Non-lethal options for those who are legally disabled.

[Texasgrillchef]

In many if not most all states, the laws specify a distinction between using non-lethal or non-deadly force and using deadly or lethal force.

As I understand barring some exceptions, firearm use is almost if not always considered to be the use of deadly or lethal force.

Using your fists by most reasonable standards would be a form of non-lethal force. Using tasers, stun guns, and chemical sprays for the most part are non-lethal. Yet in many states those items are well regulated and in many circumstances even banned or outlawed.

So for someone who is disabled including those that maybe wheelchair bound, what are some legal options for them to use non lethal force? As they can’t use simple both strength and physically fight anyone. In some cases, the simple act of physical fighting would be considered deadly to them. The simple act of removing someone from a wheel chair and taking away their cellphone could be deadly to some.

 

[Old Dog]

What one needs to understand is that so-called "less-lethal" munitions and devices can be lethal. Most especially, anything that fires a projectile. The only effective less-lethal force options that I am comfortable carrying are a good O/C (minimum 1.3 % in a MK 4 size) and a (real) TASER (not a hand held "stun gun" which are typically amazingly ineffective). Even a collapsible baton carries risks and should only be used by someone who's had good training.

 

[brewer12345]

If I were disabled, I don't think I would use anything other than deadly force.

 

[dogtown tom]

...So for someone who is disabled including those that maybe wheelchair bound, what are some legal options for them to use non lethal force? As they can’t use simple both strength and physically fight anyone....

Wanna bet?
<------Adapted PE Specialist by day, merchant of death nights and Saturdays.

The lethal or nonlethal options for someone who uses a wheelchair are no different than for someone who doesn't.
Using a wheelchair doesn't mean the person is weak or unable to fight, just that they use a wheelchair. Go watch adults play wheelchair basketball at SMU or UT Arlington, you'll see biceps bigger than your head and woe be the assailant that tries to grapple with one of those guys.

 

[Bfh_auto]

If I were disabled, I don't think I would use anything other than deadly force.

Totally agree. If you're disabled. You're already fighting against very uneven odds.
Personally if someone is messing with a disabled person and gets shot. I won't feel any pity. Same goes for geriatrics.
Fighting is for healthy people that don't know any better. Pepper spray hits both sprayer and sprayee.

 

[Waveski]

Is the life of a disabled person somehow less valuable than that of a fully capable person?

Why comprise the defense of a disabled person?

 

[.308 Norma]

So for someone who is disabled including those that maybe wheelchair bound, what are some legal options for them to use non lethal force? As they can’t use simple both strength and physically fight anyone. In some cases, the simple act of physical fighting would be considered deadly to them

I'm not exactly understanding the question. While not "wheelchair bound," my 69 year-old, 5'1", 115 lb. wife ain't going to put up much of a "physical fight" to an average sized 25 or 30 year-old male. That's why she carries a gun. Are you suggesting she carry something less effective?

 

[Jesse Heywood]

If I were disabled, I don't think I would use anything other than deadly force.

I am disabled. We are at a huge disadvantage. We cannot flee or hide. My only choice is a firearm, and I will continue firing until I am out of ammo or the offender is no longer a threat to me or anyone. LTL is a death sentence if the offender has a firearm or knife.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

What one needs to understand is that so-called "less-lethal" munitions and devices can be lethal. Most especially, anything that fires a projectile. The only effective less-lethal force options that I am comfortable carrying are a good O/C (minimum 1.3 % in a MK 4 size) and a (real) TASER (not a hand held "stun gun" which are typically amazingly ineffective). Even a collapsible baton carries risks and should only be used by someone who's had good training.

The thing is, in most jurisdictions that I am aware of, using having or showing a firearm is considered use of deadly force. There are some exceptions to the rule. Texas, you can show your weapon and it not be considered use of deadly force, BUT only if certain conditions are met. It isn’t allowed in every situation.

So for someone legally disabled, though, were use of force is allowed, but NOT deadly force. What options does a disabled person have?

Example... in Texas, if someone trespasses on your property, after you have demanded that they leave, if they fail to promptly do so, you can use reasonable non deadly force to remove them.

If your in a wheel chair, you might not be able to effectively use a baton, except maybe throw it at them! A projectile Taser gun, or one of those pepper ball guns might work. But wondering what other options someone might have?

 

[Texasgrillchef]

I'm not exactly understanding the question. While not "wheelchair bound," my 69 year-old, 5'1", 115 lb. wife ain't going to put up much of a "physical fight" to an average sized 25 or 30 year-old male. That's why she carries a gun. Are you suggesting she carry something less effective?

Absolutely not...

but in every state, there are times where the use of deadly force would be illegal, while the use of non-lethal force would be allowed. Most states will view the use of a firearm as lethal deadly force. Sometimes,we even showing your weapon other open carry still in holster. Is viewed as using deadly force. Although some states such as Texas do have exceptions.

In Texas where you can’t use lethal deadly force, but you can use reasonable non deadly force is removing someone who is trespassing on your property. After you have made a demand for them to leave, if they fail to do so. You can use non-deadly force to remove them.

So your wife, if she was by herself, police response was 45 min away and she wanted to remove trespassers that you can’t shoot, what would she do?

 

[Texasgrillchef]

I am disabled. We are at a huge disadvantage. We cannot flee or hide. My only choice is a firearm, and I will continue firing until I am out of ammo or the offender is no longer a threat to me or anyone. LTL is a death sentence if the offender has a firearm or knife.

I do think in most instances where an able body person might not get away with using deadly force, someone who is disabled and in a wheel chair would probably be given extra leeway in using deadly force. I know if I was on a jury, that fact would definitely come into play in my decision of legal justification and fear.

However, as I mentioned in my two previous replies, at least in Texas, there are times lethal deadly force isn’t allowed but non deadly force is. That’s removing trespassers after you have given them the demand to leave and they have refused. If you live where I do and police response is 3-5 min. Call the police. But in some areas, police response is 45 min away! I do have a property in Texas where response time is 30-45min away. I also don’t have cell phone service there. I do have a sat phone....but... until recently u can’t simply dial 911 on those.

 

[Swampman]

I've found that a couple large, well trained dogs (backed up by a visibly armed owner) are pretty damned effective at preventing and/or evicting trespassers.

 

[Steve S.]

I reserve lethal force for protecting life and limb only; I just do not see ”trespassing” as requiring any force at all other than calling the police. Why would you want to use any force simply because someone is occupying space that is titled to you - I just don’t get that one - handicapped (which I am) would not change my response. Someone will not leave your property, call the police (regardless of response time) and have your firearm at the ready if things start south. I guess the perspective and response to trespass is viewed differently in different parts of the country - here in MO, deadly force is reserved solely for life and limb - someone simply standing on your porch cannot be thumped or shot for simply standing on your porch - maybe I am missing something here????? Now by degree, entering your dwelling and/ or coming after you / your’s - all bets of what happens next are off.

 

[shafter]

If I were disabled, I don't think I would use anything other than deadly force.

The law applies to disabled people the same as it does to perfectly able bodies people. You must be in imminent fear for your life. A disabled person can't very well flee or fight back so they will likely get to a point where deadly force would be justified much sooner than someone who is fit. However, just because someone walks up to you and slaps you in the face while you're sitting in your wheelchair doesn't mean you can shoot them. You would need to be able to articulate that the person intended to kill you and what they were doing or about to do would likely have that outcome.

 

[Waveski]

So your wife, if she was by herself, police response was 45 min away and she wanted to remove trespassers that you can’t shoot, what would she do?

Your question was addressed to .308Norma - who had already made it quite clear what his wife is prepared to do.
"That's why she carries a gun." , I believe he said.


Scenario : A disabled person , bound to a wheelchair , is physically assaulted and uses a firearm for self defense. You telling me that there is a jury in this land who would convict that disabled victim of excessive force?

If you live where I do and police response is 3-5 min. Call the police.

Curl up in a ball for 3-5 minutes waiting for outside help while under assault? Your decision. Not me or mine pal.
Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 , as the saying goes.

 

[Kleanbore]

So for someone who is disabled .... what are some legal options for them to use non lethal force?

What is it that you are trying to ask?

 

[hso]

As I understand barring some exceptions, firearm use is almost if not always considered to be the use of deadly or lethal force.

Let's clear this issue right now, firearms are lethal force. Now that that is out of the way, there are very very few non-lethal defensive tools (OC spray is about it), and most other practical tools are less-lethal. IOW, other than chemical defensive sprays, you are limited to defensive tools that can kill if not properly applied and THAT usually means training (other than goofly net guns and similar entrapment devices more suitable to riot control).

We will NOT get into a discussion of what is legal simply because we have a Legal forum and the moderators there are well equipped to keep the discussion out of wishful-thinking-land while I'm more of a blunt instrument of compliance on such issues. Lets just say that state laws and case law are varied and complicated on the use of force and there's no point in bantering that about outside of Legal.

You didn't ask a question in your original post so with the above caveat I'll respond to the implied question of "what less-lethal defensive tools should a disabled person consider?".

We consider less lethal defensive tools part of the force continuum. We have a whole stickied thread on OC sprays because they're the most easily used defensive tool that requires minimal training. Tasers, real tasers, not stupid "stun guns", are in the next tier because they require some minimal training and there are rare cases where they might result in death or grave bodily injury (rare, but on record). So good OC (see the stickied thread) and Tasers are bout it for minimal training. After those two common less lethal tools you're into those that require considerable training for effective and compliant use. THAT training requirement and the physical requirements that go with it can make training an insurmountable challenge depending upon the disability. That about sums it up.

If you want to know what the details of those options are we have plenty of discussions on them in NFW to review or you can phrase a question on one of them ... or all of them.

 

[brewer12345]

The law applies to disabled people the same as it does to perfectly able bodies people. You must be in imminent fear for your life. A disabled person can't very well flee or fight back so they will likely get to a point where deadly force would be justified much sooner than someone who is fit. However, just because someone walks up to you and slaps you in the face while you're sitting in your wheelchair doesn't mean you can shoot them. You would need to be able to articulate that the person intended to kill you and what they were doing or about to do would likely have that outcome.

Absolutely. Someone slapping me in the face and walking away is a case where I take their picture and call the police. Someone sticking around after the first slap for more is another matter, especially if I am disabled and can't get away or fight back.

Happily I am not disabled and these days I rarely leave my home except to visit close friends or head to the woods to either target shoot or hunt.

 

[lightman]

I'm disabled, but not wheelchair bound, yet, and have not given much thought to nonlethal defense. At one time I could hold my own against most threats but not anymore. So I carry concealed. I think I understand the responsibility of carrying and what I can and cannot do. Woe be unto anyone that attacks me or mine and won't back off when they see my weapon.

 

[.308 Norma]

So your wife, if she was by herself, police response was 45 min away and she wanted to remove trespassers that you can’t shoot, what would she do?

Your question was addressed to .308Norma - who had already made it quite clear what his wife is prepared to do.
"That's why she carries a gun." , I believe he said.

Thanks Waveski. My wife is prepared to defend herself or me with a gun if she thinks it's necessary. So am I. I just don't believe either of us thinks removing trespassers from our property falls under "self defense."
However, to answer Texasgrillchef's question about what we would do if we wanted to remove trespassers that we can't shoot - we would call the police. And we actually do live where police response is probably 20 or 25 minutes away.
We've had a few trespassers too in the 40 years we've lived here. Although none of them refused to leave when told, so calling the police, much less shooting one of them wasn't necessary.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Your question was addressed to .308Norma - who had already made it quite clear what his wife is prepared to do.
"That's why she carries a gun." , I believe he said.

No, what inwas saying is if your just dealing with treapassers, then call the police and wait your 3-5 min.

Scenario : A disabled person , bound to a wheelchair , is physically assaulted and uses a firearm for self defense. You telling me that there is a jury in this land who would convict that disabled victim of excessive force?



Curl up in a ball for 3-5 minutes waiting for outside help while under assault? Your decision. Not me or mine pal.
Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 , as the saying goes.

If your being assualted thats a different story. Deadly force usually will be an accepted form of force then. Especially for disabled folk. Simple tresspass it wont be.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

What is it that you are trying to ask?

I think the question pretty much speaks for itself.

You know better thrn I, that lethal dorce is not allowed in every instance while non-lethal force can be used. Such as one example Tresspass in the state of Texas. (maybe other places too).

Firearms are perfect for disabled people when deadly lethal force is justfied for use. However they are not when deadly force is not justified.

So what forms of non deadly force can that use?

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Let's clear this issue right now, firearms are lethal force. Now that that is out of the way, there are very very few non-lethal defensive tools (OC spray is about it), and most other practical tools are less-lethal. IOW, other than chemical defensive sprays, you are limited to defensive tools that can kill if not properly applied and THAT usually means training (other than goofly net guns and similar entrapment devices more suitable to riot control).

We will NOT get into a discussion of what is legal simply because we have a Legal forum and the moderators there are well equipped to keep the discussion out of wishful-thinking-land while I'm more of a blunt instrument of compliance on such issues. Lets just say that state laws and case law are varied and complicated on the use of force and there's no point in bantering that about outside of Legal.

You didn't ask a question in your original post so with the above caveat I'll respond to the implied question of "what less-lethal defensive tools should a disabled person consider?".

We consider less lethal defensive tools part of the force continuum. We have a whole stickied thread on OC sprays because they're the most easily used defensive tool that requires minimal training. Tasers, real tasers, not stupid "stun guns", are in the next tier because they require some minimal training and there are rare cases where they might result in death or grave bodily injury (rare, but on record). So good OC (see the stickied thread) and Tasers are bout it for minimal training. After those two common less lethal tools you're into those that require considerable training for effective and compliant use. THAT training requirement and the physical requirements that go with it can make training an insurmountable challenge depending upon the disability. That about sums it up.

If you want to know what the details of those options are we have plenty of discussions on them in NFW to review or you can phrase a question on one of them ... or all of them.

Thank you for that reply. You answered the question at least i was attempting to ask. So thank you.

In Texas, for the purpose of Tresspass, you CAN legally display your gun to show that you will use it if the justificstion for use becomes necessary. You cant point it at them, and you cant discharge it, even into the ground. But you can pull your weapon and display it. It also cant be before you have given the berbal demand to leave, and it also cant be showed until they have refused to leave as well. This is what a Texas lawyer has informed me.

But again thanks for your response.

Oh and whats your opinion on pepper ball guns?

Similar to a paint ball gun and a OC spray but the balls are filled with "pepper spray liquid" instead of paint?

 

[Alex Clayton]

To me? The "disabled" need to make sure they have lethal protection even more. The more disabled they are the less likely they can defend themselves. I am in my 60's, in fairly good shape for my age but, I am NOT going to let some animal beat me down. If he tries in my mind my life is now in danger. I was out with my in-laws the other day to eat. They are past 90 now. Both get around great but, all it would take is one hit to either of then to be deadly. So for them? They should use lethal force if attacked.
What people have to remember is if you are attacked and use lethal force the police will show up. At this point SHUT UP. If you get in trouble over a shoot it will be your mouth not your gun that gets you in hot water. Let some DA try to make their case if they want but pleading your case to the LEO's will never make anything better.

 

[Waveski]

Pepper ball gun for threat class A ,
Taser for threat class B ...

This thread is making my head hurt.