Final answer:
The correct answer is option b, which states that using a cartridge deployment at close range is more desirable because it reduces the chance of leaving multiple "signature marks"
Step-by-step explanation:
The correct answer is option b, Less chance of multiple "signature marks" on the suspect. When considering the use of a conducted electrical weapon (CEW) like a Taser, deploying a cartridge allows both probes to potentially make contact with the target, creating a complete circuit.
This can induce neuromuscular incapacitation (NMI), which temporarily disrupts the ability to control movement and can be effective in safely subduing a suspect.
A drive stun, on the other hand, might need to be applied multiple times to different areas to be effective, potentially leaving multiple signature marks, or superficial burns, on the suspect.
Furthermore, option a) is incorrect because the full 5 seconds of contact isn't relevant to the method of deployment's effectiveness, and option c) is incorrect because it confuses the drive stun technique with probe deployment, as NMI is typically achieved when both probes are at a minimum distance apart on the target's body, not when a drive stun is 4 inches from the darts.
A cartridge deployment is more desirable than a drive stun, even at close range, for several reasons. First, both probes make contact for the full 5 seconds, ensuring a more effective incapacitation of the suspect.
Second, there is less chance of multiple 'signature marks' on the suspect when using a cartridge deployment, as the probes are fired from a distance and do not require physical contact.
Lastly, a drive stun applied over 4 inches from the darts may not achieve NMI (neuromuscular incapacitation), whereas a cartridge deployment is more likely to achieve this effect.