|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 27, 2013, 10:09 AM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 16, 2009
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 999
|
Criminal armed with a taser
If a criminal armed with pepper spray or a taser is going to attack me, would I be authorized to use deadly force?
On the justification that once attacked my physical ability to defend myself against being killed would be greatly hindered or In a scenario in which my kids were with me and the fear that once disabled the criminal would be free to harm my children. This is hypothetical of course and the reason I am asking this is not to argue the point but simply to know what to do in the event that something like this took place and under the knowledge that they WERE going to use the device and not just THREATENED to use the device. If I am not authorized to use deadly force, than what options would I have? |
April 27, 2013, 10:51 AM | #2 | |||
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,817
|
It depends on your state law. As you list your location as Kentucky, we'll start there:
Use of physical force for self-protection: http://www.lrc.ky.gov/KRS/503-00/050.PDF Quote:
Quote:
-- Exceptions. http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/503-00/055.PDF Quote:
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|||
April 27, 2013, 10:55 AM | #3 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
Any weapon creates a disparity of force.
There are basically three elements of a lethal force scenario. Opportunity, Ability and Jeopardy. Your would-be attacker must have all three if you are going to be justified in using deadly force against them. Pepper spray or a taser goes to ability. They certainly give the attacker the ability to harm you and you have no idea nor cause to believe that the harm would end at the simple use of one of them and it's entirely possible that the taser in particular could be deadly in several ways, such as hitting your head when you fall or perhaps you have a heart condition. Opportunity is essentially the question of whether or not the attacker is close enough to do what he wants to do. Being on the other side of a river might give him opportunity if he has a gun, not so much with pepper spray or a taser. Jeopardy essentially means are you really in danger. Would a "Reasonable and prudent" person believe that they were about to be attacked by a person who meant to do them severe harm. Finally, some jurisdictions, and indeed common sense, dictate that if there is some reasonable manner of escape for you and all other innocent parties, you must make use of that avenue. So, complex question, there's more than "what if he has X".
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
April 27, 2013, 04:15 PM | #4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2002
Location: alaska
Posts: 3,498
|
Quote:
Some of us mentally and physically prepare multiple defense options. Some of us put if off because theres more important things we gotta get done. Some of us put all our faith and trust in the gun and believe that suriviving the hazardous situation is all that matters ('better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6'). Your question indicates that you are looking for an answer that will keep you within the confines of the law, justifiable use of force. Learning what the law says, and properly interpreting it are two different things. It is yet even different when you pull into the equation 'how does your local prosecutors interpret the law?' I note that in the excerpts provided by Spats, Kentuckys laws are rather straight forward. Not necessarily so in the case of other states, such as mine. My states laws are peppered with phrases like 'affirmable defense'. Which means that even though you may feel you are in the right using deadly force in self defense, you could very well be arrested, charged with crimes, face a grand jury, even go to trial, but your defense (if offered by a quality attorney) could be made that you acted lawfully. Expect a prosecutor to try and prove you wrong though. So, learn your states laws, talk to attorneys versed in the use of force.
__________________
"Every man alone is sincere; at the entrance of a second person hypocrisy begins." - Ralph Waldo Emerson "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Soren Kierkegaard |
|
April 27, 2013, 04:21 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 228
|
Brandishing to deter an attack isn't (usually) considered lethal force.
|
April 27, 2013, 04:31 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
There are enough very negative outcomes with tasers that a good lawyer could make the case that you fear grievous bodily harm from the taser alone.
Note that if you are pepper sprayed and then tased, you could be set on fire. From a legit source: http://www.policeone.com/police-prod...y-With-Tasers/
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
April 27, 2013, 04:51 PM | #7 |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
I've also heard it argued that pepper spray and/or a taser could be used to incapacitate someone or remove their ability to defend themselves. Since I haven't done anything to merit being sprayed or tased, I would assume it as a prelude to greater violence.
Of course, it would be up to me to convince a jury of that.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
April 27, 2013, 05:24 PM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 1,287
|
Quote:
Now I have not gone through all the statutes etc. but considering all that then my question is would tasers mace etc. be considered a large enough disparity of force to justify using deadly force in defense of even though those items are not technically designed to be lethal?
__________________
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2 |
|
April 27, 2013, 06:30 PM | #9 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,817
|
Quote:
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
April 27, 2013, 08:30 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 16, 2009
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 999
|
Thanks for the advice. I tend to throw up what if scenarios to myself in case unusual things like this were to happen.
|
April 27, 2013, 08:35 PM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 720
|
Yes there are some outcomes with both OC and TASER (one companies tradename) that did result in death.
Just speaking broadly, OC would have less of a chance of being mistaken as a deadly weapon due to shape. Its a can with a push button on top generally. Also, some TASERS (trade name again) can resemble a firearm, and thus a person could rightly not know if they are facing a lethal, or less then lethal threat until after the fact. Also keep in mind with TASERS (trade name once again) last for 5 sec for a law enforcement version, and 30 sec for a public version. There are more investigations/lawsuits due to the law enforcement version (deep pockets/more likely to be used) so take it for what its worth. The question at hand is whether use of OC or a TASER will meet the definition brought about in the laws quoted by Spats. Quote:
Side note, after having gone through OC and TASER classes, experiencing both, I would prefer OC (TASER cramped my back up for 2 weeks, OC is over after a couple of hours with water and soap). Yes it can incapacitate a person, or render that person at a less then ideal position to defend him/herself. Personnally speaking, I could only testify to my experience having gone through both. Without that experience, it could weaken a persons testimony, or perhaps strengthen it, due to "fear of the unknown" Last edited by Fishing_Cabin; April 27, 2013 at 08:40 PM. |
|
April 27, 2013, 08:52 PM | #12 | ||
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,817
|
Yes, but FC, your quote is lacking a critical element:
Quote:
As an aside, I think every LEO I've ever worked with has echoed this sentiment when the topic of OC v. Taser came up: Quote:
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
||
April 27, 2013, 10:19 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2006
Posts: 1,512
|
Quote:
|
|
April 28, 2013, 04:22 AM | #14 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
My opine...
In my opine, you(as a armed citizen or license holder) can use a firearm(deadly force) if a violent attacker uses a blunt object or EDW(electric discharge weapon) or if they start to beat/hit you.
Around 4 years ago, a uniformed armed female deputy was attacked & beaten by a larger unarmed subject who fled a Home Depot in a dispute. The thug pounded the deputy's head into the pavement then ran off. She was in a ICU and almost died. In a more recent event, 2 young women were attacked by a well dressed man with a baseball bat. The video is on Youtube.com . I urge any use of force instructor or tactics trainer to review the clip & share it with their students or cadets. It shows how a sudden or violent assault can occur nearly anywhere. |
April 28, 2013, 10:26 AM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
|
As others said, it's good to know your specific state laws.
In some states, the fact of the robbery itself offers a presumption of legitimate self-defense. Even in those that don't, one may be able to introduce into evidence that one knows about the risks associated with tasers (cardiac rythm disruption, etc) that have resulted in deaths, or that one knows of risks involving reactions to pepper spray, or that one had reasonable fears of what could follow being disabled. It would help if one could show training received, or materials studied on the matters under discussion. Mas Ayoob goes over how to set up supporting evidence of such studies and knowledge in his MAG-40 class. |
April 28, 2013, 10:31 AM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
|
ClydeFrog, baseball bats are always considered deadly weapons, AFAIK.
The theoretical less-than-lethal weapons the OP is asking about should, in theory, pose a bit more of a hurdle in establishing need for deadly force. A baseball bat at close range, being wielded with intent should be a gimme if one has a competent attorney. |
April 28, 2013, 02:25 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
All I can say is that if someone points a taser at me, I would consider it no differently than if he or she pointed a firearm at me and react accordingly.
|
April 28, 2013, 09:05 PM | #18 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
Post 16...
I agree 100% my point is for any armed citizen/license holder or armed professional, you need to be fully able to make use of force decisions quickly.
I've heard of a few documented events where license holders stood by and were unsure of what to do in spree shooting episodes. Tactical Response's James Yeager(the tactics instructor who had the big scandal) has a interesting video about the topic, www.youtube.com . Yeager talks about live cowards & dead heroes. It's worth a look. ClydeFrog |
April 29, 2013, 12:02 PM | #19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
Quote:
|
|
April 29, 2013, 12:26 PM | #20 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
|
Illinois as an example has some good but somewhat longwinded laws on the matter
Quote:
Quote:
We actually have some pretty "good" SD laws here in Illinois
__________________
"....The swords of others will set you your limits". |
||
April 29, 2013, 09:31 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 9, 2013
Posts: 235
|
Yes if you are by yourself, an avenue of escape has more options. Running away from a threat in an alley or car etc. I could escape from some things.
However, when others are involved - wife -who is NOT as fast as me or in extreme cases if my family was involved. I can't even get my 3 year old into the car in less than 20 min. with all bribes attached let alone tell them to quickly dash around a corner the right way to avoid something. Not going to happen. If anything threatened my family I don't care what state I am in, I would protect them to the fullest and with my wife's blessing. I'll hatch it out in the courts. Never was in the situation, but once I was turning around in a dead end with wife, friend and baby and this crazy started to pin us in with his car and who knows what was he thinking - probably rob us? Well i put into reverse and started to ram his car with everyone screaming etc. I didn't care - he was not going to pin me . I would have rammed him all the way back to the river. Anyway, he backed off and i left and called police but they didn't find him. Point is, in extreme case if family is there and threatened, there is no other choice. Now, if I had had a gun at that time I'm not sure how affective it would have been to a crazy in a car, but I would have felt better though. |
April 29, 2013, 09:34 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
|
Taking that example further, my wife is 9 months pregnant, and is not running anywhere. Nor am I going to allow anybody to tase her or harm her in any way.
Since the baby is due soon, my 70something parents are visiting. Mom, with a bad knee, is not running. Dad, with other issues, is another person whom I am unwilling to see tased. At the moment, I do not have a realistic retreat option, unless everybody is in a vehicle. |
April 29, 2013, 09:41 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 24, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 917
|
most tasers ive seen are shaped somewhat like guns anyway and if its getting dark, and somebody pulls something out, and points it in my direction in a threatening manner why is it my responsibility to first determine what it is hes pulling out from under his shirt/jacket/waistband and pointing at me? What guarantees ill have that much time? "He had a weapon that i believed at the time to be a firearm", but i live in Texas so i dont know about your state.
|
April 30, 2013, 03:21 AM | #24 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
Another point...
As a armed professional(armed security/EP specialist/PSC) I can honestly tell you, use of force or more specifically deadly force will be required if a subject(s) attack you or become hostile with "non lethal" weapons(or fists for that matter).
If they assault you, you have a valid reason to use force saying(honestly), I had my loaded firearm & I was in fear for my life or safety if they got ahold of it. I, for one, would not press charges on a armed citizen or armed professional(licensed, certified, trained, etc) who said this in a grand jury or inquest. FWIW: I was hand picked by my county's State's Atty to serve on the special 6 month homicide grand jury(2005/2006). I didn't have any self defense shootings or stand your ground cases but Id be fair & understanding of a armed citizen's actions in a critical incident. Real life is NOT like NCIS, Law & Order or CSI. CF |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|