Police brutality should be used because in order to establish police as the superior form of authority between the criminal and police. Obviously, the police should not beat the criminal who is obeying the police and doing exactly what he says but in a time where the criminal is disrespecting the police officer and there is no order between the two of them, then the police should use brutality to resolve this conflict. Otherwise, the person will not cooperate with the officer and do as he says.
I see your point, but if a person is disobeying a police officer, as the supreme authority, the officer can calmly place the person in handcuffs, and reason from there. The supreme authority should be looked up to as the bigger person. Not a person who needs to turn to violence to have people obey.
The criminal could still disrespect them. The CRIMINAL is thinking that the police officer is oppressing him and he may use disrespectful methods such as spitting, swearing, not cooperating, and the police officer should not have to tolerate that for his job. Since the police officer is the supreme figure of authority, he has the ability to use brute force under the right circumstances. The brutality is used as a reinforcer to instill the rules put forth by the officer. Plus, you are not giving a reason why it should not be used. All you are saying is that since handcuffing and dealing with the disrespect and abuse is an option, the officer's job should be to deal with this unfair treatment to be the BIGGER PERSON.