Very timely given the considerations brought up again from "Defining your Mission" and covered in other podcasts like "Realistic Carry Considerations".
Admittedly, I was once VERY pro-baton/anti-OC. Taser is STILL not an option at our agency (all the $ had to go to bodycams). I think a lot of my stance stemmed from accounts of poor OC deployment into conflicts with individuals already amped up (or with drugs in their system) and in a fight and ultimately affecting others than the target. Compound that with the legal obligation to de-con and clean-up, several exposures to CN, CS, OC and the like, and witnessing a variety of responses and deployment considerations, it became an afterthought.
A few years ago, we had an officer become World Star famous in a video that ended with him lawfully using his baton on a combative suspect (suspect sucker-punched the responding ofc. upon initial contact). The officer's form was textbook and he targeted the suspect's thigh area (everything on the up and up)...but this had little effect on the suspect. Ultimately, the suspect was cornered and taken into custody by 4-5 officers. Despite its lack of effect, the baton strikes garnered a fair amount of backlash from the community and there was a fair amount of backlash given the totality of the events.
In short, the OPTICS of the baton deployment did not look good to a layman...and there were no less than 3 different videos of the event that people could cherry pick from to further whatever agenda they wanted.
Today, I have re-considered my stance on OC in light of current events and optics. It makes good sense to me to "soften-up" someone exhibiting aggression or pre-fight indicators. I really can't put it in any better context than Darryl or Chuck did in the aforementioned Mission podcast.