Yes disarmed and fully functional perp that has just had his weapon taken away is no longer a threat. That is unless he proceeds to grapple and retake the pistol, then uses that pistol to kill you.
Maybe people who have not been in such situations do not realize how fluid they are.
Fighting with someone with a gun, still in a fight, get the weapon, and proceed to club him with it while still in a struggle, continuing to club until the threat is down, or allows you to get away or gain some distance.
Seems logical to me. In fact it shows a lot more self control than proceeding to shoot him with it. If you are in a struggle with someone and either of you have a pistol, you are still in a life and death situation.
Taking someone's pistol away and pistol whipping them immediately is one of the oldest and most effective ways to end a very dangerous situation in a less than lethal way. If someone has the ability to do so, putting themselves in danger, I applaud them.
To me pistol whipping the threat while still in a struggle is no different than tazering him, hitting them with a baton, or spraying them. It is dangerous, and he may be injured, but your safety is more important than the person willing to do you harm who is still a threat.
What exactly do you do after taking the pistol away from him and still being engaged in a struggle?
You may not even have the pistol by the handle, perhaps holding it by the slide/barrel and having possessing of it for a split second. He may be punching clawing and grabbing for it.
1. You could shoot him.
2. You could now continue the struggle with one hand while they have two, and see how it turns out.
3. You could simply point it at him from grappling distance as you are obviously in, and hope he complies rather than grabbing it, at which point you have to shoot.
4. You could toss it away, and once again be in a life and death situation if he gets an advantage and manages to reach it again.
5. If you just happen to carry other weapons on you, you can proceed to employ them with one hand while your useless other hand holds onto a weapon you won't use.
.6 If you just happen to carry handcuffs or another way to secure the individual you can proceed to handcuff someone who may still be fighting you with one hand, while you ineffectively attempt get thier second hand, with no holster or other place to put the firearm, not knowing anything about the firearm or whether it is even safe to put into your pocket (where it might just be grabbed and used to pistol whip or shoot you).
OR DING you can start beating the idiot with it as soon as you wrestle it from thier grasp, choosing to put yourself in more danger than just shooting them because you are a good guy willing to take that risk, but still don't want to die. Getting some distance once he is reeling away dazed or unconscious etc from the clubbing, and hold him at gunpoint or run away.
Imagining you can just disarm someone in the heat of a struggle and they are suddenly not a threat is foolhardy. You don't wear an extra holster for that firearm, and you don't carry a duty belt full of gadgets to help you out. Attempting to get away while still in a struggle with a fully functional individual can end up with the gun once again out of your complete control.
I think pistol whipping is a less lethal alternative that shows a large degree of restraint. It is not like he approached him armed with his own firearm and proceeded to pistol whip him. He took it away in a struggle and then made sure he wasn't going to take it right back.
People not involved in fights seem to imagine them in perfect steps and stages, as portrayed in movies, or martial arts training and demonstrations. They are usualy much more fluid than that.
It certainly is an interesting topic, and one that has many differing facets to consider. Here at THR we often attempt to put things into historical terms, and while I personally would NOT want to hurt anyone, I would have to say that in a US not that far in the past, such an action would have been quite acceptable, and again while I do not personally condone such actions (either from a legal or moral perspective), I can say that with the problems that are present in our judicial system I can see where someone might be inclined to take such actions as the justice/penal system does not seem to provide much justice, or for that matter, much of a penalty these days.
I am not saying as punishment, that is clearly wrong, and once out of the situation seperated from the threat it is up to the legal system to administer justice. However I think people imagine the line between necessary and extra is clearer mid fight in a fluid changing struggle than it really is.
