CCW and Taser Dillemma...

[CDignition]

IT looks like Taser Sells Stun Guns that shoot a projectile(Like the ones Cops Carry) to the general public. I don't have a problem with this, but it got me thinking.

What do you do???.. IF: a Bad Guy tries to hold you up with a Taser...you're carrying a firearm... If he shoots you with the taser, he could disarm you and kill you with your own weapon.

What happens if you drill the guy?? You're afraid for your life as he may disable you and kill you with your own gun.....I think you're SOL, and will likely get prosecuted...Since you shot a guy that had a "Non Lethal" weapon...you're balance of force is maybe considered Excessive...Unless you think Like I do...that he could kill you with your own weapon.

IS there any news on this scenario playing out?? results??



http://www.taser.com/self_defense/m18la.htm

 

[Guntalk]

I thought it was a gun, officer.

 

[CDignition]

I'm not willing to bet a 20 year stretch on that..there needs to be case law...this has had to happen somewhere...

 

[hoppinglark]

when someone is pointing a projectile weapon at you,
you shoot back.

FYI those taser's have i.d. tags so criminals are supposed to not use them...
cause we know that will work :banghead:

 

[Firethorn]

Generally speaking, deadly force is authorized even if the criminal is clearly seeking to incapacitate you. The question is 'what are the criminal's intentions after he has you incapacitated?'. Especially for females, this can still be considered a deadly threat - he may want to torture & rape before killing.

 

[Guntalk]

Would a police officer be justified by his agency in shooting (with a firearm) someone who was pointing a Taser at him/her?

 

[average_shooter]

I could be wrong, but aren't tasers actually "Less lethal" arms? People have died from Tasers, so they're not exactly 100% non-lethal.

ETA: Also, you're not necessarily shooting to kill the aggressor, you're shooting to stop the attack...

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

I think average_shooter has it. A taser, less-lethal or not, would qualify to me as a threat of great bodily harm.

 

[PotatoJudge]

I could be wrong, but aren't tasers actually "Less lethal" arms? People have died from Tasers, so they're not exactly 100% non-lethal.

It's a little more complicated, but nobody has been killed by the electric shock of a taser. It's been discussed before, if you're interested.

I agree, it's what happens after you're tazed that should make you fear for your life.

 

[Reyn]

Im an LEO and carry a X-26. When we were trained on them we were instructed that if a person takes our taser it is treated as a deadly force situation. Obviously there are factors such as distance. If you take a direct solid hit you are totally incapacitated. The person can do anything he wants to you.

 

[qlajlu]

It's all about perception

All of the court decisions I have read concerning the use of deadly force hinged on whether or not there was fear for life. If a 110 lb woman is aggressively confronted by a 210 lb man and she fears for her life, she is generally allowed the luxury of using deadly force to defend what she perceives as a life or death situation.

Someone coming at you with a stick/club may not have the intention of killing you, but if you perceive a life or death situation, lethal force is acceptable to defend yourself.

It revolves around perception and that is why the user of deadly force is raked over the coals in these situations. It is the same typical "Monday morning quarterbacking" that hounds police officers when they make split second decisions in the heat of the moment.

There is no way of knowing what is in the attacker's mind,...unless he lives!

 

[vis-à-vis]

If someone pulled a taser on me, I am going to assume they are there to kill me, rape me, or kidnap me. I will do my best to drop them with lethal force. As to owning one, I might be interested, but I would really like the law to define explicitly whether it is lethal or non-lethal and what my liabilities are if someone dies.

 

[cngerms]

I have to agree with several posts here. If the criminal is going to use something on me that will render me incapacitated, then, "I feared for life," and he wouldn't be alive to tell the jury what his intentions were and to gain their sympathy cause his daddy touched him. I'm not going to wait for a Taser case law. I think you have to decide this in your mind NOW and be prepared.

My brother is ex-police and his dept. abided by the same rule. Incapacitation and/or unconsciousness=lethal force if you're attacked or threatened.

Consider this, police can kill a person threatening them with a bloody syringe. Case law has been established for "after the fact" or "post-attack" consequences when death is likely and perceived but not imminent for the victim.

I have no desire to own a taser. I don't want to be close enough to the agressor to use it. In Virginia, a CHP is just that. It's a handgun permit, and other concealed weapons are prohibited; no brass knuckles, switchblades, nunchuks, etc. can be carried and I ASSUME tasers would fall under this weapons class by default. I can only imagine using a Taser on someone and then have them sue me in civil suit for having and using a weapon which the law did not permit me to carry.

IANAL

 

[MacEntyre]

It's all about perception

It seems that the justification for a woman's use of deadly force when confronted by a BG doesn't always apply to us men folk. Most BGs could defeat me when I am unarmed, even if I run. They may not rape me, but I could end up just as dead.

 

[TacMedic4450]

Any thoughts on what the legalities are of carrying one in places prohibiting handguns? Soley as a backup to give you options if you are not allowed to carry?

 

[tyme]

Any thoughts on what the legalities are of carrying one in places prohibiting handguns?

Legally? Some states ban carry of tasers; most states don't, and don't put any location-specific restrictions on them either. You'd have to check, but if it's legal to carry a knife it's usually legal to carry a taser.

Practically? Tasers are limited-range, one-shot weapons. Depending on your accuracy one probe might miss, or the goblin might be in the 5-10% of cases where tasers aren't (as) effective.

If there's any way to carry a gun, IMHO it is much preferable. If you carry a taser, be aware of its limitations and be ready to switch to another weapon (knife? OC spray? impact weapon?) if the taser doesn't work. If you're attacked by multiple assailants, you're in serious trouble. (That's true even with a gun, but at least if you have breathing room a gun gives you a lot more of a chance.)

If attacked by some creep with a taser, I'd try to minimize my taserable cross section and get outside the 15' range. If for some reason I didn't think that strategy would work, I'd consider the assailant a lethal threat.

 

[Fosbery]

If someone is looking to kidnap you and subject you to electric shocks whilst tied to a chair, I'd say you've got a bulletproof (excuse the pun) legal defence for 'perferating the fool'. A tazer is just a more expediant way of doing the same thing to you, so the legal defence should apply also.

But that's just me, ask a lawyer.

 

[qlajlu]

It seems that the justification for a woman's use of deadly force when confronted by a BG doesn't always apply to us men folk. Most BGs could defeat me when I am unarmed, even if I run. They may not rape me, but I could end up just as dead.

MacEntyre, as I said earlier, it is all about perception. What is the difference between a 110 woman facing a 210 man than a 160 lb man facing that same 210 lb man. Yes, most people would think that the man would have a better chance, but even in professional boxing matches they align the weights closer than that.

Conversely, a 70 year-old, 250 lb man would not be expected to be able to defend himself against an 18 year-old, 160 lb "kid."

The person being confronted has no idea what might be in the BG's mind. He doesn't have time to find out either. If that guy confronting me has a tazer I would perceive that as a situation with life-threatening consequences for me and defend myself accordingly.

 

[American_Pit_Bull]

I'm not willing to bet a 20 year stretch on that..there needs to be case law...this has had to happen somewhere...

There isn't any case law on USPS CCW and that gray code has been on the books five times as long as the new tasers have been on the market to the public.

I would be very very surprised to see any case law on this specific topic.

 

[Spreadfire Arms]

would the situation change if someone used pepper spray against you (not in self defense)?

since the Taser is relatively new (meaning that there probably is not a whole lot of case law on this topic) maybe someone could research pepper spray, since it too is a "less lethal" defense tool.

personally i know what i would do, so long as the person was not using it in self defense (but as an instrument to assault me, rob me, etc).

i figure im not going to put myself in a situation where it appears i am an aggressor, as most people carrying concealed would behave (walking away from a situation instead of instigating one), so that someone wouldn't be able logically think i am attacking them, and they are using a taser, etc in self defense.

as far as tasers and most over-the-counter (not restricted LE) OC spray dispensing devices, they do have a limited distance. taser will sell LEO's cartridges that will fire up to 35 feet vs. 15 feet for the "civilian" tasers. a MK-III or MK-IV OC spray canister has about the same effective range.

so, i would think that if you are out of the effective range of either weapon you clearly cannot justify the use of deadly force.