Self Defense or Defense of Others

[theshadow]

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

+1. If you're going to make the decision to fire, you have to commit all the way. Aim for the part of the body which is typically the easiest and most likely to hit: the torso.

You can always do a "Russian warning shot", where the COM shot in Perp one is the warning shot to perp 2 he best stop his current behavior.

[PeteG]

[quote=GunLawyer001;19099]Section 505 contains the very important criteria (the "limitations") for use of deadly force, and it's incorporated by reference in the "defense of others" statutes; here's Section 505:

" § 505. Use of force in self-protection.

(a) Use of force justifiable for protection of the person.--The use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion.

(b) Limitations on justifying necessity for use of force.--

1. The use of force is not justifiable under this section:
1. to resist an arrest which the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, although the arrest is unlawful; or
2. to resist force used by the occupier or possessor of property or by another person on his behalf, where the actor knows that the person using the force is doing so under a claim of right to protect the property, except that this limitation shall not apply if:

(A) the actor is a public officer acting in the performance of his duties or a person lawfully assisting him therein or a person making or assisting in a lawful arrest;
(B) the actor has been unlawfully dispossessed of the property and is making a reentry or recaption justified by section 507 of this title (relating to use of force for the protection of property); or
(C) the actor believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily injury.


2. The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat; nor is it justifiable if:
1. the actor, with the intent of causing death or serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force against himself in the same encounter; or
2. the actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that:

(A) the actor is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling or place of work, unless he was the initial aggressor or is assailed in his place of work by another person whose place of work the actor knows it to be; and
(B) a public officer justified in using force in the performance of his duties or a person justified in using force in his assistance or a person justified in using force in making an arrest or preventing an escape is not obliged to desist from efforts to perform such duty, effect such arrest or prevent such escape because of resistance or threatened resistance by or on behalf of the person against whom such action is directed.


3. Except as required by paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection, a person employing protective force may estimate the necessity thereof under the circumstances as he believes them to be when the force is used, without retreating, surrendering possession, doing any other act which he has no legal duty to do or abstaining from any lawful action.

(c) Use of confinement as protective force.--The justification afforded by this section extends to the use of confinement as protective force only if the actor takes all reasonable measures to terminate the confinement as soon as he knows that he safely can, unless the person confined has been arrested on a charge of crime. "
QUOTE]

Got all that? Good. Just memorize these rules, and review them at the time of any confrontation or assualt.

Section 505 covers the use of force for the protection of others, so you better get that down as well, just for situations like this.

There are a bunch of provisions concerning the use of force to defend property. (Yes, the use of force is allowed to defend property - and on some rare occasions even the use of deadly force.) Just memorize those sections in the event there is a property crime involved.

Section 508(b) has many provisions concerning the use of force by a "private person" to make an arrest. (By "private person" they mean not a peace officer.) If you plan to arrest anybody, better pick that up, too.

Be sure to also memorize Section 501 (definitions), and learn the various leading precedents interpreting the meaning of the terms used in these rules. Include them in your on-site review.

And review all the foregoing under the emergency standard of care.

If you can do that, come and see me. I want to hire you to work in my firm.

Otherwise, I recommend that gun owners try and internalize the following, much more general standards:

1. No deadly force unless you REASONABLY believe a human being (indluding you) is in IMMINENT danger of suffering SERIOUS BODILY INJURY OR DEATH. Absent imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death to a human being, stop.

2. No deadly force unless the use of deadly force is NECESSARY to prevent the aforementioned serious bodily injury or death. "Necessary," for this purpose, means there is no safe alternative. If there is a safe alternative that will prevent the harm without the use of deadly force (including, by the way, the use of force short of deadly force), stop.

3. No deadly force unless you, yourself, are FREE FROM FAULT in creating the circumstances. If you started or provoked the trouble, stop - or at least know that if somebody gets shot, you may very likely be prosecuted criminally.

4. No deadly force if you, or the person you have elected to defend, can SAFELY retreat. If you (or the person you have elected to defend) can leave in complete safety, stop. For a number of very practical reasons, I recommend one should leave if he can safely do so, so no matter WHERE he is ("castle doctrine" notwithstanding).

Personally, the above is all I am able to process in a few seconds.

I have been unable to memorize the statutes, and I frequently do not recall a detail correctly. Running through the potentially applicable statutes and how they will operate under a given set of facts takes me HOURS, and I have some practice.

[Mtbkski]

Originally Posted by Fitch

I'd also highly recommend that you read Maasad Ayob's book, In Gravest Extreme "before" you carry, and Chris Bird's book on concealed carry as well.

I think everybody that can get a LTCF should carry, but not with out getting a good understanding of what it means and the huge responsibility that goes with it. Firing a weapon at another person is an irreversible decision that must often be made in a split second - it is good to have as much reading and training as you can so you "know" what you should do.

Fitch

Fitch, I love you already. I have preached and posted that everyone on this sight should read that book. Yet, I haven't heard from anyone else that has ever read it. It is an eye opener for sure if you are carrying, or thinking about carrying, a firearm. And all of it isn't the kind of stuff you want to read. But, you should be aware that it will happen after you have used your firearm in self defense.

A BIG +1 on Massad Ayoob's "In the Gravest Extreme".

If you don't read any other book. Read this one.

[TonyF]

Originally Posted by Mtbkski

Fitch, I love you already. I have preached and posted that everyone on this sight should read that book. Yet, I haven't heard from anyone else that has ever read it. It is an eye opener for sure if you are carrying, or thinking about carrying, a firearm. And all of it isn't the kind of stuff you want to read. But, you should be aware that it will happen after you have used your firearm in self defense.

A BIG +1 on Massad Ayoob's "In the Gravest Extreme".

If you don't read any other book. Read this one.

OK. I've read it. I've also attended LFI 1 and LFI 2 so there.

[Mtbkski]

Originally Posted by TonyF

OK. I've read it. I've also attended LFI 1 and LFI 2 so there.

And we all thought it was just your good looks that got you this far.

[colagrrl]

Originally Posted by Mtbkski

Fitch, I love you already. I have preached and posted that everyone on this sight should read that book. Yet, I haven't heard from anyone else that has ever read it. It is an eye opener for sure if you are carrying, or thinking about carrying, a firearm. And all of it isn't the kind of stuff you want to read. But, you should be aware that it will happen after you have used your firearm in self defense.

A BIG +1 on Massad Ayoob's "In the Gravest Extreme".

If you don't read any other book. Read this one.

I can +1 to the fact that you've "preached and posted" that everyone should read the book, because I just picked up a copy at a gun show on the 30th. When I saw it, I immediately thought to myself...Mtbkski Oh yes, all from constantly having to read your recommendation about reading it in darn near every post you make

Yes, I'm joking about the 'constantly' part, but not so much about picking the book up because of a post you made on another thread a few months ago. Maybe when I'm done reading it, there will be two of us preaching to the choir?

Jennifer

[PA_SIGpacker]

Originally Posted by Mtbkski

Fitch, I love you already. I have preached and posted that everyone on this sight should read that book. Yet, I haven't heard from anyone else that has ever read it. It is an eye opener for sure if you are carrying, or thinking about carrying, a firearm. And all of it isn't the kind of stuff you want to read. But, you should be aware that it will happen after you have used your firearm in self defense.

A BIG +1 on Massad Ayoob's "In the Gravest Extreme".

If you don't read any other book. Read this one.

I don't know whether to thank you or be pissed! I've had that book for years and after reading your post I want to re-read Ayoob's best book ever BUT I CAN'T FIND IT. GRRRRRRRRR!

[TonyF]

Originally Posted by colagrrl

I can +1 to the fact that you've "preached and posted" that everyone should read the book, because I just picked up a copy at a gun show on the 30th. When I saw it, I immediately thought to myself...Mtbkski Oh yes, all from constantly having to read your recommendation about reading it in darn near every post you make

Yes, I'm joking about the 'constantly' part, but not so much about picking the book up because of a post you made on another thread a few months ago. Maybe when I'm done reading it, there will be two of us preaching to the choir?

Jennifer

Jenn,

Another "must read" is Col. Cooper's "Principles of Personal Defense".

[colagrrl]

Originally Posted by TonyF

Jenn,

Another "must read" is Col. Cooper's "Principles of Personal Defense".

Hey Tony! I'm all about a good book, so thanks for recommending Col. Cooper's "Principles of Personal Defense"! I checked the Gunsite on-line store for it and am a little shocked that they don't offer it for sale there.

I did however find it at Paladin Press, but before I place my order with them, is there any chance there are other books that might be of interest and/or should be required reading? It's not an expensive book, so I just thought I'd ask so I can spend more on books to save more on shipping. Just from poking around on the site, it appears as though they have a wide variety of books to choose from. I'll read just about anything, so even if it's not a personal defense related book, that's ok

Jenn

[tec]

I practice a variety of styles of martial arts. My understanding of the law in terms of self defense is this: One can use equal or less force to thwart an attack. My master grew up in a rough part of Philadelphia and he's had to defend himself many times. He always told us, in order to stay out of trouble with the law, to use enough force to ensure the attacker is 'down' and unable to continue the assault; but you cannot subject the attacker to bodily harm you would have not received during the attack (ie. if you are punched you cannot stab the attacker). I do apologize if this has already been mentioned.