There is no real difference between law enforcement and non-law enforcement use of force models. LEOs may be able to justify use of force in a few situations that the general public may not, most especially preemptive use of force and use of force to effect arrest. (Citizen's arrest authority is generally quite limited.)
1. Bearing and demeanor. Implied power due to ones presence. This is especially true if there is great disparancy in size and strength.
I personally dislike including any form of presence as a force level; if your personal presence is enough to deter an attack, than there will be no use of force. If it's not -- it's never going to be enough.
2. Verbal Crises Intervention. Mantle of innocence Use non-violent dispute resolution techniques. Many ways to talk to a person to de-escalate the situation.
Verbal tactics are not limited to de-escalation and calming. "I'm calling the cops!" or "Help!" or even just noise that's attracting attention can sometimes be enough to stop an attacker. Verbal tactics should always accompany any use of physical force. Yelling "stop attacking me!" or "Help!
Call the police" supports the fact that you are defending yourself -- not attacking someone.
3. Blocking Techniques. Purely defensive and non-aggressive. It can be hard or soft blocks, or simple escapes from non-deadly holds.
You're drawing an artificial distinction that doesn't exist here; instead, if you're going to articulate a level below counteroffensive tactics of striking and "soft hands", come-along/pain holds, I would argue that it should be evasive tactics, like breaking holds, defensive stepping, and outright flight from the scene. There's nothing wrong with running away!
4. Grappling/Restraint Techniques. Arm locks, wrist locks, holds, etc. are less damaging. Not juged as being deadly except certian choke holds.
While these belong in the civilian arsenal (Please, let's not start the whole "LEOs are civilians" thing again; it's a distraction and I'm tired of trying to work around the word.), they are only tactics a civilian should use in rare circumstances. My job as a cop is to arrest the bad guy; that means I restrain him. And I carry tools to do so. Except for special circumstances (kids, drunk relatives, or sometimes patients are about all that pop to mind), a civilian isn't out to contain and restrain an attacker. Your job is to STOP the attack and get out of there!
5. Hand techniques. Punches are usually less damaging as kicks (or knees or elbows) unless the practitioner is known for being deadly with their hands. I have personaly read of DA's calling high ranking black belts 'rambos' and 'killing machines'. Pro boxers fall in this category in many states.
6. Foot techniques. Many states consider the shod foot a deadly weapon.
Strikes are strikes. Simply wearing a shoe will not automatically make your foot a deadly weapon; every case I've seen that has designated a shoe as a deadly weapon had significant aggravating factors, like the victim already being largely incapacitated when they were kicked or the targets. Nor are kicks automatically considered a greater level of force. Use the unarmed strike, whether that's a kick or punch, that's appropriate to the target and situation. In one case, a hard push (still technically a strike) may be all that's appropriate, while in another, a punch to the throat is. It all comes down to articulating the force you use; lethal force can come from an empty hand or a bazooka.
7. Less-Lethal Weapons (batons, chemical spray, tasers, etc..) The clubs are only considered 'less-lethal' in the hands of those documented to be experts in using the weapons to restrain.
There aren't a lot of really reliably effective less-than-lethal choices for civilians, or at least there haven't been until the civilian-model Taser came out. Most stun guns require you to be too close. Chemical sprays are not nearly 100% reliable, they're just worth a try before causing actual injury, and most impact weapons aren't practical for civilians to carry. They're likely to prompt questions like just why exactly you felt the need to carry a baton. That said... they're not bad things to have available in your car.
8. Defensive deadly force. Vast majority of defensive shootings and use of other weapons fall in this category.
9. Offensive deadly force. Very rare for civilians. Not rare for LEOs.
10. Pre-emptive deadly force. Example: Known terrorist planning to make an attack. Also extreamly rare for civilians.
Deadly force is deadly force; no matter who you are, you must be able to articulate that either you or another person were in imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death. Cops are simply in more situations where we are prepared for that possibility, like searching a house for possible burglars. I take special exception to your idea that police can use deadly force offensively; they cannot. Any use of deadly force must be justified as reasonable and appropriate due to the immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm to someone.
I have a few minor issues with some of this...I'll post in detail later.
The one thing I'll say now is that just like LE "force continuums" we don't want to get hung-up with the notion that we have to progress through the list of options in a linear fashion (not saying you were implying anything of the sort). We should pick the force option appropriate to the threat regardless of whether we have tried another, less damaging, option prior to that.
Very, very important point. Use of force should never be a stair-step; move to the appropriate level for the threat being presented. Don't get stuck trying to move up or down inappropriately.
