Deadly force against "unarmed" attackers

[Crazy Fingers]

I often hear stories of people getting beat to death, being blinded, or permanently injured by people who were using nothing more than bare fists. I'm not a real big guy. So I think it is reasonable to fear your life is in danger or that you will face severe bodily harm from a man who is threatening to "kick your ***" or "bust the **** out of you."

Let's play scenario games.

A man gets very angry with you for some reason. You are pretty darn sure is he unarmed, although you don't know for sure. You want to leave, but to do so would be impractical for whatever reason (let's say you accidentally backed into his car or something and have to wait for the police.) He continues to get irate with you and begins threatening you, beating his chest, etc. He comes towards you, and you draw your pistol. He then says something like "I dare you" and keeps coming. I think it is 100% clear to fire. What say you?

And what other situations can you think of where an unarmed man is threatening to get into a physical confrontation with you when you would NOT be able to use deadly force?

 

[Crazy Fingers]

I should mention that I live in FL where we have pretty good self defense laws.

 

[fletcher]

It's good to shoot IMO. Unarmed physical attacks are quite lethal. Considering that the individual saw your gun, kept approaching, and might be in range to fight for the gun, it's completely justified.

 

[MedWheeler]

If you played college football, and he goes 100 pounds soaking wet, you'd better have your tap shoes on for the grand jury. However, if it's he that played college ball, and you're the lightweight, you likely would have reason to fear the possibility of serious injury or death, which is what the law requires to substantiate a deadly-force reaction.
Now, if it were the hypothetical "just backed into his car" and he's irate and all, I'd still rather attempt to leave the scene and call police than get involved in an unnecessary shoot. Just because Florida says you can "stand your ground" doesn't mean you have to. Of course, if he prevents your leaving, all bets are off, and the law backs you up.

 

[machron1]

In Oregon in my CHL class, they went through different self-defense scenarios just as a general guideline (in other words, it depends on the DA and jury ultimately). The instructor said basically, if someone gives evidence they know a martial arts, are a trained boxer, etc. (such as they take a martial arts stance, they mention something about their fighting skills, etc.) then it's a good shoot. Otherwise, good luck convincing a jury in one of the most liberal places on earth that you had to shoot an unarmed person. However, 2 (or more) unarmed people against one is a good shoot. Otherwise, you have to go fist to fist. Me personally, I would still rather be tried by 12 than burried by 6. If I truly am in fear of my life, and I'm fairly certain the person can overwhelm and kill me, I'm going to do whatever I can to save my life, liberal jury or not. There is at least one case I know of in Portland where a person shot and killed someone breaking into their car, claimed self-defense, and walked, so you really never know what's going to happen. Also, just because you don't have criminal charges stick, you are still open to civil litigation (just ask OJ).

 

[Jeff White]

Let's play scenario games.

Ok

A man gets very angry with you for some reason.

What reason? This is very important.

You want to leave, but to do so would be impractical for whatever reason (let's say you accidentally backed into his car or something and have to wait for the police.)

So you'd rather get in fight for your life rather then explain why you left the scene of a property damage accident?

He continues to get irate with you and begins threatening you, beating his chest, etc.

What are you saying and doing while he's giving this performance?

He comes towards you, and you draw your pistol.

Did you back away? What did you say when you drew your pistol?

He then says something like "I dare you" and keeps coming.

And you did what at this point?

I think it is 100% clear to fire. What say you?

I say it all depends on your answers to my questions. It could be a good shoot, or it could be mutual combat. A lot is going to depend on any size difference between the two of you, creating a disparity of force, and if you could make a judge and jury believe that you acted the same way the model "reasonable man" would have.

These situations are almost never clear cut and even though it may seem perfectly reasonable to you, unless you can articulate why it was reasonable for you to shoot in a way that will convince a disinterested person who is looking back at the incident with no fear or adrenalin pulsing through his body, you could be in trouble.

Quite frankly, I'm pretty hard pressed to come up with a legitimate reason that you couldn't retreat.

Jeff

 

[rondog]

A elderly man was just beaten to death in NYC, I think it was. Read it on The Drudge Report today. Killed by one really hard blow to the face.

 

[Hardtarget]

I'm 58. Bad shoulders. ..knees...a little heart problem. I'm not rolling on the pavement with any thug...any. I avoid trouble...but if it won't let me leave...well...

Wife has had both knees replaced. She can't run,so...where am I going?

Mark.

 

[B yond]

As long as a reasonable person would fear for his/her life or the life of another, and you're a reasonable person, shoot the threat until the threat is no longer a threat.

Sound pretty darn simple doesn't it?

 

[Zedo]

Oregon says the assailant needs to have the means and the intent.

85 yr old lady with a rolled up newspaper may have intent but lacks the means.

Someone with the physical stature to harm you who threatens to "kick your ass" has both means and intent. The laws in your jurisdiction should be clearly stated and accessible. Do some searching with Google.

 

[Treo]

I have to ask why you don't just lock yourself in your car? Now that said, had I locked myself in the car and our ficticious man managed to break a window of my car that would probably be my line in the sand.

 

[CWL]

Depending on what state or county, you may have a "duty to retreat" unless you are in your home, place of business, etc. This may influence how the law will look at your actions.

You do not just need to be in fear for your life (though that's what I would say to responding LEOs before asking to speak to an attorney), you merely need to be "in fear of imminent serious bodily injury" for justification to defend yourself. Look up this term in your state's law statutes.

 

[GRB]

Let's play scenario games.

A man gets very angry with you for some reason. You are pretty darn sure is he unarmed, although you don't know for sure. You want to leave, but to do so would be impractical for whatever reason (let's say you accidentally backed into his car or something and have to wait for the police.) He continues to get irate with you and begins threatening you, beating his chest, etc. He comes towards you, and you draw your pistol. He then says something like "I dare you" and keeps coming. I think it is 100% clear to fire. What say you?

You are kidding right? This would probably be at least manslaughter in most states if not all if just as you described it.

The guy is approaching you, threatening you, and you do not first at least try to back off to prevent getting hurt. Is the guy bigger than you, is he smaller than you, what kind of threats is he making (I am not going to assume they are of a physical nature), is he innebriated, does he appear in better shape than you, is he saying he has a weapon, does he say he is going to hurt you, does he say he is a black belt or similar, did you do anything that may be perceived as instigting this behavior (other than the accident, such as did you get out of your car), have you made verbal pleas for him to stop (before drawing a weapon), why do you think this particular man at this particular time is a threat of death or of serious bodily harm to you (and be darned specific), how far away from you is he, are other people involved, if yes what are they doing.

Expect other questions at trial like: "Why were you so willing to kill another human being, or inflict serious bodily harm on him (you are about to use deadly force as witnessed by you drawing your weapon) rather than just walk away or even run away? Do you have an ego problem? Or is it you were seeking an excuse to kill him?"

Answer those questions and others the right way for a particular grand jury, or trial jury, and you may be okay.

Why not even ask those questions of yourself, right now, before you are ever involved in such a situation.

 

[kentucky_Dave]

That's a tough one.
Many variables involved.
Are you easily intimidated?
Are you capable of determining if a person is venting and not a true threat?
(I'd raise holy hell if somebody hit my truck after a weekend detail, but not mad enough to lash out a them or fight over a clear accident)
Maybe a person can perceive that as a threat and shoot me...hmmm.
Are you willing to trust your future to a judge and jury if you make a mistake and react too soon to what may be a questionable perception of a threat?

Get back in your car, lock up and close the windows.
Get on the phone with dispatch / 911 and keep them on the line.

I hate to say it, but you are required to be the person of level headedness (if that is even a proper word) in every situation if you are armed, no matter where you live, and you must take every precaution possible to AVOID the situation getting to the point of a necessary shoot.
Unfortunately, you must assume the role and offer all apologies, swallow pride (right or wrong) and attempt to diffuse the potential aggressor's reason for threat.

Use the car to flee if you can.
Use it as a barrier between the two of you if possible.
Use the mass and power of the machine to "make" egress if necessary.

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.--The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

If you have tried everything else and he is threatening to or attempting to kill you...well, you gotta assess the situation at that moment and hopefully you can come out unharmed, but you cannot under any circumstance shoot first and ask questions later...completely unacceptable.

By all means be ready and able to defend yourself, but also understand that the perception of a threat must be clear and evident beyond doubt, not in any way questionable.

That said, look up the florida laws on "CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE"
http://www.flsenate.gov/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0776/ch0776.htm

776.08 Forcible felony.

776.08 Forcible felony.--"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

Will it make you look less manly or macho?
Maybe.
But at least you will not have to live life wondering if you did the right thing and won't have to prove it to a judge and jury in a land where perception is regularly manipulated by an anti-gun media spewing half truths in favor of frying you.

Your firearm, as I see it, is the last line of defense when all else fails, not your first reaction...

http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/self_defense.html

 

[kentucky_Dave]

To add clarification...

Chapter 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.--

(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or

(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or

(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

(5) As used in this section, the term:

(a) "Dwelling" means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.

(b) "Residence" means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.

(c) "Vehicle" means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

 

[deaconkharma]

just make sure you start screaming help alot first.

It's all about perception and who can back your perception up.
My CWP teacher mentioned this. Pure self defense aside and all, it's part of the training we all should practice. Perception of witnesses that we were in danger sure does help.

Example: My instructor used this in my CWP class. You're in your home and someone is breaking or has broken in. Put a shoe under the bedroom door and then call 911. while on the phone loudly as if you are speaking to the burglar, "please don't come in here I don't want to hurt you". If he comes in he makes a racket pushing on the door with the shoe under it. Make sure to repeat yourslef if piossible then... bang bang. You warned him/her, it's on tape, the tape is your witness as well as te operator. Can't always go like this, I know, but it sure does make it easier later for both criminal and civil trial. You begged and warned twice then bang bang.

SO... like I said, if it looks like you have to scream for help first make sure you try to get away and now that you've got attention, make sure you have no other option and others would likely agree by hearing you and seeing your defensive posture and your attempt to flee.

 

[ZeSpectre]

The problem with "unarmed assailant" scenarios is that you really never know, and cannot know until AFTER the event, if someone is really unarmed. Basically you have to assess the situation to the best of your ability and then make an educated guess.

Unfortunately the stakes are extremely high and the consequences are HUGE if you guess wrongly, and sometimes even if you guess right.

So let's put the OP's scenario up against the old yardstick of MMO (Means, Motive, and Opportunity)

Means - In this scenario we don't know if the aggressor has the means to do grave bodily harm, but I personally would be extremely suspicious that he does if he continued to approach and threaten an armed individual. Additionally, I have had abdominal surgery and one good punch by -anyone- to the gut could KILL me so even a smaller guy taking a swing at me is a pretty serious threat so I tend to be a little more twitchy about that sort of thing. Your risk level may, of course, be different.

Motive - Anger over the damage to his car.

Opportunity - Approaching you (closing distance) while continuing issuing threats.

So for me MMO is met in such a scenario because of my risk from even a bare handed hit to the abdomen. However I would have, at minimum, tried to keep distance and obstacles between myself and the other guy for as long as I could and I'd have to be cornered before I'd even consider resorting to my sidearm.

 

[1 old 0311]

I was on a murder trial years ago. They told us that for a justifible shooting ALL THREE OF THESE MUST TAKE PLACE.

1) You can't be the one who started the confrintation.

2) You have no means of escape.

3) You feel your life is in danger.


We found him guilty, based on #2. Guy left the bar to get a pistol out of his car, then went BACK into the bar.

 

[mbt2001]

If you played college football, and he goes 100 pounds soaking wet, you'd better have your tap shoes on for the grand jury. However, if it's he that played college ball, and you're the lightweight, you likely would have reason to fear the possibility of serious injury or death, which is what the law requires to substantiate a deadly-force reaction.

I don't think that is true these days... Drugs come into the picture and the guy is as strong as the Hulk and less afraid. The rational centers are all screwed up, so the only thing to use is deadly force, unless you have a numbers disparity like the cops do with freaks like that.

My point is that you can't tell the difference. If you have no criminal record or anything and the perp does, chances are it will go your way. Answering Jeff's question is important and having witnesses that can verify the story you told is too, unless of course they find drugs and a knife / gun on the perp...

Best thing to do, is get the hell out of there if you can, if you can't dial 911 and then do what you have to do. Can't means a physical imparement of some kind, not some arbitrary reason.

That is my $0.02

 

[csmkersh]

Florida, like Texas, does not require you to retreat- see TxPC 9.31(e) below. Not sure about Florida's stand on brandishing, but in Texas, that's a legitimate step in your force continuum; See TxPC 9.04 below. You're were you're supposed to be and there legally. You've issued a warning, and displayed the means to inforce the warning and the other person persists in advancing while threatening you. In Illinois and several other states you go directly to jail and wouldn't collect $200 or pass Go. But In Texas and most likely Florida, you'd be home for supper.

TxPC§9.31(e) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used is not required to retreat before using force as described by this section.

§ 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of
force is justified when the use of force is justified by this
chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or
serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as
long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension
that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the
use of deadly force.

​

 

[springmom]

Jeff brought up some good questions. There's another: what's the disparity of size, age, health? Like Hardtarget, I would be awfully easy pickings for some 300-pound bubba in a rage. It wouldn't even be all *that* hard for said bubba, if he got close enough, to keep me from getting into the car and locking the door. So pulling the gun for self-defense is a perfectly sensible thing for me to do. For that matter, as long as you are not the instigator of the conflict, you don't have to be a middle aged lady with a disabled placard on her mirror to not retreat, this being a state where there is no duty to do so.

But note the phrase above, in red, which is, I think, what Jeff was getting at. If you started the fight in Texas, self defense is longer a defense to prosecution. If you yelled out your window and gave him the bird, you no longer have a defense to prosecution in Texas. In other words, if you started it and you finish it, you're going to go to jail.

But, for the moment, assuming you are as meek and mild mannered as Ghandi, apologized for the car accident, never raised your voice, and you're still fixing to be a punching bag....well, you can either be a punching bag, you can retreat to your car if possible, or you can pull your firearm. To live with yourself, however, in the long dark nights that will follow pulling the trigger, you will need to be very very damsure that you were actually in mortal danger and that there were no other options. Just sayin'.

Springmom

 

[Old Guy]

meek and mild mannered as Ghandi

Well Ghandi did say the worse crime of the British was disarming the citizens of India.

One of the biggest tool's in your tool box in a Court of Law where force and weapons are used, is an Expert Witness on your side.

A good CRIMINAL! Lawyer is imperative, "your Honor my Client is not an infirm man, but at 72 years of age he felt as a reasonable person he would be no match physically against the deceased! And as the witnesses stated, he did call out more than once he was armed please leave me alone"

The expert witness could explain to the Jury why you must use safe bullets, those that would not go right through a person, an aggressor, and possibly strike innocent citizens hollow points. Plus explain that movies show bullets blowing people off their feet, which is pure Hollywood.

"You could quite feasibly fire several bullets in to a persons body, with no physical reaction what so ever. In fact you could believe you had missed every time, seeing no reaction from the aggressive person who was about to hurt you." the huge adrenalin surge into your blood stream would distort all vision and sounds received by your brain immensely.

Having said all that, move to Florida, I have been here for 5 years, never even had an argument causing raised voices!

 

[highlander 5]

I'm in my late 50"s and my days of rolling around on the ground
with someone half to a third my age is long gone. Case in point,at the market the other day the cashier,male,late teens early 20's a good 8-10' taller and outweighed me by a good 50 lbs. I'm 5'7" 210 lbs and far from peak physical condition. I'm not saying he was a threat but they are making them bigger these days.
And it seems like some people take things personal like you deliberately hit there car or what ever perceived slight and want to turn it into World War 3. So what do you do let some jamoke pound you into the pavement or shoot him if the scenario demands. There is a 3rd option for what it's worth and much less lethal some type of pepper spray,it should slow him/her down but it won't kill 'em

 

[Deleted member 66305]

Whenever I've been in a car accident, the first thing i do is check to see if everybody in both cars is OK, WHILE calling the police. I reassure the other person that the damage is what insurance is for. I remain in good spirits, and that always seems to keep the other person reasonable, regardless of who is at fault. That being said, if the other person were acting road-ragey, I'd get into my car and lock the door, and be prepared to drive away, if possible/neccesary. Every accident I've been in, or witnessed, there has always been a third party stopping and offering aid quickly -- that is a further deterrant to violence.

Now to get to the original question -- I am 5'4". Most of my acquantances, women included, are bigger than I am. I live in Texas. If I were in a car accident and the other person were behaving belligerently, threatening to hurt me, and I was unable to leave (car blocked in or inoperable, and my kids in the back seat), and didn't calm down to my words, my weapon would be out and at low ready next, and I'd ask him please to return to his vehicle and close the door, and wait for the police to arrive. I'm not waiting for him to produce evidence he's studied a martial art, or produce a concealed weapon -- his belligerent attitude and threatening posture is enough.

 

[mbt2001]

DRUGS CHANGE EVERYTHING. The guy could be 100 lbs and 5 nothing and on PCP and wreck a much larger guy or 10. Just food for thought