During a lawful arrest for theft, a suspect actively resists by struggling and attempting to push past the security guard. The guard, who is not facing an immediate threat of grievous bodily harm or death, applies a joint lock technique to gain control. What is the primary legal justification for the security guard's use of this level of force in this context?

Question: During a lawful arrest for theft, a suspect actively resists by struggling and attempting to push past the security guard. The guard, who is not facing an immediate threat of grievous bodily harm or death, applies a joint lock technique to gain control. What is the primary legal justification for the security guard's use of this level of force in this context?

Answer options:

• To inflict pain as a deterrent for future unlawful behavior. ✅ To prevent escape and ensure the safety of the public and the guard.
• To punitively respond to the suspect's non-compliance.
• To demonstrate authority and control over the situation.

Correct answer: To prevent escape and ensure the safety of the public and the guard.

Explanation: The primary legal justification for using reasonable force during a lawful arrest is to prevent escape and ensure the safety of all parties involved. Canadian law, specifically Section 25 of the Criminal Code, permits the use of as much force as is reasonably necessary for carrying out a lawful arrest, provided the force used is proportionate to the resistance encountered and aims to achieve control and prevent harm.