What must officers demonstrate to justify conducting a frisk or pat down?

To justify conducting a frisk or pat-down, officers must have a belief that the person is armed or dangerous. This requirement stems from the legal standards established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Terry v. Ohio, which allows officers to perform a limited search for weapons when they have reasonable suspicion that an individual may be armed and pose a threat to their safety or the safety of others.

The rationale for this requirement is to ensure the safety of law enforcement officers and the public during encounters with individuals who may be potentially dangerous. Officers are expected to assess the circumstances surrounding their interaction with the individual, which can include factors like the person's behavior, environment, and any specific information received prior to the encounter. This belief must be based on specific facts or circumstances, not merely on a general assumption or instinct. Hence, the requirement for a belief that the person is armed or dangerous is crucial in justifying a stop and frisk.

The other options do not meet this legal standard as adequately as the correct choice. Simply having general assumptions, visual confirmation of a weapon, or requesting consent does not establish the requisite level of suspicion needed for a pat-down under the law.