So I have question for current or former (retired) L.E. trainers …. Back in the day, there was the so-called “21-foot rule” for using deadly force to stop an attacker closing in on the officer with an edged weapon, e.g., knife, machete, Kung Fu sword, etc.
More recently, a cop-nephew mentioned they now teach rookies the “35-ft rule.” He said, based apparently on studies of a great number of officers being stabbed and cut by knife-wielding bad guys, that 21-ft is just too close and there’s no certainty of incapacitating the attacker by gunfire before he kills or seriously injures the officer. …. Comments?
Separately, I assume that whatever general rule of proximity applies to cops in gun v. knife threats (or fights) would also apply to legally-armed civilians in the same circumstances (who are assaulted or cornered or otherwise unable to evade the attack)? Comments?
First off, it was never a 'rule'. That was a misnomer, helped in part by the way some gun magazine writers may have treated it, and how it was subsequently discussed in various academies. It took on a life of its own as it was talked about and spread.
In reality, it was a drill created by Dennis to help some academy cadets of his (he was teaching at the time) answer a question they'd asked about how close was 'too close' for someone attacking with a knife. Dennis came up with a drill and the cadets all participated in the drill set up in class, in pairs (runner/shooter), and reaction times were recorded and then averaged. When I listened to Dennis discuss the drill, he said that if he were doing it again today, he'd probably extend the distance to more than 30ft to better benefit reaction time of the average person.
One of the best lessons learned from the drill is that the defender remaining still in the same spot is at a serious disadvantage from someone rushing to attack with a knife. Moving away from the attacker to try and maintain/gain distance, while acting in defense (i.e. use of deadly force,
if appropriate and reasonable in the totality of the circumstances) is an important tactic.
As far as applying to both LE and non-LE, consider the laws in whatever your state of residence, or visiting, may be. Here in CA, peace officers don't have any more 'right' to use deadly force in defense of self, or innocent third persons, than the regular non-LE private person.
Now, unlike the Public, LE may also be constrained by
policy in their chosen use-of-force in situations. The courts (including appeals courts) have also opined in some matters, as well.
While LE receive a basic introduction about how the laws are written and work (and are enforced), they also typically receive legal updates when new laws are introduced, existing laws changed by legislators (or interpreted by the courts), etc. How does the average member of the Public get such info?
So 150-ft? That's IPSC grandmaster distance. Are you at Ben Stoeger's level?
