Did anyone here get instruction on "disparity of force"?

[PeteG]

For those who were ever instructed on "disparity of force," I'm interested in what is being put out on the topic. What were you told about the concept?

Please avoid identifying the instructor. I would like to avoid any "my guru is bigger than your guru" pissing contests. Just lay out the concept as it was presented; or, at least, as you heard it.

Thanks.

[Svickstc]

PA does not qualify disparity of force as use for deadly force...

INAL

[TonyF]

I did.

In LFI 1 at Forest Grove in May 1996.

From my notes.

06. Disparity of Force: The use of deadly force on an unarmed subject(s) is justifiable only in circumstances such as the able bodied attacks the disabled or you are outnumbered.

a) Cultural Predispositioning - male vs. female = Disparity of force

07. Warren Doctrine: Disparity of force when outnumbered implies all threats/subjects are culpable.

[PocketProtector]

In fear of your life or bodily harm.....BANG. or rather Bang Bang, Bang

[Orive 8]

Various training schools/programs/instructors since the mid-late 80s

Things that could possibly be used to show a disparity of force:
1. Multiple foes
2. Defender is disabled
3. Size & Strength difference between attacker and defender
4. Attackers training, fighting expertise etc... - that was known to the defender prior
5. Attacker is male vs a female defender

The key words being "could possibly", it will all really depend on the facts and circumstances at the time of that particular incident.

[ideaman]

The Law of Self-Defense by Andrew F. Branca, pg 87, paragraph 4:

"Alternatively, mere punching can also be found to be deadly, but ony when the puncher is much larger or more skilled at fighting, or if the attacker keeps punching you after you are no longer able to defend yourself......"\

My comment: If the latter happens, it's too late. Today it is common to be repeatedly stomped on your face and chest when you can not longer defend your self.

[PeteG]

PA does not qualify disparity of force as use for deadly force...

INAL

Something got mis-typed, so it is not clear. But I take it you mean in Pennsylvania disparity of force is not legal justification for the use of deadly force in response.

First, did I interpret this correctly?

Second, did an instructor tell you that?

[ideaman]

In a confrontation, let's not ignore the 'laws of physics".

It's the speed of that tiny bullet that incapacitates. A person around 6 foot weighing around 185 pounds can be fast as a light weight and hit like a heavy weight. A taller person with longer arms can generate a lot speed and if he connects, at a minimum, you are dazed with some functional loss.
Unless you are trained to take a bigger person down to the ground to minimize his sizeable advantage the odds are in his favor.

Today MMA is very popular with teenagers and young adults and they are well versed in kicking and strangle holds.

[PeteG]

In a confrontation, let's not ignore the 'laws of physics".

It's the speed of that tiny bullet that incapacitates. A person around 6 foot weighing around 185 pounds can be fast as a light weight and hit like a heavy weight. A taller person with longer arms can generate a lot speed and if he connects, at a minimum, you are dazed with some functional loss.
Unless you are trained to take a bigger person down to the ground to minimize his sizeable advantage the odds are in his favor.

Today MMA is very popular with teenagers and young adults and they are well versed in kicking and strangle holds.

I think all of those facts are correct.

Are you saying that if I confront a 6' 185 pound (apparently unarmed) assailant, I can use deadly force to protect myself (a firearm) due to the disparate level of force between my assailant and myself? And, back to my original question, where was that taught?

[Yellowfin]

Given that just about any blunt or sharp or rope/cord/chain like object in the room with you can be used as a weapon by someone with sufficient motivation, intent, and only a marginal amount of requisite physical ability, I'd be really hesitant to label any threat to be less than serious. Off the top of my head, right in my living room there are several breakable glass objects, heavy lamps, extension cords, knives on keychains, and a couple of furniture items with long thick wood or metal legs. Someone sufficiently bad given free rein could do some really bad things with any one or more of those objects. Think about the room you're in right now. Imagine what any of those objects could be used to do to you and then how willing you are to have someone be able to do that to you or your spouse and/or your kid versus you drop them before they get the chance. You have exactly the width of that room at most to get them to stop. Each step is a fraction of a second, and it only takes that fraction of that to take a swing with something that's going to leave a VERY NASTY mark.

Makes even 8 rounds of .45 seem inadequate, doesn't it?