When Are You Justified in Using Deadly Force Against an Unarmed Assailant?

[Bookworm]

This kind of question keeps the lawyers and prosecuters in business. "I" believe that a fight WILL result in great bodily injury. After all, we are not school children anymore, we are much heavier and stronger even if we remain otherwise sound.

Where I work, everyone is stocky as heck. I'm about 200lbs, and every last person I work with is 180 min, most over 200 lbs, and they handle steel all night. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what kind of damage WILL result from a fistfight there.

Out on the streets, same thing. Unlike the movies, people get teeth knocked out, noses, cheekbones, and jaws broken, eyes lost, etc. There's a very real risk of death - some teenagers killed an illegal immigrant not long ago nearby in a fight. Do you want to risk getting knocked out - unless we're professional boxers its quite likely we could go down in 1 punch - and your attacker getting to your wife and kids? Even if I didn't, why should I suffer a nasty beating because of someone else's felonious behaviour?

Nope, not I. Draw, warn, and then fire if necessary. Holster and walk away, and call an attorney. So my response to the OP is "whenever you are in fear of being assaulted (which will of course result in serious injury at the least) and may not retreat safely"

 

[dapster]

"What I did do was produce from my side a very loaded 45 kimber auto with a laser site which I promptly set right on his chest.

"I yelled at him to back up and get down on his stomach and interloch his hands behind the back of his head. Obviously he knew the routine and complied."

What if he hadn't complied, but instead commenced walking away?

 

[Art Eatman]

dapster, if a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his rump every time he jumps. We can play "What if?" until the Devil goes to selling ice cubes.

However, if the threat is ended, the need for deadly force is likely ended, as well.

 

[dapster]

What if you dropped the santimonious tone?

Clearly if the threat is over, deadly force is not justified. But, given the heat of the moment I think it's interesting to consider one's reaction to the "perp" not following commands.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Dapster-

The only command you are legally authorized to back up with the threat of violence is for your assailant to come no closer. You are no more legally authorized to hold someone at gunpoint and prevent their retreat than you are to demand their wallet. Simply put, if the immediate threat has been deflected, there is no further lawful use of your firearm.

 

[dapster]

LemmyCaution-

Well said, thank you.

 

[fastbolt]

But, given the heat of the moment I think it's interesting to consider one's reaction to the "perp" not following commands.

Interesting?

In the respect of learning whether that 'reaction' land's one in county jail or state prison, or turns them into a debtor after they lose a civil suit, or worse?

Acting in 'the heat of the moment' without some knowledge of what's allowed by law (statutory or case) ... and the ability to effectively make proper decisions under stress using that knowledge ... can potentially change the course of someone's life for the worse, or risk ending it prematurely.

Knowledge, combined with some training in how to apply that knowledge within variable circumstances, can potentially be useful.

Unfortunately, people don't always make the right decisions, even if they have received some knowledge and training. Hence, even someone who has been trained and sworn to work as LE can sometimes make the wrong decision 'in the heat of the moment' and find themselves hearing those dreaded 5 words ... "Will the defendant please rise?"

If more of the public had the opportunity to experience something like FATS training they might have their eyes opened a little more about the decision making process as it occurs under stress. You can sometimes hear of folks who have done this while attending a citizen's academy, for example.

I remember reading about how an attorney was invited to experience some FATS training with a local PD. Unfortunately, he discovered to his dismay that he made the wrong decision and 'shot' someone in a FATS scenario who should not have been shot.

Training to make difficult decisions correctly under stressful situations isn't as easy as some folks might think, even if you have an understanding of the required knowledge.

Decisions made under stress may be carefully examined afterward and judged at the leisure of someone else ...

 

[charliewood]

A perfect example of how an unarmed man can kill you and leave your loved ones at your killers mercy

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/n...-in-fatal-assault-indicted-monday-164630.html

Print this page Close
Man accused in fatal assault indicted Monday
By Valerie Lough
Staff Writer
8:29 AM Tuesday, June 16, 2009

SPRINGFIELD — A man accused of hitting and killing another man was indicted by a Clark County grand jury Monday, June 15.

Khristerpher E. Robinson, 45, of 135 Omega St., was indicted on charges of voluntary manslaughter and robbery, according to court records.

He is accused of killing Warren S. Williams, 36, of 5584 Ridgewood Road June 2.

The two men allegedly had a confrontation in which Robinson hit Williams, who was reportedly knocked unconscious.

Robinson allegedly hit a woman who was with Williams and took her purse.

Williams was taken to a Dayton hospital where he died days later.

Robinson is in Clark County Jail.

 

[t165]

You can read all the various laws and case law decisions in the world and still not find a definitive answer. The exact same actions in one jurisdiction will be ruled justified and in the next county over the person may very well be arrested and prosecuted. It is all up to the prosecutor(s) of your particular jurisdiction. Perhaps the best advice I can give is trying to get a feel for the elected prosecutor in your area.

 

[ffhuggie]

It is all up to the prosecutor(s) of your particular jurisdiction.

That is the reality of it. I was prosecuted in NW Wisconsin for murder when 3 men broke into my home. There is no castle doctrine here. The prosecutor charged me where in the next county I may not have been. A judge exonerated me. I feel I acted reasonably but the prosecutor chose I didn't. A prosecutor can charge anyone with a crime. It just comes down to lawyers arguing their truths.

 

[rrruuunnn]

My last CHL class had a cop explain the use of deadly force. He said that regardless of whether you are a cop or a civilian that use of deadly force is used when you are in fear for your life.

Sorry, for the run on senctence. I goto go do my errands now.

 

[t165]

Prisons across America have many people who feared for their life and then injured or killed someone and went to prison. If a prosecutor does not believe self defense was justified he will throw the "would a reasonable person have feared for their life" into the mix. Some lawyers could sell ice cubes to eskimos and I would hate to have my freedom threatened based on the arbitrary and capricious whims of some prosecutor looking to make a name for themself. Most prosecutors are good folk but there are some who's decisions are infleunced far to much by politics (gun control). I have never had to shoot/kill anyone and I hope I never have to make that decision. First, I have no desire to shoot/kill anyone. Second, once that trigger is pulled the decisions or right/wrong or proper is out of your hands from that point on. It sure gets twisted out there!

 

[thebadguy2k6]

Develope a ROE

For myself, I have to use a ROE (Rules of Engaement). I'm 25 years old, 6ft tall, 240lbs, fairly strong, a veteran, and trained killer. I also happened to be white which automatically pits me at a disadvantage against any assialant not of my skin color (God Bless America). With out a verifiable proof of intent to harm or kill, I would not stand up well in the courts if I discharged a firearm on an assaliant. I recognize this unfortunete truth so therefore, I created my own personal ROE based on my characteristics which, if followed as planned, should keep me out of hot water. Just because some one bucks up on me doesn't mean I can pull my weapon. My first rule is to difuse through diplomatic means....even if I have to swallow my pride. I'm even willing to go so far as to by the man a drink if it will divert a conflict. My next step is to inform the aggressor that I am armed and capable. Then, if that don't work, I show them. If that don't work, I will aim for the lower portion of the leg (below the knee) and hopefully I will miss an artery. I carry FMJ's only, my goal is to use the least amount of force neccesary to difuse the situation. I stay away from JHPs since they have a better chance of actually killing an unarmored target.

I skip the warning shot for obivous reasons. When engaged in a conflict, you are usually focused on the aggressor and are unaware of your surroundings. An intentional warning shot in the air or at the feet of the aggressor could bounce and hit a bystandard.....that is unacceptable for more since I know how to use a weapon. So, I skip the warning shot. Plus, if a springfield XD-45 in your face isn't enough motivation to stop, then a warning shot will probably not have any effect either.

To my credit, outside of combat, I have never needed to brandish a sidearm. I hope it stays that way too.

Everyone needs to develope their own method. One that they could live with if they were ever forced to carry out the full action.