Quote:
|
I think you need a new line of work.
|
No sir,
I have a firm understanding of the law and I have been schooled in many different courses, in applicable case law where unarmed attackers have been shot and killed by LEO’s where the situation was ruled justified.
See whether you might agree with it or not every call we go on is a gun call, why?
Because we bring the gun to the call, every single time.
The courts, more specifically the USSC has acknowledged time and time again that the only reason a person would attack a LEO is to do them harm, possibly great bodily harm and that the LEO can only act based on the facts known to them at the time, which does not include the knowledge of just how much harm this person may or may not intend to do and physical size disparities are always factors which can and do lead to people being in reasonable fear of great bodily harm or death.
And by doing so, if I allow the attack to go on, against an attacker which I know I cannot physically "take" there is the very real and great risk I will loose control of my weapon.
To believe otherwise is outright stupid.
In Georgia assualt is defined as “when one person places another in reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily injury. A mere threat of harm is insufficient to support an assault charge.
A threat combined with the apparent present ability of a defendant to actually carry out the threat is necessary. The victim must reasonably believe that he is in danger of receiving immediate bodily injury.”
Size is a factor here.
Aggravated assault, “when an assault is committed one of three ways: 1) with intent to murder, rape or rob; 2) with a deadly weapon (includes any instrument which, when used against a person is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury) or 3) by discharge of a firearm from within a motor vehicle toward a person or people.”
This also includes hands and fists or other bodily instruments, you can't reasonably argue that the hands and fists of somone the size of Lou Ferrigno are not deadly weapons.
OCGA 17-4-20(b) “Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury;
when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm.”
This is not a blanket license to kill but a necessary tool that must exist to allow us to be able to effectively do our job, the courts thankfully understand that not all cops can be the size of some steroidal monster or have the fighting capability of Bruce Lee and that we must have the assurances necessary to effect any arrest which must be carried out.
This is why the FBI created the use of force continuum and the Courts have adopted its model and apply it to all cases involving deadly force, especially in LE.
This model allows us to go at a minimum one step above the level of force being used to overcome any resistance to effect a arrest, but it also does not limit us in our ability to enter this continuum at any point we feel is necessary, hence we can go straight from verbal encounter to deadly force without having to stop along the way if we feel our life or safety is in jeopardy.