And AGAIN it must be said:
The law and the exact definition of terms depends very much on the statutes of the particular state.
Quatrus - - -
In Texas, "Deadly Force" means
force that is intended or known by the actor to cause, or in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing, death or serious bodily injury.
Texas Penal Code, Section 9.01(3)
The application of an axe handle or a frying pan MAY be considered deadly force, depending on the exact use of the item. A firearm is always considered deadly force. Thus, the shooting of the individual was actually deadly force. It must be noted that the officers were very careful in the actual
application of deadly force in this case, taking all due care to NOT kill the suspect.
Peace officers are allowed the use of deadly force under certain circumstances not permitted private individuals, most specifically for the purpose of defending and preserving human life. This is admittedly a very unusual situation. Along with most here, I believe the action was proper
under the circumstances.
Interestingly, there is a specific provision in the Penal Code, for such circumstances:
9.34 PROTECTION OF LIFE AND HEALTH.
(a) A person is justified in using force, but not deadly force, against another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the other from committing suicide or inflicting serious bodily injury to himself.
(b) A person is justified in using both force and deadly force against another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force or deadly force is immediately necessary to preserve the other's life in an emergency.
While (a) and (b) may appear to conflict, it
IS possible to figure a scenario for (b): I know of one case when an emergency services physician came upon a traffic accident in which a victim with a mangled face was choking to death. The doc used a sharp pocket knife and a Bic pen barrel and performed an emergency tracheostomy which allowed the victim to breathe until he could be extricated. (If cutting a person's throat with a knife isn't deadly force, I dunno what is . . .
)
Several months ago, I went to Fort Worth to interview a jail inmate as informant, who, naturally, wanted a "deal." The Tarrant County Assistant DA carefully explained to him the "Do Right" rule - - "Okay - - Give the information, and if it is useful, we are ethically bound to do right by you." Somehow, I don't think the two FWPD cops will fade much heat in this deal.
The question is raised, "How come they didn't shoot the knife out of his hand?"
I think they actually did a safer thing, shooting him in the shoulder. Consider the size and shape of a knife, and the way in which it is normally held. A bullet through the hand, with its large number of very small bones, would doubtless mangle the extremity, possibly beyond an effective reconstruction. Shoulder has more meat and fewer, larger, bones. Much easier for the surgeons to repair the damage. It's easier to earn a living with a stiff shoulder than with a permanently crippled hand.
Kudos to the officers for restraint, good judgement, and good marksmanship. I hope they'll receive an appropriate commendation.
Best,
Johnny
Late edit: Double Naught Spy posted his reply while I was composing mine off line. Prolly I should have checked before entering mine. Still, and with all respect to
00, I'll stand by my remarks.
JPG
