Justfiable to shoot?

[HiredGoon]

Just saw the below story in the crime section of Uniontown's Herald Standard newspaper. Since the BG had a knife to the victim's neck if would seem pretty clear that the victim's life is in danger and it would be justified to shoot, if the victim had had a gun. Was wondering though, does the BG have to verbally express his intent to harm/kill you? Such as saying "Give me that cell phone or I'll slice your throat". Or is the presence of the knife on your throat enough legal justification to shoot?
Too bad the victim did not have a gun. Would have surprised the hell out of the BG and made a better ending to the story.

Man threatened
John Branthoover of Uniontown told city police that as he was walking on Coolspring Street at 11:45 a.m. Monday, he was approached by an unknown male who pulled a knife and placed it against Branthoover's neck and demanded Branthoover give him his cellular phone, police said. Branthoover said he gave the man the phone and the man fled on foot, police said.
Link to story is available free for 7 days at:
http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/i...d=565757&rfi=8
(toward bottom of page).

[Pa. Patriot]

...Or is the presence of the knife on your throat enough legal justification to shoot?

...Ummm.
Are you serious?

Sorry, not trying to sound rude but good god, man, SHOOT!

[tes151]

Letting the knife get anywhere close to your throat is crazy. If someone was coming at me in a threatening manner holding a knife, they would most likely be dropped 10 feet or more from me if they were still moving towards me.

[Koli01]

Was wondering though, does the BG have to verbally express his intent to harm/kill you? Such as saying "Give me that cell phone or I'll slice your throat". Or is the presence of the knife on your throat enough legal justification to shoot?

What if BG was approaching with knife in hand saying, "I am your friend, I am not going to hurt you."?

See also:
Mars Attacks
Democratic Party (Liberals)

[vetter3006]

I have to say first,he let someone very strange get the jump on him.
By that he did the right thing give the BG what he wants and let him run away.It's easy to say pull your gun out and shoot but when the BG has got the upper hand on you first ,he caught of guard and is in control.


This is why you never let your guard down no matter what, don't let someone get the first move or jump on you. This is why training for every possible situtaion is needed, and training which has something coming at you giving your heart a work out is also important.

[RandomTask]

...does the BG have to verbally express his intent to harm/kill you? Such as saying "Give me that cell phone or I'll slice your throat".

Actually, you need to have it in writing and notarized.

[Pa. Patriot]

I have to say first,he let someone very strange get the jump on him.
By that he did the right thing give the BG what he wants and let him run away.It's easy to say pull your gun out and shoot but when the BG has got the upper hand on you first ,he caught of guard and is in control.


This is why you never let your guard down no matter what, don't let someone get the first move or jump on you. This is why training for every possible situtaion is needed, and training which has something coming at you giving your heart a work out is also important.

Lets remember that the OP is asking about "justification" not "tactically sound"
Whole other argument

[Rule10b5]

Just saw the below story in the crime section of Uniontown's Herald Standard newspaper. Since the BG had a knife to the victim's neck if would seem pretty clear that the victim's life is in danger and it would be justified to shoot, if the victim had had a gun. Was wondering though, does the BG have to verbally express his intent to harm/kill you? Such as saying "Give me that cell phone or I'll slice your throat". Or is the presence of the knife on your throat enough legal justification to shoot?

In Pennsylvania, deadly force is justified when "such force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat." See 18 Pa.C.S. 505. It also counts if you're trying to protect another innocent in the same position.

The easiest way to think about when deadly force (when dealing with a death/injury threat) is justified is to ask yourself three questions:

First, does he have the Ability to inflict death or serious bodily injury?
That is, can he cause death or harm you? A man with a knife qualifies as "Ability."

Second, does he have the Opportunity to do so? That is, can he, from where he and you are physically at the moment, inflict death or serious bodily injury? A man with a knife standing 50 yards away has the ability but not the opportunity. A man with a knife standing 21 feet or closer is generally held to have both the Ability and Opportunity to inflict death or serious bodily injury. To the naysayers on the 21 foot rule: I can cover 21 feet from a stop in about 1.5 seconds and bury a knife in you. Nobody, can see the threat, react, draw, shoot, and get a stop without divine intervention in less than 1.5 seconds. So, a man with a knife at your throat has both Ability and Opportunity.

Third, are you in Jeopardy of death or serious bodily injury? That is, has the actor evinced an intent to cause such harm to you? A knife at a victim's neck evinces Jeopardy. Given that he already has the Ability and the Opportunity, it's a clean shoot, even if the actor says nothing.

Remember AOJ, for short. If they're all there, deadly force is likely justified. Quite frankly, any situation where someone is advancing on you with a knife at 21 feet or closer in a menacing manner warrants deadly force if you can't retreat in complete safety. Knives aren't toys -- they're more lethal from guns at that distance. There are no guarantees, ever, though. If you're going to use deadly force, you do so at your own legal peril, every time. There are plenty of people sitting in jail today who were perfectly justified.

[Pa. Patriot]

...
Quite frankly, any situation where someone is advancing on you with a knife at 21 feet or closer in a menacing manner warrants deadly force. Knives aren't toys -- they're more lethal from guns at that distance.

This is really all that needs to be said on this issue.

[MarcS]

If there's a knife against your throat and you reach for your gun, you're probably going to look like a pez dispenser before long.

This is why some form of practical martial arts training is helpful. We shoot people with knives, but only before they're on top of us

A man with a knife standing 21 feet or closer is generally held to have both the Ability and Opportunity to inflict death or serious bodily injury. To the naysayers on the 21 foot rule: I can cover 21 feet from a stop in about 1.5 seconds and bury a knife in you. Nobody, can see the threat, react, draw, shoot, and get a stop without divine intervention in less than 1.5 seconds. So, a man with a knife at your throat has both Ability and Opportunity.

There's no reason to wait until they are at 21ft. For one thing, I've seen that 21ft rule turn into the 35ft rule in some classes, but that's besides the point.

I still see guys at the range practicing the Tueller drill thinking that because they can draw and put a round on paper from a fixed position in 1.5 seconds, they'll win that particular encounter. They missed the point. What do we expect when we shoot someone? In short: nothing. They'll be plugging rounds into this crackhead while he slits their throat. Ai Uchi is not a win. (for those not versed in Japanese martial arts, that's the mutual kill, very honorable way to die...but you still die)

There's no reason to let them that close. Put a barrier between you like a parked car or table and start firing or move quickly and fire, but don't be so concerned with "is this 21/35ft?" "how will this look in court?" If they're close enough for you to feel threatened, they're close enough.