Legal Issue

S

SM24

Joined
Mar 13, 2002
Messages
89
Here is an interesting point that I really don't know the answer to...

I know I'm asking this about guns, but, what if....(totally pat hypothetical scenario so we can get at the underlying legal/tactical issues)...Man with a knife is advancing on you, screams "I'm going to kill you", you are clearly in fear for your life, and have no avenue of escape. You draw your legally carried handgun, point it at him, command him to stop and drop the knife. He does drop the knife, but thencontinues advancing on you. What now?
You were justified legally when you initially drew your weapon, but what about now that he has disarmed himself? Should you attempt to reholster, and be ready to engage him empty-hand? What if you don't have time to do that safely? Shoot him as he advances? Remember, no escape possible. The first option doesn't seem very tactically sound, the second doesn't seem very legal. Or is this just a stupid question because no one would ever disarm himself, then move on an armed victim/opponent? It seems like some crafty criminal type might do it, especially if he didn't believe that you'd really shoot him.
Any ideas? (tactical, legal, or otherwise)
 
That's a stinky one you have thrown out. :)

The pelvic girdle shot is out, in my opinion, because you have to be able to justify that he presented lethal force and that's hairy too.

You have to be able to articulate to a Grand Jury, if necessary, that you believed through his movement and with the firm and accurate knowledge that alot of Police Officers are shot with their own Duty Weapons, that he intended on dropping the knife to survive, to make it to contact distance to take your weapon and use it on you.

After you lose your house and everything you own, you will be able to start over with a new life.

In some enlightened States, this would not be a problem.

In a perfect world, you should be able to double or triple to the pelvic girdle and put him down, but that's problematic.

Depending on how close he was to begin with, you might be a fool to warn him because when he sees you move, he might rush and not drop anything. Again...in a perfect world, if someone did that and said that, as you stated, you should be legally justified in shooting them right then and there with no further warning.

And all of this is based on the fact you cannot escape, as you stated, for whatever reason(s)...
 
Shoot the second you were justified, do not wait. BG tend to travel in pairs or better. Shoot primary and look for secondary.
 
If he continued to advance on me after dropping the knife I would still shoot.I believe you would be justified in that anyone that continues to move towards you when they see you have a weapon trained on them still intends to do you harm.If they don`t fear a weapon pointed at them then I would still feel in fear of my life.
 
Interesting, but a few points come to mind.

--This would be a different scenario whether it's based upon a law enforcement perspective or legally armed civilian perspective.

--The surgical shooting of a pelvis or other body part doesn't seem feasible to me, as the time it would take to begin that action would be too great, unless the shooter was very highly trained.

--The subject has already stated a willingness to kill, and even if he drops the knife, yet begins advancing, who's to say his mindset had changed? Although it would be a really messy court battle, the shooting would seem justified. Because the subject drops the knife doesn't mean his mindset has changed any (though, I suppose, the exact reverse can also be argued: he dropped the knife to avoid being shot, and was running at the shooter, not to kill him, but instaed to flee adn avoind being killed).

--dan
 
Me and the bad guy, no one else. He never dropped the knife. It fell out if his hand when I shot him.

I'd have to agree with Hammerhead, As soon as I had a person armed and threatning to kill me its blam!, blam!, "drop the knife or I'll shoot you again."

Of course in a court of law your guess is just as good as anyone elses. It all depends on twelve non-experts voting in private.

Paul
 
Another thing has occured to me.Just because he has dropped his knife doesn`t mean he has disarmed.He may have another weapon.There are plenty of us here that carry multiple knives.Probably,if some of us fell out of a boat,we would drown!:D
 
Keep It Simple Stupid, we have all heard this one. It does not matter your profession keep this in mind this is how you respond to questioning.

1.He said he was going to kill me and advanced.
2.If you mentioned by error about him dropping the weapon, he still advanced when presented with a fiream and warning. (at this point a reasonable person would assume he still had the intent and ability through whatever means to carry out the threat.)
3.I fired to stop him, center mass as taught civillian or Law enforcement. Do not attempt to shoot anywhere else stop him.

Do not get colorful with description of the act, do not brag about your group. Immediatly ask for your lawyer. Have a nice day.

(Yooper is correct also, see first reply, shoot immediatly.)
 
You are not required to tell bad guy to drop knife. You have the green light to shoot, because the criteria of distance, weapon and intent have been met. When he advanced towards you brandishing deadly weapon, and threatening to kill you. This is where the 21 feet rule comes into play, required distance for above criteria. When he first stated his intentions and came at you with weapon. You draw your weapon aim for center of mass and light his sorry ass up. Being polite and asking someone to drop their weapon when they are closing in on you will get you killed
 
The lession learned from this thread is IF you give a verbal warning, you yell STOP! and if you have time to give a second warning you yell STOP again. In a life-and-death sitch you give orders not make requests.

And then when he is almost but not quite within arms reach - pull the trigger.
 
Slightly different scenario:

You are carrying, legally, a concealed firearm.

A stranger on the street comes up beside you, and grabs for your gun.

What level of force may you use to retain your weapon?
 
That is easy, IMO. If he is going for my weapon I am in fear of my life. You are able to use whatever force necessary to protect yourself. Why would a person want your weapon, without warning, if he was not going to use it against you (probably) or someone nearby?

BTW, if you are carrying concealed, you must have made a tactical error if he knew you were carrying a weapon, no? If you had already presented it, allowing him to know you had it, lethal force must have already been justified.
 
Originally posted by one2gofst
BTW, if you are carrying concealed, you must have made a tactical error if he knew you were carrying a weapon, no?
Click to expand...

Indeed. But I see people whose "concealed" weapon prints through fairly frequently. Poor choice of clothing/carry system, usually.
 
tactical advice: aim for the largest body mass
legally: try to scare [warning shot]and then, if necessary, disable him so you can escape to call police[this is not a legal opinion or legal advice]
practically: shoot him dead and live to let your lawyer argue about it later.
 
Do not fire a warning shot. What if something goes wrong that might be the only shot you have. Also, you are responsible for where that warning shot goes. If it hits an innocent you are responsible and will be paying dearly, I assure you.
 
Since when is the law concerning weapons and self defence realistic?
Actually, the law expects you to say,
"Pardon me, good sir: it appears from your demeanor that your intentions towards me are somewhat hostile. I must warn you that if you do not desist from advancing towards me in this ostensibly hostile manner, I shall have no choice but to reagard your conduct as affirming my present apprehension of imminent danger to my person, including the probability of the infliction by yourself upon me of grievous bodily harm. In that case, it is my intention to repel your advance with a weapon which is in my possession[show the weapon and your licence for possessing and carrying the same] and I must caution you, in no uncertain terms, that there is a high degree of liklihood that you will thereby suffer serious and permanent injury, and even death. [repeat the last sentence for emphasis in case he did not hear you] I assure you, good sir, that it is not my intention to injure or offend you if my interpretation of your intentions towards me are mistaken and I therefore propose that we diffuse this situation and the possibility of a misunderstanding by a mutual and immediate retreat from each other's proximity. If this meets with your assent, please signify the same at your very earliest convenience."
This warning should also be repeated in Spanish and then in sign language, just in case the "good sir" is deaf.
The authorities are not in agreement as to whether the mandatory warning should also include an apology, just in case offence had been given, even unknowingly. To be cautious, it is advisable also to issue culturally appropriate apologies as well, in several different languages.

:D

PS Shoot the mother****er if you genuinely believe you are at risk of serious bodily harm or death.
 
Given the fact that there is overt opportunity, ability and "intent," I would shoot 'em where he's biggest and keep doing so until the fear factor subsides and allows me to stop pressing the trigger. Never fire a warning shot... That would be a liability in a court of law - besides where is that stray bullet going?

If running is feasible, I'd opt for that way out. If not... BANG!
 
I'm not sure why a civilian would want to give a verbal warning in this scenario. If the bad guy says that he's going to kill you, then advances on you with a knife, and you can't retreat, then it's an open and shut self-defense case. (BTW, there's no duty to retreat in some states.)

Police will command the bad guy to drop the knife before they fire, but that's because other officers can safely go in and handcuff the guy after he's dropped the knife.

If, as a civilian, you command the bad guy to drop the knife and he complies, then what? You don't have any way to restrain him and he could just pick up the knife again and continue advancing (which he might very well do after seeing that you're not going to fire your gun).
 
very good ideas....
Excellent thinking regarding not complicating the verbal commands and just yelling "Stop!", and/or shooting immediately upon it being clear he can, and wants to kill you, and you can't escape.
Thanks for the thoughts...:)

Does Sierra912 have an opinion?;)
 
If you're a civilian, yelling "STOP!" while brandishing your gun in my state will mean a lost CCW. Violation: brandishing. Firing a warning shot -- same thing, but add illegal discharge of a firearm. In other words, in my state, you may not expose your weapon unless you must uses it to defend yourself or another against death or serious injury, period. The prosecutors here like to argue that if you had time to yell "stop" without firsing, or had the luxury of firing a warning shot, that you were not in an imminent death scenario.

That said, I'd respectfully disagree with Clint Simpson on one point: if you do issue and order, never give a second warning. Once is all the time you usually might have (if that), and if the bad guy ignores you the first time, he's likely jacked up on adrenaline or drugs, experiencing auditory exclusion, or he just sees you as too weak to actually go through with killing him. Shoot first, warn afterward. Or, if your judgement in a particular scenario allows you to warn, do it just once and do not repeat.

In the scenario described above, I would draw and fire center mass. No warnings, nothing but the report of my gun. It would suck bigtime that I was stupid enough to get myself into a situation where I had to live with killing someone, but I wouldn't hesitate if necessary.

best,

Brian.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top