Kimber Lifeact pepper spray. legal question.

Status
Not open for further replies.
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?
 
I bought this for my wife and daughter:

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Defining the word STOP

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:
 
Thoughts about spraying someone after a warning

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?
 
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.
 
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. ;)
 
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.
 
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?
 
Last edited:
The nice thing about pepper spray

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)
 
Some things one may want to consider before saying you'll hestitate to spray

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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top