Correctional Officer Basic Training Practice Test 2025 – The All-in-One Guide to Master Your Exam Success!

In the context of Wilkins vs. Gaddy, the appropriate use of force in correctional settings hinges on the principle that it should not only be justified but necessary for maintaining security and order within the prison. The ruling emphasized that any application of force must be proportionate and aimed at ensuring the safety and security of the institution, rather than serving as a punitive measure.

Force can be deemed acceptable when it poses a significant risk to prison security because it prioritizes the collective safety of inmates, staff, and the facility itself. This principle aligns with the standards set by the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, thereby framing the use of force as a necessary action to control situations that could lead to chaos or violence within correctional environments.

While disobedience, perceived threats, or unruly behavior may indeed provoke a corrective response, the guiding principle from the case suggests that the justification for force must squarely relate to managing security risks rather than responding to non-compliance or emotion-based reactions.