum), would have used the same level of force or higher, then the standard is met . If the level of response is determined to be justified, the quantity of force used is usually presumed to have been necessary unless there are additional factors . For example, should it be determined that a trained police officer was justified in using deadly force against a suspect, the number of times he fired is presumed to have been necessary to stop the suspect's action that justified use of deadly force, as long as there aren't other factors, such as a reckless disregard of other officers' or bystanders' safety, or it is clearly proven that additional force was used after the suspect was no longer a threat . </P> <P> When any person undertakes a skills - based activity that creates a risk to others, they are held to the minimum standard of how a reasonable person experienced in that task would act, regardless of their actual level of experience . </P> <P> Factors external to the defendant are always relevant . Additionally, so is the context within which each action is made . It is within these circumstances that the determinations and actions of the defendant are to be judged . There are myriad factors that could provide inputs into how a person acts: individual perceptions, knowledge, the weather, etc . The standard of care required for each set of circumstances will vary, yet the level of care due is always what is reasonable for that set of circumstances . </P> <P> While community customs may be relied upon to indicate what kind of action is expected in light of given circumstances, such customary requirements are not themselves conclusive of what a reasonable person would do . </P>

The reasonable person in tort law refers to the