knife if you arent trained with one

[abominableSnowman]

What leagally warrants the use of self defence? I read that many cases that self defence was not leagally warranted and that the "defender" had actually committed a crime.

[For if I'm not trained with a knife]
First, Verbal & body language to diffuse the situatuion. If that failed, display a knife to diffuse the situation. If that failed, used the knife in a kamakazi-lunge-for-the-gut-or-neck offensive fashion as a last resort defensive measure yeah?
Is it legal to stand my ground or am I obligated by law to try to Run away first?

How would you Deffuse a situation?



I edited some stuff here

 

[mljdeckard]

Using deadly force for self-defense is justified when a REASONABLE PERSON believes that they are in danger of serious bodily injury or death. Some states say deadly force is justified to prevent a violent felony.

I'm not into body language or verbal warnings when I'm looking at using deadly force. The time for talking is over. I'm not in a movie directed by Richard Donner where they make the hero sound really cool when he's got a gun pointed at him.

What exactly have you been reading, and where have you been reading it?

We don't know if you have a 'stand your ground' law because we don't know what state you live in.

We don't ever recommend people carrying weapons they don't know how to use.

 

[Darkninja]

Be careful of carrying a knife for self defense. As soon as you he stops resisting, if you keep stabbing, you're now the aggressor. I carry a knife mainly for function.

 

[Floppy_D]

Based on my limited military knife training, I would never use a knife for anything other than opening boxes and cutting cord. If I couldn't carry a handgun and felt like I needed to carry something, I'd stick to OC over a knife. I don't intend to stick around long enough for a knife fight to happen.

 

[Zoogster]

If that failed, display a knife to diffuse the situation.

A crime in many jurisdictions.

Displaying a weapon in a threatening manner is felony assault with a deadly weapon/aggravated assault.
Sometimes people get away with it in some places, whether knife or gun, but sometimes they do not.
Less get away doing it with a knife ironically.


Misdemeanor assault is not a violent felony. So someone posing an unarmed threat will often not be committing a felony.
An assault is the threat of force, so someone threatening to attack you, swinging at you etc
Even an actual barehanded attack is initially only normally a misdemeanor battery. So even someone punching you is a misdemeanor (well unless you happen to die or other serious injury results.)
Many courts will send you to prison even for using a lethal weapon when only facing an unarmed attacker.

So in states you are only allowed to stop a violent felony, someone threatening or even attacking with just their fists may not qualify for even just pulling a deadly weapon never mind using it.
Meaning they may be guilty of a misdemeanor for actually attacking or threatening to attack you, but you may be guilty of a felony assault for threatening them with a lethal weapon.
If you actually use a lethal weapon to inflict injuries or kill someone committing a misdemeanor attack you may or may not spend a long time in prison. Its a roll of the dice.
If you did not do all you could to get away or avoid the situation, prison is more likely. Not backing down from something which can be avoided is often considered mutual combat, and the legal defense of self-defense is not available to someone who is a mutual combatant.

 

[mptrimshop]

when you pull a knife out and then he pulls his gun out and shoots you HE is in the right

 

[abominableSnowman]

awesome information! ty ty

 

[Zoogster]

when you pull a knife out and then he pulls his gun out and shoots you HE is in the right

This would be correct, unless of course he is considered a mutual combatant because he was unwilling to shrug off a challenge which resulted in escalation.

But yes if you were the first person to pull a lethal weapon, creating a major threat of serious bodily injury or death, they would then be justified to pull a gun and shoot the lethal threat.
So pulling a knife on someone intimidating you can justify them pulling a gun and shooting you.

 

[abominableSnowman]

This would be correct, unless of course he is considered a mutual combatant because he was unwilling to shrug off a challenge which resulted in escalation.

But yes if you were the first person to pull a lethal weapon, creating a major threat of serious bodily injury or death, they would then be justified to pull a gun and shoot the lethal threat.
So pulling a knife on someone intimidating you can justify them pulling a gun and shooting you.

:s
ill remember that
This is all good information!

 

[abominableSnowman]

Recap

Never threaten anybody
Never display a weapon in a threatening manner
If the attacker is unarmed, just block and run away
Use of a deadly weapon for defence is only justified if the attacker pulls a deadly weapon on you or if the bad guy is committing a violent felony

also is a broken glass bottle or a club a deadly weapon?
Edit: also does the above apply if there are multiple agressors [they encircle/corner you] and you didnt do anything to provoke or escalation the situation?

 

[Zoogster]

There is something called a disparity of force.
This can allow you to use a higher level of force. Like with multiple attackers, or a major threat, professional fighter etc
Or if you are injured, disabled, in a wheel chair, just had surgery, etc etc

If you are in such a condition that even the unarmed person would cause a "reasonable person" (more on that) to fear for their life or of serious bodily injury.


The problem is many including those on the jury will view fighting like on TV, movies, school, or even boxing and similar sports.
Something not immediately a threat of more than some bruises and hurt pride.
So are unlikely to see an unarmed man attacking another healthy man as a disparity of force.
If those on the jury think your actions are not what they should have been, then you go to prison, or at the minimum become a felon and get probation.

Juries are made up of a lot of people with no experience with violence, soccer moms, housewives, and others with no felony record unable to get out of jury duty. Most people with a lot of life experience seem to get kicked off a jury during the selection process if they are honest.
When serving on jury duty I have been amazed at the naivety of some.
With statements like "well if the police chose to arrest them then they must have done something wrong".
Facing a such a jury tasked with determining if your use of a weapon on an unarmed person was "reasonable" is not something I would recommend.

They are the "reasonable person".

is a broken glass bottle or a club a deadly weapon?

Yes, but if you did not bring it with you then you get bonus points in the eyes of a jury. If it was something you carried for use as a weapon (even in self defense) then its not viewed quite the same, as a spur of the moment improvised self defense out of desperation.

also does the above apply if there are multiple agressors [they encircle/corner you] and you didnt do anything to provoke or escalation the situation?

Multiple aggressors is a disparity of force. That justifies use of a weapon for most "reasonable" people.
However keep in mind they are many witnesses and you are one.
They may say you were the aggressor, and if you pulled a weapon before they even attacked it wouldn't be an unreasonable claim that you were the criminal who pulled a weapon over an argument with one of them.

But if you don't do something you may end up hurt or dead.
So it is best to avoid situations where the aggressors have more friendly witnesses who may lie, or may claim to have seen nothing at all.
Even if you do nothing illegal their united story may make you out to be the problem.

 

[strambo]

How would you Deffuse a situation?

Not by pulling a knife! ...that's what I would do to end a situation.

If there is a knife in my hand...I'm either opening a box, or a it's to help me open up someone's vascular system from the inside. If someone has a knife in their hand (and there aren't any packages around) I'm going to assume their motives are the latter as well and act accordingly.

 

[abominableSnowman]

Not by pulling a knife! ...that's what I would do to end a situation.

If there is a knife in my hand...I'm either opening a box, or a it's to help me open up someone's vascular system from the inside. If someone has a knife in their hand (and there aren't any packages around) I'm going to assume their motives are the latter as well and act accordingly.

true...
anyways i like asking "What if?" type questions to see what kind of responses i get... And i learn a whole lot too
Ive never taken any self defence classes so im full of questions
When I turn 21 Ill go do the classes get a carry permit

 

[carsten1911]

Simply put: If you are not a Master in the art of knife fighting dont get one for self defense. Even hairspray will be of more use FOR DEFENSE than a weapon that needs close body contact to be appplied to effect. And even knife-fighting masters use the phrase "no matter how good you are in a knife-fight...you WILL get cut badly!!"
I tend to believe this.

A knife is an offensive weapon (when used as a weapon).

OC, a stick, a baton, a leather belt with a heavy buckle,.... (thousand of threads have been written on that, at least enough to justify me only listing a few of the intermediate-distance means of SD. Just look ´em up) will get some distance between you and the offensive party. Remember: You dont want to DO damage, you want to avoid damage to be done to your person.

Carsten

 

[rrruuunnn]

I think that the castle doctrine is a safety net rather than a guarantee to hold ground. If you have another option, take it. The castle doctrine may or may not protect you. I wouldn't rely on the law to protect you. Innoccent people have ended up in jail self defending themselves.

I've just started reading about knife defense and offense. I really think that you should look into this. Because it is the most common weapon you will be presented with. There are more knives on the street than guns. And you need to know what you are up against. The knife has alot of advantages if you carry trained.

 

[strambo]

Simply put: If you are not a Master in the art of knife fighting dont get one for self defense.

Why not? Most aggravated assaults with knives are committed by criminals. Most prison aggravated assaults and murders...are with improvised knives. So, the most experienced people in our society at doing violence w/ edged weapons aren't anywhere close to being "masters" in knife fighting arts, or anything close to it. Do a youtube search for something like "prison shankings". See any use or "knife fighting" martial arts style techniques? Master or expert level movement and application?

Why is it that so many people think you have to be a highly trained expert to "defend" yourself and yet the most violent people in our society have little or no training and use no "technique" other than "stabbin' " or "beatin' " or sometimes..."Knock 'em down an' stomp 'em" ?

If you want to level the playing field with any criminal, it comes with the realization that you can injure them just as easy as they can injure you. All you have to do is want to bad enough, don't hesitate and don't stop. Hit, kick, stomp, stab, rock to the back of the head-them until they don't twitch.

Want to make the odds better than even? Then train to up your efficiency by learning how to dump maximum force into the weakest parts of them.

Self defense law is basically the same everywhere...if you feel you are in danger of serious bodily harm or death (and another "reasonable" person would feel the same), you may use force, up to/including deadly force, to protect yourself.

If you feel you are in danger of injury, not serious, then you may use force to stop the threat proportionately. Again, "reasonableness". If he takes your parking space, do you stab him in the neck? If he shoves you, do you stab him in the neck? If he says; "We're gonna kill you" and reaches for his waistband while him and 3 buddies advance menacingly, do you stab him in the neck? (I'm hoping the answer to each Q is obvious....)

EDIT: If you replace any "what if" scenario with some blatantly deadly force response you will immediately know the right answer based on whether it's funny or not. He took my bar stool and called my wife a whore, so I shot him in the head. He punched me in the face, so I crushed his skull w/ a tire iron. He threatened me with a knife, so I stabbed him in the neck. Only one of those won't sound waaaaaay out of proportion to a jury....

The second one could go a different way with more background infomation: i.e: I'm a 100b female with a broken down car, at night middle of nowhere, waiting on AAA. Man stops, asks if he can help, I say no thanks, helps on the way. He looks both ways, then punches me in the face, so I crushed his skull with a tire iron.

 

[ozarkgunner]

I wouldn't pull a knife if you don't know how to use it for defence. And like some one stated, you will get cut in a knife fight. My experience is, You can't be affraid to get cut in a knife fight if you expect to have a superior out come.
Do not be the first to pull a weapon, unless like others stated, you are at a disadvantage to begin with, physical disability, out numbered, etc.
And if you don't know how to use a knife for fighting, you will be even more likely to be at a disadvantage, lose it, and have it used against you. Your manerisms, how you hold it, etc will be a give a way that you are not comfortable with it. You should only carry something for defence that you know how to use, are comfortable with, and are willing to use it.

 

[bdickens]

The difference between the winner and the loser in a knife fight?

The loser dies there at the scene. The winner dies later in the hospital.

 

[mbt2001]

Like it or lump it, when it is time to deploy the weapon, it is time to use the weapon, unless the perp is OBVIOUSLY disengaging because of the weapon.

A knife is not a "defensive" weapon IMO. It is a great tool, a great last chance device to turn the tables, but the idea of "defensive" knife use (to me at least) is an oxymoron.

EDIT:

I see a lot of these - "Unless you are a "master" then do not use a knife for self defense."

That is an idiotic sentiment. If you are being gang raped and all you have is a knife, use it. Whether or NOT you know how to use it, things are not likely going to get much worse for you and the chance that it MIGHT work certainly outweighs the risks of it not working. Odd, how everyone becomes an elitist when the weapons change.

I will say again, I do not believe that a knife is a defensive weapon. You have no range and in order to use it you must be moving forward. That doesn't make the useless, it does make them close quarters tools for when all else fails. Simply put, GRAB / HOLD / STAB / TWIST / WITHDRAW / STAB / TWIST / Repeat.

 

[benEzra]

The legal standard for self defense almost everywhere is this: a reasonable perception that someone else's illegal assault places you in imminent danger of death, serious bodily harm, or a forcible felony.

Self defense 101 (from NC's CCW training manual, but it applies equally to knives and all other lethal weapons):

(1) Justified Self-Defense

A citizen is legally justified in using deadly force against another if and only if:

(a) The citizen actually believes deadly force is necessary to prevent an imminent threat of death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault, AND

(b) The facts and circumstances prompting that belief would cause a person of ordinary firmness to believe deadly force WAS necessary to prevent an imminent threat of death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault, AND

(c) The citizen using deadly force was not an instigator or aggressor who voluntarily provoked, entered, or continued the conflict leading to deadly force, AND

(d) Force used was not excessive -- greater than reasonably needed to overcome the threat posed by a hostile aggressor.

Note that all four conditions must generally be met in order for a shooting to be ruled justifiable (although there is an exception for someone kicking your door in, or in some states, someone violently attacking you while you are in your vehicle).

Reasonable belief does *NOT* mean merely "feeling threatened"; the phrase is a legal term, and its definition in the context of self-defense law is that in paragraph (b) above--i.e., that "the facts and circumstances prompting that belief would cause a person of ordinary firmness to believe deadly force WAS necessary to prevent an imminent threat of death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault." Merely "feeling threatened" isn't reasonable belief; the belief has to be objectively rational, i.e. there is in fact a guy standing in front of you holding what appears to be a knife in a threatening posture.

 

[TankHand]

military training...

When I trained for CQB in the military, and also in subsequent security and hostile perp scenarios, the rules of engagement are that if a subject pulls a knife, and gets to within 10 paces of your position, then you had better consider your life in danger because most people cannot draw and fire as fast as the perp can close that gap and stab you. Check out youtube videos of krav maga training in Israel.

 

[hso]

You don't have to be a master to use a knife for self defense, but it helps. People have used knives effectively without any training at all, but it doesn't mean that an untrained person will be as effective as a trained individual.

Of course, you don't have to be a master at pistol CQB, but it helps.

The rules for each in a defensive situation are the same, a reasonable person won't use it except to preserve life and limb. Why are they the same? They're both, rightfully, considered to be the use of deadly force.

Learn what the local laws are before carrying anything for SD purposes.

 

[rrruuunnn]

At least, learn the lethality potential of a knife and the defense against a knife.

 

[FerFAL]

"Is it legal to stand my ground or am I obligated by law to try to Run away first?

How would you Deffuse a situation?"

Sometimes you have to use good old common sense. If you're being attacked, turning your back to your attacker is a pretty bad idea. Are you sure you can outrun your attacker or are you only exposing your back for an attack that will drop you to the floor and get killed?
I'd move away, if the attacker keeps coming and you dont believe you can outrun him or dont have means of doing so, then you have every right to protect yourself.
If everything could be solved just by running away then there would be no need for self deefense laws.

FerFAL

 

[smince]

Google Tom Sotis or AMOK!

A weekend AMOK! class (usually $125 for one day, $199 for both days) will teach you quite a bit about using or defending yourself with or from edged weapons.