Legal question about Taser AND gun carry..

[bradfromearth]

Greetings all,
I am new here but have been lurking for some time now.

I have a question about taser and handgun carry. I currently do and would like to continue carrying a x26 taser. I also have my CCL and I carry a gun on my body and the taser off body (laptop bag /man bag/waist pack or whatever the situation has me with). My concern is that should I ever have to use the gun to defend myself would there be legal difficulties for me because I HAD a taser and opted not to use it?

FYI -
The taser topic as a whole is interesting but my real concern here is the legal part. If I cant find a general thread on tasers I'll start one.

Thanks
Brad

 

[Jeff White]

I don't see why not using a less lethal option first would get you in legal trouble. The force continuum that many law enforcement agencies use do not require every force option to be used in order. You respond with the level of force that the threat requires.

That said, I don't think it's a good idea for a private citizen to burden himself with multiple force options. Peace officers have multiple force options because they are duty bound to respond and to take people into custody. A private citizen has no such duty and is free to withdraw, and is not concerned with taking anyone into custody.

I never carried OC or other less lethal force option off duty. I was not going to engage in the kind of encounter where I might need to use it. Less lethal options are more proactive then reactive. In most cases on duty I could tell when a contact was going to degenerate to the point where a less lthal force option was going to be called for and get it out to use. A private citizen can simply withdraw from that situation.

If local law only allows you a less lethal option then that's what you are stuck with. Other then that I wouldn't use or recommend them for the private citizen over a firearm.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Um.

My jurisdiction differentiates between lethal and non-lethal force. Incapacitating force doesn't enter into the legal equation. Maybe it should; I dunno. I'd disagree as a philosophical matter if it did, but in any event, it doesn't.

Tasers have been known to kill people, but so have many things.

I don't happen to like tasers, but as you say, this isn't a general free-for all about them.

It takes a pretty special situation for lethal force to be justified around here. At least in my neck of the woods, it does. By that point, to paraphrase Carl the Groundskeeper, "The kidding around is pretty much over, now."

If I have to draw (and fire) a firearm, a taser is just about the last thing I want to come up with when I go for the gun.

Some ink has been spilled elsewhere about choice of caliber in SD shoots and its implications in defense. I'm on record as pooh-poohing those concerns. I'm not so sure I'd pooh-pooh a taser/gun situation. Sort of a heath.

I don't even know where I'd get a taser. I don't want to know. But I know where to get a gun.

 

[expvideo]

I have considered buying a taser, but since they cost as much as another gun, I'd rather buy a new range toy.

One thing to remember is that while many states have a preemption on firearms (meaning that cities and counties can't pass more restrictive laws, so you only have to know the state laws), that preemption does not extend to tasers. They may be illegal in some cities. As long as you know the laws, you should be OK. It is a nice alternative, but I wouldn't worry about using your gun in self defense and having the fact that you had a taser used against you. Either deadly force was authorized or it wasn't. There is no gray area.

 

[Yosemite Sam]

Tasers are expensive! I've seen them for $500-550.

 

[bradfromearth]

Jeff-

Thanks for the insight. I understand what your saying and I do agree with you.
However it is when I see things like this video that I get caught up in the taser issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMIuG3HvV0Y


The guy doing the beatdown is not armed and it does not look like he is doing life threatening harm BUT with a gun there would really be nothing you could do to help, or is there?

 

[indoorsoccerfrea]

nothing says that once you start carrying a gun, the only defense you have is a gun. you still have fists. as long as your gun is pretty well secured or your taser or whatever you have won't likely get into the wrong hands, you can use you fists if need be. If I see a fight that is getting out of control, more likely than not i will call 911 put my gun in my car and go break it up. of course this all depends on the situation...

 

[indoorsoccerfrea]

wow i just watched the video... that would be called disparity of force... a taser would be justified in my mind, i dont know about a gun though...

 

[expvideo]

The prosecutor is saying that she is shocked that no one tried to stop the guy. Well, as a person who was in a very similar situation and did try to stop the guy, I was beaten to the point of fearing for my life and had to draw and threaten to shoot just to be able to escape from the angry, drunken, and very large attacker. And all I did was try to reason the guy out of throwing someone off of a balcony with an "everybody calm down, there's no need to fight over this". I didn't even touch anybody, and the violence quickly shifted from the original victim to me.

So the prosecutor may not realize what she is expecting of the guys in the pizza store. They could have gotten as severe of a beating, if not worse, just by saying something.

 

[TRGRHPY]

Look at the many ways that someone can prosecute or persecute a legitimate self-defense shooting and then look at how much easier they would find it to prosecute or persecute you for a less dangerous situation. To most of us the threshold to shoot in self defense is very high, but that same threshold would be much lower and open to more scrutiny in a situation involving a taser.

I also think that when carrying a firearm, most of us are responsible enough to avoid confrontation so that the use of deadly force isn't "forced" upon us. The amount of responsibility incurred by carrying is tremendous and not taken lightly (not by myself, anyway). I really doubt that people would associate anywhere near that much responsibility with carrying a taser and would suspect far more liberal use of it. It is much easier for a person to draw a mental line at killing someone, and much harder for them to draw a mental line at something considered less lethal.

Then you also have to consider the "mistakes" that officers have when they thought they had their taser in hand and then shoots a suspect with their firearm. As posted before, if it isn't a situation that requires immediate deadly force, you probably have time to retreat.