More practical than a bug, pepper spray/mace - Page 2

markj · July 14, 2009, 02:16 PM

I see no reason for a BUG so therefore no need for spray.

I would carry it if I was a postman or door to door kinda work.

**Brian Pfleuger** · July 14, 2009, 02:55 PM

Quote:

I see no reason for a BUG so therefore no need for spray.

I still don't see how not needing one has any relation to the other. They are on opposite ends of the force spectrum, completely unrelated.

OldMarksman · July 14, 2009, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Civilians are NOT obligated (as police officers may be) to follow the force continuum doctrine, to do what police officers do. period.

It is true that civilians do not have the duty to apprehend a suspect, or to restrain someone who is acting dangerously. Sworn officers have that duty and must do so without using deadly force except under dire circumstances. Hence, the continuum of force concept is an essential part of their strategy, and they thus carry tasers and the like. They cannot just go away unless they themselves are under attack. That's not what we pay them for.

Civilians, on the other hand, usually have only the responsibility to defend themselves or persons with them; they do not need to subdue or sequester anyone. If they are not under immediate attack themselves, they can and usually must just go away. (There some exceptions involving prevention of serious felonies in some jurisdictions).

That does not mean that civilians can jump immediately to the use of deadly force when a threat presents itself.

Quote:

It even may be more dangerous for them to do so .... e.g., drawing pepper spray when an assailant, who approaches, may have a knife or blunt instrument, is an example that comes to mind.

I don't think I agree. If the assailant does in fact have the ability and opportunity and puts a defender in jeopardy, and deadly force is immediately necessary. that's one thing. But unless size, numbers, or infirmity create a disparity of force, I think that the idea that a person "may have" a blunt instrument or knife might not meet the threshold.

Of course, everything will depend on how things turn out. Shoot someone who appeared dangerous but who turned out to be unarmed and the folks assigned to determine after the fact whether your fear had been reasonable may decide that it was not.

I can, however, conceive of situations in which the use of an effective less than lethal force option may be indicated if the defender reasonably believes that serious danger is immediately present but cannot know whether the A.O.J threshold is met.

Lay opinion.

armsmaster270 · July 14, 2009, 08:27 PM

Remember The Boy Scout Motto "Be Prepared" and The Coast Guard Motto Semper Paratus (Latin, "Always Ready")

It doesn't cost or weigh that much to possibly save your life or your loved ones.

thesecond · July 15, 2009, 04:15 AM

Oldmarksman: I can see your point. I've carried OC, before. Just know its limitations as reasonable non-deadly force against assailants, who may or may not be able to close the distance and make contact with a deadly weapon, before you can 'beat feet'.

Depending on the circumstances, I do treat people whose hands are unaccounted for, with extreme caution, however. And, as I mentioned in the earlier post, reasonable fear of imminent threat of death or serious injury to one's self or a third party, is not evaluated from the perspective of 20/20 hindsight, e.g., from the fact of what the assailant 'actually' had in his pocket(s), but from the perspective of the defender, i.e., what the defender had reason to believe, at the time of the shoot. No need to further discuss this issue, not enough facts. But there's no doubt one would rather not have to have this argued in court, after an arrest, indictment, and the hiring of both a criminal defense attorney and a plaintiff's attorney (to sue the assailant/family).

OC instead of a BUG? Probably not. OC, in addition to a BUG? Maybe. Know your state/municipal laws regarding OC possession (as to capsacinoid content, and/or as to overall amount).

Asps/batons and knives are also alternatives, but those also require some research into their legality for concealed possession within the jurisdiction, not to mention the requirements of training to become proficient in their use.

BTW .... I've had plenty of encounters with homeless, belligerent drunks, and bat-poo crazy folk in my lifetime, and nearly all of them without serious incident or resort to the use of dangerous instrumentalities.

And I'm certainly not suggesting that because one decides to carry a BUG, and decides, further, to leave the spray out of his/her kit, that he/she is out looking for people to shoot when they don't comply with orders to keep their distance. Not enough facts, so I'm not going to generalize.

Do what you need to do to be prepared.

neon · July 15, 2009, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Actually, I don't carry the spray but it wouldn't be a bad idea. Certainly not saying one couldn't carry both a bug and the spray - but we have to make compromises. Any thoughts?

I always have a small canister of Fox labs in my pocket. I
think it's always good to have other tools in the toolbox.
Say it's a drunk getting out of hand..you don't need lethal
force here.

Pepper spray is just another tool in the toolbox. If all
you have is a hammer then everything will look like
a nail

GojuBrian · July 16, 2009, 05:17 AM

I had to spray three dogs while biking one day ,the spray was very effective in stopping the dogs. I wouldn't had shot the dogs if I had no spray unless they had already chomped me.

I believe pepper spray is a very effective tool for self defense and bugs are unnecessary. Well, that depends on what your job is.

106RR · July 28, 2009, 02:58 AM

I carry spray because it gives me an economic advantage in self defense. The use of a firearm in CA is very likely to result in a lawsuit. These are crushing to the spirit and to the bank account. If it is possible to escape unharmed cheaply then I would do it. In some cases nothing but a gun will suffice, but most cops use the pepper spray frequently and seldom fire the gun.
I also think it is important to get past the idea that you are going to teach someone a lesson, or right a wrong. There is little justice in this sweet world of ours and it is not your place to press justice on the street. If you get into a gunfight you will wind up broke, lonely and angry. That is probably how the street criminal feels at the time of the attack. Many of these criminals go virtually unpunished in the court system. Killing one bad guy won't help in the long run (it might help you survive another day).
There is a small town nearby with a population of 51,000 and 900 of them are gang members. Many are third generation in the gang. If you use pepper spray or a gun you might live another day but the pepper spray is cheaper. 899 gang members remain!

July 14, 2009, 08:27 PM	#29
armsmaster270 Senior Member Join Date: November 25, 2008 Location: California Posts: 1,750	Remember The Boy Scout Motto "Be Prepared" and The Coast Guard Motto Semper Paratus (Latin, "Always Ready") It doesn't cost or weigh that much to possibly save your life or your loved ones. __________________ http://www.armsmaster.net-a.googlepages.com http://s239.photobucket.com/albums/f...aster270/Guns/ Retired LE, M.P., Sr. M.P. Investigator F.B.I. Trained Rangemaster/Firearms Instructor & Armorer, Presently Forensic Document Examiner for D.H.S.

July 15, 2009, 04:15 AM	#30
thesecond Member Join Date: January 4, 2008 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 62	Oldmarksman: I can see your point. I've carried OC, before. Just know its limitations as reasonable non-deadly force against assailants, who may or may not be able to close the distance and make contact with a deadly weapon, before you can 'beat feet'. Depending on the circumstances, I do treat people whose hands are unaccounted for, with extreme caution, however. And, as I mentioned in the earlier post, reasonable fear of imminent threat of death or serious injury to one's self or a third party, is not evaluated from the perspective of 20/20 hindsight, e.g., from the fact of what the assailant 'actually' had in his pocket(s), but from the perspective of the defender, i.e., what the defender had reason to believe, at the time of the shoot. No need to further discuss this issue, not enough facts. But there's no doubt one would rather not have to have this argued in court, after an arrest, indictment, and the hiring of both a criminal defense attorney and a plaintiff's attorney (to sue the assailant/family). OC instead of a BUG? Probably not. OC, in addition to a BUG? Maybe. Know your state/municipal laws regarding OC possession (as to capsacinoid content, and/or as to overall amount). Asps/batons and knives are also alternatives, but those also require some research into their legality for concealed possession within the jurisdiction, not to mention the requirements of training to become proficient in their use. BTW .... I've had plenty of encounters with homeless, belligerent drunks, and bat-poo crazy folk in my lifetime, and nearly all of them without serious incident or resort to the use of dangerous instrumentalities. And I'm certainly not suggesting that because one decides to carry a BUG, and decides, further, to leave the spray out of his/her kit, that he/she is out looking for people to shoot when they don't comply with orders to keep their distance. Not enough facts, so I'm not going to generalize. Do what you need to do to be prepared. Last edited by thesecond; July 15, 2009 at 05:02 AM.

July 14, 2009, 02:16 PM	#26
markj Senior Member Join Date: October 27, 2005 Location: Crescent Iowa Posts: 2,830	I see no reason for a BUG so therefore no need for spray. I would carry it if I was a postman or door to door kinda work.

July 16, 2009, 05:17 AM	#32
GojuBrian Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2009 Posts: 304	I had to spray three dogs while biking one day ,the spray was very effective in stopping the dogs. I wouldn't had shot the dogs if I had no spray unless they had already chomped me. I believe pepper spray is a very effective tool for self defense and bugs are unnecessary. Well, that depends on what your job is.

July 28, 2009, 02:58 AM	#33
106RR Senior Member Join Date: July 10, 2002 Posts: 216	I carry spray because it gives me an economic advantage in self defense. The use of a firearm in CA is very likely to result in a lawsuit. These are crushing to the spirit and to the bank account. If it is possible to escape unharmed cheaply then I would do it. In some cases nothing but a gun will suffice, but most cops use the pepper spray frequently and seldom fire the gun. I also think it is important to get past the idea that you are going to teach someone a lesson, or right a wrong. There is little justice in this sweet world of ours and it is not your place to press justice on the street. If you get into a gunfight you will wind up broke, lonely and angry. That is probably how the street criminal feels at the time of the attack. Many of these criminals go virtually unpunished in the court system. Killing one bad guy won't help in the long run (it might help you survive another day). There is a small town nearby with a population of 51,000 and 900 of them are gang members. Many are third generation in the gang. If you use pepper spray or a gun you might live another day but the pepper spray is cheaper. 899 gang members remain!