Kimber Lifeact pepper spray. legal question.


PDA






rocinante
February 18, 2008, 07:20 AM
I bought a Kimber Lifeact at a gunshow. It is a handheld devise that "fires two blasts of ultra-hot pepper spray up to 13 feet in less than a second!"

I bought it for my wife since she is scared of guns. She is delighted and assures me she would have no qualms about using it.

Legal question. If she did feel the need to use it then it would be a threatening situation she felt she was in immediate danger. She is not a super flighty chick. My advise to her is to squirt someone, get the hell out of there, and call the police. Is that good advise? Ideally she isn't leaving a scene of a crime because she acted before an assault happened. My other thought is as screwed up as our laws are should she just leave and keep the police out of it? I think this would immoral because it would leave a potential predator free but would she be open to any form of persecution or civil action for causing someone pain and suffering?

Second legal question. Generally are these defensive spray devices subject to any restrictions on where you can carry? Surely they aren't as restricted as handguns.

Finally question does anybody trust this kimber thing? I would like to think it is a little bit better than nothing.

If you enjoyed reading about "Kimber Lifeact pepper spray. legal question." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
lawson4
February 18, 2008, 11:48 AM
If she sprays someone with pepper spray, she should be the first one to call the police. Otherwise, the other person can claim he was assaulted by a "crazy chick for no reason at all."
The first one to call is usually assumed to be the victim.

lawson4

IllHunter
February 18, 2008, 11:50 AM
I am not familiar with the Lifeact but have tried out the Guardian Angel which Kimber advertises effective to @13' with a two shot capacity. The insert from Kimber recommends taking a defensive stance with the off hand held out in the "stop" position, the angel esconsced in the strong hand, in pocket,purse or behind the back. They strongly suggest spraying well before the attacker comes within reach. Verbal warning and the device brought to bear resting on the off hand thumb to align the aimpoint. They further suggest if the attacker is alone, after firing the first shot and with the attacker on the ground, fire the second. IF multiple attackers, save the second blast for the next brave soul. The spry has adhesive qualities and considering how even water sprayed at 700fps will hurt, I read that no volunteer has remained standing after one shot. I bought one for my niece whose workmate was abducted and killed (the boyfriend did it) and who was unwilling/unable to carry a gun. She first expressed intrest in a shock device but as that requires closer proximity I felt she would be better off keeping her attacker at a distance. The test I saw was with inert spray and the dispersion of the spray in a 5mph wind was as advertised. We all felt the spray was max effective at 12-15' and that the firing force was sufficient to ovecome most normal outside wind. All that said, I had her apply for a FOID and will instruct when possible.

TexasRifleman
February 18, 2008, 12:04 PM
So I have some concerns over this one.

If it's the device pictured here this opens a real can of worms in my mind.

This looks enough like a handgun that it could cause confusion, both to an LEO or to anyone else.

Might be a good way to get shot.....

http://www.life-act.com/resources/images/sections/jpx/jpx.jpg

rocinante
February 18, 2008, 12:50 PM
That would be my take lawson4. thank you.

This is a link to the device

http://www.life-act.com/guardianangel.php

It is the same as the guardian angel our friend Illhunter discusses that looks more like a electric zapper than a handgun. Thanks for that feedback it is very reassuring. I took looked at the zappers and rejected them for the proximity reasoning too. You have to have a FOID to carry pepper spray in Illinois? Sad.

I agree somewhat with your concerns on that contraption TexasRifleman. My wife would never drag something around like that anyway. She was totally delighted with what I got her and assured me she would have no qualms using it if needed.

kd7nqb
February 18, 2008, 01:15 PM
some individual locals restrict OC spray you may need to check your local laws. I always prefered a can of fox labs to a device like this but if this is what your wife will carry then it looks just fine.

I firmly agree that SHE needs to be the one to call 911 if she uses it.

Threeband
February 18, 2008, 04:10 PM
I carry one in my back pocket. Since I live in Maryland, it's about the best I can do and stay on the (legal) High Road.

No, I don't really trust it. There's a video somewhere demonstrating its use against a manniquin, and it seemed to shoot slightly to the right, i.e., it looks like you could easily miss your assailant entirely.

Still, I feel safe against manniquins while carrying it.

I've checked the local laws (online sources, anyway) and it's legal around here, even in the (shudder) City, where I rarely venture.

If I ever have to use it, I will Run Like Hell, and yes, call the cops afterwards.


Edited to add:

Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWbyWgjgF54
Real confidence builder, isn't it?

I love that line, "Do not attempt to help your assailant. On the contrary..."

Somebody's gotta point out the obvious to the blissninnies.

Pa.Bill
February 18, 2008, 04:18 PM
rocinante-- I just read about the guardian in one of the gun mags. Had the same thought as you ---for the wife.

If I remember correctly the price was $38.00 + S&H......Am I close??

~THANKS~

rocinante
February 18, 2008, 05:02 PM
Given the alternatives of which a gun is not one it is better than nothing. Shock devises require direct contact. Tasers give a range but are very expensive and depending on clothing may not be effective. Most sprays require the person to be pretty close and you have greater danger of it coming back on you. If she gets a hit anywhere this stuff will be noticed at least.

Don't laugh at the don't assist part of the instruction. I can easily see my wife zapping the bastard and then feeling guilty and try to help. Me personally would probably be tempted to get a boot beating on him just for good measure.


I paid 40 even for it at a gun show.

chris in va
February 18, 2008, 05:14 PM
If it's the device pictured here this opens a real can of worms in my mind.

I see where you're coming from and it certainly is in the shape of a gun, however...

Does that mean we shouldn't carry firearms because we're afraid we'll get shot?

LAK
February 19, 2008, 06:09 AM
If you are using it against an attacker in the course of an assault, who cares what it looks like? By the time police arrive you should have it lying on the hood of your car or on the seat (for example) and be standing away from it awaiting their arrival to file a complaint against your assailant.

I have the Lifeact Guardian Angel, and my only criticism of it is it's lack of accurate directional "feel" or point. The "pistol" version not only shoots out faster and is effective to a greater distance, it's "pistol" configuration should make accurate delivery much easier and certain.

They both have a "minimum safe distance" due to the possibility of eye injury. So consider them "deadly force" inside those distances - in other words use them at those shorter distances to face only when you would be justified in using deadly force with a firearm, knife etc.

-----------------------------

http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org/oldindex.html
http://www.gtr5.com
http://ssunitedstates.com

NukemJim
February 19, 2008, 06:45 AM
You have to have a FOID to carry pepper spray in Illinois?

Uhmm... Allthough I can always be wrong, to the best of my knowlege you do NOT need a FOID in Illinois to buy or carry pepper spray of any kind unless fired from a firearm.

NukemJim

IllHunter
February 19, 2008, 11:02 AM
I sold these retail ($39.99)and no foid is required for their purchase, btw, the niece is applying for a foid to up the ante, not for the guardian but for the Glock.;)

TexasRifleman
February 19, 2008, 11:09 AM
Does that mean we shouldn't carry firearms because we're afraid we'll get shot?

Of course not, but if you are gonna carry something that might invite the use of a gun against you, being able to shoot back might be nice......

It's the misidentification that is really the worry, as much by an LEO as a badguy. You have this thing (the gun shaped one) in your hand walking to your car in a dark parking lot (which would be perfectly legal to do) and a cop sees you, things could go downhill in a hurry. He is going to assume it's a gun and if a person that's not particularly paying attention turns toward the LEO to see what the yelling is about...... well you can play out how that one ends in your mind.

Extreme caution should be exercised when you are carrying something that looks like a gun, but isn't a gun.

waterhouse
February 19, 2008, 11:35 AM
insert from Kimber recommends taking a defensive stance with the off hand held out in the "stop" position,

I don't know if the instructions say anything about it, but the goal of the off hand being up in the stop position is to shield your eyes (in the event of a wind gust) from the spray. When we trained with the stuff it wasn't really a full extension, locked elbow sort of "stop", the hand was closer to the face and behind the spray in a sort of guard position.

As for the OP, if she uses it, getting away from the area and calling the cops sounds like good advice. The effect of the spray is temporary . . . she does not want to hang around the bad guy while calling the cops. She isn't "fleeing the scene" so much as "fleeing the attacker." If she is being victimized, the crime is still ongoing even after the spray is used.

It hurts, in a horribly bad way, but I've fought through it and I've seen others fight through it. She does not want to be around if the bad guy decides to fight through the pain.

Master Blaster
February 19, 2008, 01:16 PM
It's the misidentification that is really the worry, as much by an LEO as a badguy.

I will leave my wallet at home then and refrain from making finger gestures as well, since pulling a wallet has caused the NYPD to open fire on innocents.

Defensory
February 21, 2008, 03:40 AM
rocinante:

After spraying the perp, she should promptly depart the area and go to a safe place, then call the police ASAP.

dmazur
February 21, 2008, 04:01 AM
The Guardian Angel device has some kind of chemical propellant which is much faster than the typical aerosol and provides the advertised range.

IMO, there is less danger of the spray blowing back at you.

However, there are two and only two shots! If the user is accustomed to the larger spray cans, this may require a change in mind-set...

DonP
February 21, 2008, 12:31 PM
We got one for the youngest girl that's in Med School in "Gun Free" Chicago.

(If it was up to me she'd have our Charter Arms Undercover. 38 special in her lab coat pocket. But if she got caught with it, she'd lose her medical license and would forfeit 10 years of training and preparation, thank you Mayor Daley.)

She is about 95 pounds with a roll of quarters in her pocket and needs something besides her keys through her fingers. In Chicago that's about all she can do.

I did a lot of research before I picked one up for her. This model, the flat compact model with two shots, does not have any propellant in it, it's a straight pump with a reducer in the nozzle to increase the velocity in the tube. That way it works no matter how long it sits in your pocket or glove box.

It has a small plastic tab that serves as a "safety" to keep you from accidentally spraying your pocket with pepper spray. I just wish they had a "practice model" so you could judge your shots and the actual range and aim before she had to use it.

The one I picked up, at a local gun store, was $34.95.

waterhouse
February 21, 2008, 01:54 PM
I just wish they had a "practice model" so you could judge your shots and the actual range and aim before she had to use it.

You might want to call Kimber and suggest that. Just about every OC spray that comes in a can has training cans. They even use a nice minty smell for the training spray :D

Zoogster
February 21, 2008, 03:55 PM
It really depends on several factors. It is smart advice, but depending on the state and the circumstances in a particular event it could be illegal advice.

These devices are often advertised with a scared woman using them in "self defense" to avoid being victimized. However if they have not been victimized yet no crime has been commited. A creepy person following you (or you thinking they are, whether they are or just walking to thier car etc) for no reason is not a criminal offense. In some such situations a judgement call might be made that they are most likely bad news, excessively suspicious, and it might be in her best interest to use it before he gets into arms reach and she is at a greater disadvantage against his strength or she is unable to deploy her defensive measures.

That is however illegal if there is no threat or threatening movements, and no weapon is present. So there is a grey area there. There is no set rules in that situation. There is no green light until a crime has been commited.
Fleeing from the scene of a crime can also be a big offense. So if she sprays someone that commited no criminal act, and then proceeds to flee the area technicaly she could have commited multiple crimes.
There is women (and men) that spray people for little or no provocation, or as punishment for percieved disrespect or insult. Good police must take a nuetral stance in investigating a situation and cannot presume guilt or innocence, nor should a prosecutor or jury. Now if the guy turns out to have a rap sheet for sexual offenses it would help tremendously.

So it really is a judgement call, and it is up to the person. If they feel strongly that someone is trouble, and have taken measures to avoid them or change direction, or they just strongly feel that person is trouble and targeting them, then by all means make the judgement call. Simply pulling out a weapon and pointing it however is an assault, nevermind using it.

There is a big grey area where force can be used against someone who has no appearant weapon, and has not yet commited or voiced intent to commit a crime. Anyone can follow anyone they want, and there is no law against it.
If there was the paparazzi could not exist.

A total stranger can follow anyone and film them, annoy them or even make rude statements. Until a law has been broken any use of force against them is an illegal assault/ battery, aggravated assault/assault with a deadly weapon etc.

Kruzr
February 21, 2008, 04:19 PM
I did a lot of research before I picked one up for her. This model, the flat compact model with two shots, does not have any propellant in it, it's a straight pump with a reducer in the nozzle to increase the velocity in the tube. That way it works no matter how long it sits in your pocket or glove box.

HUH? No propellant? If you "research" a Kimber catalog, here is what they say:

"Driven by pyrotechnic charges, the solution travels at 90 MPH with little chance of cross-contamination, and with enough energy to wrap around glasses or penetrate a face mask."

No matter how small the nozzle is, you would have to have a very fast trigger finger to pump out solution at 90 MPH. :)

The big one that looks like a Nerf Gun, shoots solution at 270 MPH.

another okie
February 21, 2008, 06:03 PM
I've seen a practice version of the flat one from Kimber. Whether it's available for sale to the public I don't know, but it was on the counter at a gun shop, so they must have bought it.

Nikdfish
February 21, 2008, 07:17 PM
The training version of the Guardian Angel fires a dye marker stream instead of pepper & is a little cheaper than the "live" version (retails at 29.99 vs 41.99). The trainer is orange while the live one is black. You can order direct from the Kimber site or a dealer. I bought from a local shop when I got one for my daughter for use while mountain biking.

The powder charge for projecting the spray is robust enough that the spray could probably cut/inject into flesh or seriously damage eyes if fired in close quarters (i.e. less than 1-2 feet).

Nick

Defensory
February 21, 2008, 10:43 PM
I recommend a cannister of Mace brand 10% OC pepper gel with UV dye.

Easy to handle, very concealable and won't be mistaken for a gun by LEO's.

GuyWithQuestions
February 22, 2008, 06:06 AM
Fleeing from the scene of a crime can also be a big offense. So if she sprays someone that commited no criminal act, and then proceeds to flee the area technicaly she could have commited multiple crimes.

Isn't it dangerous to stick around if you reasonably believe an assault is imminent and you just used pepper spray? Don't most places say don't stick around after pepper spraying but get away right away and call 911? I mean, if you're in a car accident, it's illegal to flee the scene. However if gas is leaking everywhere it may not be safe to stay there and so it may be reasonable to get a safe distance from the vehicles involved and call 911. Isn't the purpose of pepper spray to distract the reasonable believed assailant long enough so that you can escape and evade, rather than to stick around?

Southern6er
February 22, 2008, 10:39 AM
I bought this for my wife and daughter:

http://www.life-act.com/resources/images/sections/guardian/guardian.jpg

Hardly a gun. It's about palm sized and VERY easy to carry in hand while walking to the car with keys in the offhand.

My daughter is a waitress and the restaurant closes late enough (11:00pm) that I want her protected when she leaves. The pyrotechnic charges could be an issue, but most people don't realize that it is explosive driven vs regular pressure like typical sprays would be. Those who are informed may know, if it is kept concealed most of the time, not an issue at all.

Southern6er
February 22, 2008, 10:43 AM
D'OH. Put in twice.

another okie
February 22, 2008, 07:24 PM
I know it's illegal to drive away from an accident, but I've never heard of a law that made it illegal for a crime victim to run away.

Zoogster
February 22, 2008, 10:07 PM
Isn't it dangerous to stick around if you reasonably believe an assault is imminent and you just used pepper spray? Don't most places say don't stick around after pepper spraying but get away right away and call 911? I mean, if you're in a car accident, it's illegal to flee the scene. However if gas is leaking everywhere it may not be safe to stay there and so it may be reasonable to get a safe distance from the vehicles involved and call 911. Isn't the purpose of pepper spray to distract the reasonable believed assailant long enough so that you can escape and evade, rather than to stick around?

I know it's illegal to drive away from an accident, but I've never heard of a law that made it illegal for a crime victim to run away.
It is usualy illegal for a criminal to flee. Using force if it is determined to not have been justified is a criminal act, so it would be fleeing from the scene of the crime.
The term "victim" gives the impression a crime was commited against them, however someone spraying someone to avoid becoming a victim prior to a crime actualy being commited against them is a judgement call that may or may not be judged in thier favor.

For example, woman alone, man running up, fairly isolated area, and she feels scared. It may be in her best interest to spray the guy before he is close enough to grab her. However since he has not yet voiced a threat, swung or lunged at her, or presented a weapon, he has technicaly commited no crime even if he is a predator out to get her.
If however the guy was about to ask her something, has no rap sheet, and was just not giving a woman out alone a feeling of safety and courtesy by keeping his distance and running up and he reports being sprayed as the victim of a crime, or an officer comes by, someone calls and finds him in pain and he tells the story. Then she would have commited a criminal act and fled the scene of the crime, a criminal offense.
It is not self defense until a threat has presented itself, which can sometimes be too late.

A homeless person coming up to ask for some change, or a guy trying to start up a conversation could be a predator looking for opportunity or could just be someone without malicious intent trying to be helpful or flirt, get some change etc
It may be wise to spray and run in a very vulnerable situation as a woman just to be safe, but it would be a crime.
So it is a grey area that requires individual judgement, but yet it can also be a criminal offense.


A further consideration is I wonder just what someone could classify a device working on "pyrotechnic charges" as. It sounds a lot like the definition of a firearm, something using the force of a explosive to propel something, which I imagine could be considered a firearm under many state laws.
I don't know of anyone who has yet classified it as such, but it could be done based on the definition of law some places.
If it is legal to propel a "liquid" projectile with a pyrotechnic charge then I know of some things that are liquid at room temperature, and become hard solids when kinetic energy is applied and could function as bullets. Such a device could exploit that loophole and be a legal unlicensed firearm. So is something propeling liquid with explosives a firearm or not? I am quite interested.

GuyWithQuestions
February 22, 2008, 11:09 PM
A further consideration is I wonder just what someone could classify a device working on "pyrotechnic charges" as. It sounds a lot like the definition of a firearm, something using the force of a explosive to propel something, which I imagine could be considered a firearm under many state laws.
I don't know of anyone who has yet classified it as such, but it could be done based on the definition of law some places.
If it is legal to propel a "liquid" projectile with a pyrotechnic charge then I know of some things that are liquid at room temperature, and become hard solids when kinetic energy is applied and could function as bullets. Such a device could exploit that loophole and be a legal unlicensed firearm. So is something propeling liquid with explosives a firearm or not? I am quite interested.

In Massachusetts, you need a firearms identification card to have pepper spray because it propels something out at the other person and is used as a weapon :rolleyes: I wonder if they consider pepper spray as a firearm? I know that the ATF says that dart-firing air tasers aren't firearms because they don't use explosives to propel the darts but instead compressed air. Then there are some states that have their own laws about that.

HKUSP45C
February 23, 2008, 08:54 AM
It has a small plastic tab that serves as a "safety" to keep you from accidentally spraying your pocket with pepper spray. I just wish they had a "practice model" so you could judge your shots and the actual range and aim before she had to use it.

The one I picked up, at a local gun store, was $34.95.

I bought 5 for my fiance'

We used one me, 2 for target pactice, she totes the other 2 now. I promise you they work .... really, a lot, perfectly. There's no "false advertising" in Kimber's book on this.

A couple of hundred dollars seems so cheap when we talk about guns but everyone seems to think spending cash on a non-gun purchase causes cancer or something.

ETA: It looks just like a cell phone when held up to the ear in a "ready" position.

rocinante
February 23, 2008, 09:46 AM
As the original poster I really appreciate all the information. Bottom line I will trust my wife if she decides to use the thing responsibly and get the hell out of there. If she feels that threatened we will deal with the aftermath.

I hear the thing about the loons but they cross the line. My wife is a very pretty woman and she handles the annoying flirt and occasional pushy bum quite well. A couple years back she had a man chasing her on the freeway, get off her exit, keep following her evasive actions and pull up when she pulled into a convenience store to get away from him. End result is this loon wanted her telephone number and left after a very pointed tongue lashing. It unnerved her though.

IllHunter
February 27, 2008, 02:11 PM
I believe the instructions call for a very loud command to stop. Any sane individual approaching a lone female for "chivalry or flirtations" should stop dead in his tacks and start backing up with both hands exposed and held aloft. ANY other reaction deserves a non-lethal squirt. How close they got determines if they get the other.
Any dissenting.......?:cuss:

GuyWithQuestions
February 27, 2008, 04:15 PM
I believe the instructions call for a very loud command to stop. Any sane individual approaching a lone female for "chivalry or flirtations" should stop dead in his tacks and start backing up with both hands exposed and held aloft. ANY other reaction deserves a non-lethal squirt. How close they got determines if they get the other.
Any dissenting.......?

I've heard several say that if someone's approaching you in a suspicious or threatening manner, that you can't just spray them because anyone's entitled to be in public places. But if one holds out a hand, shouts, "Stop! Leave me alone!", at the same time backing away, many say to spray only after a warning has been given (that's providing that they're not ambushing you and closing the distance so quickly that you don't have time to do that). When I bought my dart-firing air taser, in the instructions for self-defense, it's says if someone approaches you in a threatening or suspicious manner, to shout a warning to get away because you have a taser, if they keep approaching, shoot them with the taser and then run away and call the police immediately. (If you call the police immediately, are they going to think you were trying to flee?) In the instructional video from TASER, the vice president of training, who was a leader of some Californian SWAT team for years, said that you should warn someone, but if they keep on approaching, don't hestitate to shoot with the TASER. If you wait to long, you'll really be risking your safety by letting them get too close. He also said, "Remember, you will not be taking someone's life." But then, you can say legally, anyone can walk anywhere they want in public. However, I do know a lot of places say that unwanted touch or unwanted grabbing is considered assault. So, if a woman is walking one direction, a guy is following her, then she changes directions, he still follows and is looking at her while doing that, if she holds out a hand, gives a warning, at the same time backing away, it seems like it may be justified, and bystanders watching may see the part where she holds out a hand and backs away and think that she was being attacked. If I was minding my own business walking around in public, that's my right. If I decide to park my car in front of a house in a neighborhood watch area for 4 hours and just sit in the car the whole time, that's my business because I'd be on a public road. But if I'm following a person around wherever they are heading, they tell me to leave them alone while holding out a hand and backing away, and then they spray or tase me, I'd probably deserve it.

Those are just some of my thoughts. What does everyone else think/know about this?

Zoogster
February 27, 2008, 04:36 PM
I've heard several say that if someone's approaching you in a suspicious or threatening manner, that you can't just spray them because anyone's entitled to be in public places. But if one holds out a hand, shouts, "Stop! Leave me alone!", at the same time backing away, many say to spray only after a warning has been given (that's providing that they're not ambushing you and closing the distance so quickly that you don't have time to do that). When I bought my dart-firing air taser, in the instructions for self-defense, it's says if someone approaches you in a threatening or suspicious manner, to shout a warning to get away because you have a taser, if they keep approaching, shoot them with the taser and then run away and call the police immediately. (If you call the police immediately, are they going to think you were trying to flee?) In the instructional video from TASER, the vice president of training, who was a leader of some Californian SWAT team for years, said that you should warn someone, but if they keep on approaching, don't hestitate to shoot with the TASER. If you wait to long, you'll really be risking your safety by letting them get too close. He also said, "Remember, you will not be taking someone's life." But then, you can say legally, anyone can walk anywhere they want in public. However, I do know a lot of places say that unwanted touch or unwanted grabbing is considered assault. So, if a woman is walking one direction, a guy is following her, then she changes directions, he still follows and is looking at her while doing that, if she holds out a hand, gives a warning, at the same time backing away, it seems like it may be justified, and bystanders watching may see the part where she holds out a hand and backs away and think that she was being attacked. If I was minding my own business walking around in public, that's my right. If I decide to park my car in front of a house in a neighborhood watch area for 4 hours and just sit in the car the whole time, that's my business because I'd be on a public road. But if I'm following a person around wherever they are heading, they tell me to leave them alone while holding out a hand and backing away, and then they spray or tase me, I'd probably deserve it.

Those are just some of my thoughts. What does everyone else think/know about this?

That is a judgement call, it does not make it legal. There is clear black and white moments when force is allowed, there is however far more that are a grey area. Following someone without a court order not to is perfectly legal. Approaching someone is perfectly legal.
Filming people that do not wish to be filmed is perfectly legal. Telling people things they do not want to hear while doing all of the above is perfectly legal.
It does not matter if you are Average Joe or a celebrity. It does not matter if it happens in an location with nobody else around, or on a crowded public street.
You must make a judgement, and you must live with the consequences. Nobody is going to be able to make that decision for you beforehand. Asking people to do it is just an attempt to remove personal responsibility for the decision, but it will still be you who is personaly responsible at the time.

There is times when force is clearly allowed. There is many more when you will need to step out into that grey area where your decision is not protected by law and use personal judgement that may or may not end badly for you.

Defensory
February 27, 2008, 06:30 PM
It's actually pretty simple.

She should use her best judgement. If possible and practical, she should issue a loud command of "STOP, STAY AWAY FROM ME!" If using the spray becomes necessary, she should immediately flee to a safe area and call the police ASAP.

That's about all there is to it. If she would somehow come under legal scrutiny, it's better to be judged by twelve than carried by six. ;)

Anchorage
February 27, 2008, 11:53 PM
If she sprays someone with pepper spray, she should be the first one to call the police. Otherwise, the other person can claim he was assaulted by a "crazy chick for no reason at all."
The first one to call is usually assumed to be the victim.

Who calls first does not matter. It is not necessary to call first. or be the first to call or the first to make a statement, it might have been important n highschool, but when dealing with law enforcement officials things are different.

GuyWithQuestions
February 28, 2008, 01:11 AM
Who calls first does not matter. It is not necessary to call first. or be the first to call or the first to make a statement, it might have been important n highschool, but when dealing with law enforcement officials things are different.

In the case of Bobby Cutts who killed Jessie Davis, he claimed that he killed her in an accident, when he didn't want the death penalty. Many don't buy that because he didn't call 911 right away for emergency assistance and instead buried her. If you don't contact 911, and they find you, won't that make them a lot more suspicious of your intentions?

GuyWithQuestions
February 28, 2008, 01:40 AM
That is a judgement call, it does not make it legal. There is clear black and white moments when force is allowed, there is however far more that are a grey area. Following someone without a court order not to is perfectly legal. Approaching someone is perfectly legal.
Filming people that do not wish to be filmed is perfectly legal. Telling people things they do not want to hear while doing all of the above is perfectly legal.
It does not matter if you are Average Joe or a celebrity. It does not matter if it happens in an location with nobody else around, or on a crowded public street.
You must make a judgement, and you must live with the consequences. Nobody is going to be able to make that decision for you beforehand. Asking people to do it is just an attempt to remove personal responsibility for the decision, but it will still be you who is personaly responsible at the time.

There is times when force is clearly allowed. There is many more when you will need to step out into that grey area where your decision is not protected by law and use personal judgement that may or may not end badly for you.

That's one thing that's nice about pepper spray, it's not susposed to cause permanent damage, so there's less they can sue you for and may lesson criminal charges (since if you cause permanent harm like you could with a knife, that could make it worse). There have been quite a few studies where one group was sprayed with pepper spray and the other one a placebo, and there's no difference in oxygen levels in the blood nor suffocation levels. It just causes breathing spasms, but scientifically controlled experiments have found it doesn't suffocate. In these same studies, they found that although being sprayed with pepper spray vs. the placebo had no affect, laying down on the ground in a hog tie position sure lowered the oxygen levels in the blood. Studies have also found that being sprayed with 0.9% capsaicinoid content levels of pepper spray cause lacerations to the eyes, but no permanent damage, the lacerations healed after one week. No changes in sensitivity for being sprayed once, either. The pepper spray that I carry, however, is 3.0% capsaicionoid content and their manufacturer won't make it anymore and I tried to convince Sabre Red to make a 3.0% CRC but they won't, so I don't know what that would do to the eyes, but I'm guessing it would still be safe.

If I'm somewhere and someone comes up to me asking for directions in a bad part of town and I walk away and they keep on following me and I tell them to stay away or else they'll get pepper sprayed and they keep on coming after me, they'll get a face full (if the pepper spray misses because it's blowing, that's why I also have trusty old dart-firing air taser, and if they pull out a deadly weapon I have a cocked and unlocked handgun with 17 rounds). I'd rather get in trouble for simple assault for spraying OC then be dead dead for the rest of my life (I have a family member who had a friend who was kidnapped and then killed because the murderer pretended to ask for directions). I'd tell the police that it was reasonable and prudent (using words that LE relate to may help out), and that this person was obviously testing me as a potential victim with a just messing with you attitude, and then suddenly tried to position me as a victim, which is how violent criminals set up their victims, then when I was trying to get away I kept on telling the aggressive person to stay away and that I had pepper spray and since he kept on coming towards me it was reasonable and prudent to believe he was trying to assault me. (I wonder if that would work or if I'd need to find a better way to elaborate my point across)

GuyWithQuestions
February 28, 2008, 02:13 AM
Some may feel like hesitating to spray if someone approaches suspiciously or threatenly after they give them a warning to stay away. I'm thinking against that after one time a rottweiler bit me and its owner was watching at the same time. I had my hand on my pepper spray long before that, but didn't want to spray because the dog owner was watching the whole thing. Then because of hesitation, the rottweiler bit me, and I then sprayed it to stop the attack that was already happening! Never again. If I reasonably believe I'm am in immediate danger of being attacked, I'll remember that pepper spray is not supposed to cause permanent damage and feel free to apply.

Some other reasons that make me think about not hestitating is reading about Ted Bundy, how many were last seen going in one direction and never came back, and how he kept parts of their skeletons as tropheys (that part not discussed below but he admitted to keeping certain bones :eek:). Maybe this will scare you enough:

Roberta Kathleen Parks, 20
Disappeared: May 6, 1974, from OSU in Corvalles, Oregon Found:Mar 3, 1975 Taylor Mountain, Wa May 4th she'd had an argument with her father on the phone, and her sister called from Spokane on May 6th to tell her their father had suffered a massive heart attack. Her sister called later with the good news that their father would recover. It's speculated that Kathy was feeling terrible guilt over the argument and the heart attack that followed. That night, she agreed to walk to another dorm hall to have coffee with friends. She never arrived. Her skull was exacavated with the others on Taylor Mountain, so far away from her Oregon dorm.Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Brenda Carol Ball, 22 Disappeared: May 31, 1974, Burien, Wa Found: Mar 1, 1975 in the thickly wooded Taylor Mountain Brenda stood 5 ft 3, 112 lbs, with lively brown eyes. On the night of May 31-June 1, she'd gone to the Flame Tavern alone. She told friends that day, she would see about getting a ride to Sun Lakes, on the eastern side of the state, to meet them there later. She stayed at the tavern till 2 am, then asked a musician for a ride, but he was going the other way. She was seen last in the parking lot, talking to a man with his arm in a sling. Because she was such a free spirit, her friends thought nothing of her absence, and didn't become suspicious until almost 19 days after she was last seen. March 1 of 1975, college students working on Taylor Mt, discovered the first of several skulls on that mountian, and it proved to be that of Brenda Ball. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Georgeann Hawkins, 18 Disappeared: June 10, 1974 UW in Seattle, Wa. Found: According to Bundy, one of her bones was found Sept 6,1974 nearly 2 miles from Lake Sammamish State Park On June 10th, Many students were cramming for exams that night, so Georgeann was hardly the only one awake at 12:30 am. She visited her boyfriend, borrowed some Spanish notes, then headed for the street. A friend called out of a window to her, and they chatted for a few minutes. She said goodnight and walked 30 feet away before he stuck his head back in through the window. 2 other male friends remembered seeing her cover the last 20 feet before disappearing around the corner. She only had 40 feet to go in the brightly lit alley. Georgeann's roommate knew something was wrong when she didn't arrive 2 hours later, and she called Georgeann's boyfriend and learned she had left his place at 1 am. She woke the housemother, and together they waited for the girl. They called the police in the morning, and because of the other disappearances in the area, the Seattle police took action immediately. They later learned that a housemother had awaken to a high scream. She'd thought it was a few of the students hoarsing around as usual, and went back to sleep. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution, and though he was foggy on
the details, he remembered how trusting she was. He'd asked her for help carrying his briefcase to his car because of his fake cast, and she'd trustingly obliged. He knocked her out, stuffed her into the car and sped away. She came to before he killed her, and in her confused ramblings, said she had thought he'd been sent to help her with her Spanish exam. He knocked her out again, then pulled over and strangled her. Before his execution he claimed that part of her remains were found Sept 6,1974 nearly 2 miles from Lake Sammamish State Park. Janice Ott, 23 Disappeared:July 14, 1974 Lake Sammamish State park, Wa Found: Sept 6,1974 nearly 2 miles from the park A newly wed of a year and a half, July 14th was a sad day for her. The job she'd worked so hard for had taken her away to Washington, leaving her husband behind in his own practice in Riverside Ca. She was missing him very much the day of her disappearance. She left a note for her
roommate and told her she'd be home by 4, then biked to the park. Witnesses later said she got up to help a friendly man in a cast, and that was the last Janice Ott was ever seen alive. Workers discovered some of her remains in a wooded area where other victims had been dumped. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Denise Naslund, 18 Disappeared:July 14, 1974 Lake Sammamish State park, Wa Found: Sept 6,1974 nearly 2 miles from the park Denise was studying to be a computer programmer, working part time in an office to pay her way through night school. She and her boyfriend of 9 months had planned a picnic that day at the park with another couple. They roasted hot dogs, then the men fell asleep in the sun. Denise walked off to the bathrooms around 4:30 pm.
She never returned. Her friends started to worry after a while, and searched for her. Denise had brought her dog and they hoped she was looking for the dog, but it turned up alone. Workers discovered some of her remains in a wooded area where other victims had been dumped {along with Janice Ott's remains} Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Melissa Smith, 17 Disappeared:Oct 18,1974 Midvale, Utah Found:Oct 27,1974 near Summit park, in the Wasatch Mountains Melissa was the daughter of Midvale's police chief and was a very cautious girl. Midvale itself was a small Mormon town, very quiet, and though her father worried about his kids and taught them to be safety-aware, Melissa had little to fear in the tiny community. October 18th, Melissa had plans to attend a slumber party. She ended up walking to the local pizza parlor to console a friend who'd had a quarrel with her boyfriend. After this, she left to pick her overnight clothes up and go to the party. She never made it home, and she never made it to the party. The teenager who'd gone to comfort a friend in need, was found battered and nude 9 days later, far from the small town she'd grown up in. Her head had been severely beaten with perhaps a crowbar, and her body had been battered before death. She had been strangled, raped and sodomized.

PressCheck
February 28, 2008, 02:11 PM
Is it re-fillable, or do just buy another one?

archigos
February 28, 2008, 02:37 PM
To be honest, I think you have bigger things to worry about if you actually have to use pepper spray.
To answer your question, the Guardian Angel appears to be an entirely self-enclosed unit, meaning you can't replace the charges. On the other hand, the JPX Jet Protector uses replaceable magazines. Full specs available at http://www.life-act.com/specifications.php

another okie
February 28, 2008, 07:15 PM
I have never heard of a law saying it's illegal to flee the scene of a crime. Find me a cite if you're sure it's the law. It's illegal to flee to escape arrest or prosecution, but if go far enough away to be safe and then call the police, you will be fine.

As far as why it's important to call first, anyone with experience with police knows that they have a form with two places on it: victim and aggressor. Whoever calls first gets put in the victim slot, and it's pretty hard to get out of that aggressor slot once you're in it. Like anyone else, police tend to believe whoever they hear first.

rocinante
February 29, 2008, 06:08 PM
Man all you wanna be lawyers can deal with it the way you want. If my wife feels even the hairs on the back of her neck stand up or her spidey senses stirs I want her to go as rambo as best she can. I would rather have her in my bed than a body bag.

If you enjoyed reading about "Kimber Lifeact pepper spray. legal question." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!