Use Of Deadly Force : Justified or Not

[mungo]

Personally, I feel some people are too quick to pull a firearm during a simple fist fight. What ever happened to settling things the old fashioned way?

In terms of deadly force. If you sit there an analyze the law too much, you'll never carry nor will you ever draw the firearm.

To me it's like this: I'm not a criminal, I am not a vigilante, I am generally a law abiding citizen. If I truly feel the need to use deadly force then I am going to trust the fact that I used reasonable judgment and that a jury of my peers would do the same thing.

You don't have to worry about the law if you are doing the right thing. However, pulling a gun on someone because they hit you in the jaw and broke it is an unjustified use of deadly force. Here in NC, you cannot defend yourself with deadly force until you are threatened with deadly force (or someone else is).

 

[hk boy]

dc1263
you should contact criminal law lawyer in your state and get needed info before shooting occurs

 

[JohnK87]

Simply put, you are better off in almost all cases if you can defuse or walk away without having to pull your gun.

If you do, be ready to fire, and if you are in fear for your life do so. The clearer the threat, the less likely you will be charged and convicted. If it does go to trial, you'll be explaining yourself.

BTW, I've heard that the average cost of a self defense shooting is $10,000. Legal fees aren't cheap.

 

[FN1910]

I would say that $10,000 would be on the low end of the scale without it even going to trial. Figure $200 per hour for your lawyer and at least $200 for each defense witness plus $200 per hour for each expert witness on your behalf. Remember that your lawyer will bill you for every second he talks to you or to anyone on your behalf plus the time for writing up and legal documents. I doubt that $10,000 will even get you to trial.

 

[dc1263]

Some of you people missed my point completely, I am not itching to pull my gun on someone for spitting on the sidewalk, and I don't need a lawyer to tell me it's not a good idea to shoot somebody for no reason.

Anyway, Thank for your insight.

 

[Lonewolf2810]

Some of you people missed my point completely, I am not itching to pull my gun on someone for spitting on the sidewalk, and I don't need a lawyer to tell me it's not a good idea to shoot somebody for no reason.

Anyway, Thank for your insight.

Funny how some people seem to get away from the questions that are ask or off topic. You will never get a straight answer but will be criticized for asking your question. So don't take it personal around here as I know where you are coming from.

 

[FN1910]

Some of you people missed my point completely, I am not itching to pull my gun on someone for spitting on the sidewalk, and I don't need a lawyer to tell me it's not a good idea to shoot somebody for no reason.

Anyway, Thank for your insight.

It's not an itchy trigger finger but you ask a question that cannot be answered they way you want it answered. There is a thread on another board that is totally off the wall on this type of subject with the courts deciding your question when it happens. As you say about spitting on the sidewalk is a no-no for shooting. How about if he spits in your yard, on your car, your house, your dog, your wife, on you. What if he has some serious infection and spits on you trying to infect you with it. Just where in the line? What if he spits blood instead of salaiva? Somewhere you will have to make the decision where he has crossed the line and hope that the courts agree with you. The bad thing is that one court may agree with you and another not in the same states.

This is the reason for our courts and the way our laws are writtten. Some prefer this system and some don't but it s what we have to go by for now. Our courts interpret the laws, and the constitution and your actions to see if they apply.

 

[dc1263]

Not necessarily looking for "correct answers"

Just some points to ponder

Thanks for your insight, you guys are great

 

[Atstewart1]

Use of Deadly force

In Georgia where I have a CCL, the rule of thumb is "if any reasonable person in the same circumstances would believe their life is threatened," then deadly force is justifiable. Also, three factors go into this definition of "life being threatened." 1. The other person or persons have the ability to kill you. i.e.There are three of them and one of you. They had a deadly weapon like a bat, or knife, or just fists if they are must larger than you. 2. They have the opportunity to kill you. The person is close enough to actually harm you. If they are 100 yards away, you would not be justified in shooting them even if they met condition 1. Usually 30 feet or closer is considered close enough to someone to either shoot you or get to you in less that 3 seconds to inflict harm on you with their bare hands. 3. They must be intent on harming you. A person may meet condition 1 and 2 but not have any intention on harming you. They may show their intent in various ways. i.e. They may say, "I'm going to kill you!" They may banish their firearm. They may not stop approaching you when you command them to stop. If you sense a threat from a person approaching you and you command them to stop and they do not stop, this indicates their intent on harming you. Why else would they not stop and keep their distance? You may also read their body language and it shouts anger and murderous intent. Note all three conditions must be met. If anyone of them is missing you will probably not be justifiable in using deadly force.

When all three of these conditions are met, then any reasonable person in your circumstance would believe their life to be threatened. In Georgia there is no duty to retreat law, but I think if there is any way to avoid a gun fight, take it. You will always have two fights. The gun fight, then the legal fight afterwards. Even if the law says you were justifiable, the family of the person you shot may sue you in civil court.

 

[FN1910]

then any reasonable person in your circumstance

I think that you find that almost all self-defense laws are based on this especially court rulings. The problem is when you stand before the jury trying to convince them that what you did was reasonable and what they would have done under the same circumstances. Luckily the terms "great bodily harm" or similar are placed into these laws as well as "fear of life".

 

[dc1263]

Atstewart1 The Packing Preacher

Great Post, Commonsensical

 

[knighted4]

If you feel imperiled irregardless of the circumstances, then you must shoot. When the police arrive you must repeat this over and over with no alterations, aditions orchanges...Officer, I feared for my life. He was going to kill me....

DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Get a good lawyer and let them talk for you.

this is from another forum it is 48 min but a good 48 min.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

knighted4

 

[wjh2657]

The major factor in defending yourself against physical assault (no weapon involved with assaulting party) would be how that assault came about. If the guy came out of nowhere and started beating you, with no provocation from you, you probably have a good argument to fear enough to shoot. If the guy and you have been arguing or having words then you are one of the parties in a two party fight and all you can do is take your medicine or run.

Even if he follows you when you try to escape, it is real dicey whether you can use deadly force. I sat in at a trial with that approximate scenario. The jury elected to go for the lowest grade of manslaughter because they believed the shooter had pretty much started the altercation and they felt he thus had contributed to the assaulter's eventual death.

If you said anything about his mother and all the sailors in the Seventh Fleet, I am pretty sure you are not going to walk away clean!

Keep away from other guy's wives, avoid places where fights predominate and don't pick fights with people who could beat you to death! Saves on wear and tear and attorney fees.

 

[bigdaddysdaddy]

Simple assault is not a justified use of deadly force, I understand that.

Are broken bones and blood beyond reasonable force and justification for the use of deadly force ?

What if a dude twice my size pushes me around then punches me in the mouth and breaks my jaw ?

Or say he knocks a couple of teeth out of my mouth and bloodies my nose

Would that be considered "Serious Physical Injury" or "Great Bodily Harm" as defined by The Law ?

Can anyone here point me to the laws pertaining to the "Use of Deadly Force Against A Person"

I recently took the Concealed Carry Class here in NC ( I've had my CT permit for 20+ years now) and was surprised that the only place I can find reference to these laws of self defense was in the training handbook,
Thought there would be a statute or some other reference to the Common Laws ?

You guys are great, Lots of good info here.

Here in Texas if your sitting in your car, and someone comes up to your car and threatens you, you can blow him away.

 

[blkdragon]

On the criminal side, it is "criminal intent" that is the first litmus test. Then will be the belief of the person being attacked. In Texas, where I am a law enforcement officer, it is primarily being in fear of one's life. It will depend on many factors, but if the person attacked can articulate their reason for using deadly force, then they will be alright.

The kicker is on the civil side, because that is a totally different sent of rules. Just because you don't see a weapon does not mean that the person punching the snott out of you is not carrying one. The most important thing to remember is, if you are armed and you are attacked, there is at least one gun in the fight. Think about it.

 

[billwot]

To answer is NC a stand your ground state? NO it is not you have the duty to retreat. I sure wish they would change that law it sure would help in the matter of protecting your self and family.

"Deadly Force / Castle Doctrine:
North Carolina is a Castle Doctrine state and has a stand-your-ground law".


North Carolina Concealed Carry Permit Information

bill

 

[billwot]

Simple assault is not a justified use of deadly force, I understand that.

Are broken bones and blood beyond reasonable force and justification for the use of deadly force ?

What if a dude twice my size pushes me around then punches me in the mouth and breaks my jaw ?

Or say he knocks a couple of teeth out of my mouth and bloodies my nose

Would that be considered "Serious Physical Injury" or "Great Bodily Harm" as defined by The Law ?

Can anyone here point me to the laws pertaining to the "Use of Deadly Force Against A Person"

I recently took the Concealed Carry Class here in NC ( I've had my CT permit for 20+ years now) and was surprised that the only place I can find reference to these laws of self defense was in the training handbook,
Thought there would be a statute or some other reference to the Common Laws ?

You guys are great, Lots of good info here.

Here is a link to the guy that taught my CCW class. Click on the link to "ADF" (After Deadly Force" ) It is a sepcialized seminar he offers that deals with many of the questions you are asking, and what your follow-up actions should be following a deadly force incident. Much of the material is presented by a local attorney who specializes in deadly force cases. I haven't had time to take the course yet, but I fully intend to at my earliest convenience. NOTE: His classes fill up quickly, so if you plan to attend, you should register as erly as possible.

His classes are in the Wilson/Rocky mount, NC area

HOME/ABOUT US/CONTACT - Concealed Handgun Carry, Inc.

billl

 

[dc1263]

The class I was in was small, only 4 people, so we had lots of time for open discussion, I understood the laws prior to the class and enjoyed listening to the comment/opinions of the others as well, Seems to me that most people I talk to would use appropriate force including deadly force if necessary, without concern for any consequences, If it is truly a life or death situation then there will be little or no problem with justifying the use of deadly force afterwards,

You guys are great, thanks for all the input!

 

[kelcarry]

Hey dc1263: Within your comments--therein lies the problem. When you choose to CC you are in an inherently difficult situation that others will eventual judge you on from the LEO to the prosecutor to a jury; a great deal of the "judging" also has a lot to do with the state and community that you live in. In SC, I have read about cases that I found to be too lenient on the CC shooter and I certaiinly have read about cases in other states that gave me great concern--sure I do not have all the facts and I can be very wrong on each and every one but the point is that there is a very very big "grey area" that those of us with CC can easily fall into. It seems to me that "imminent danger" could be at a point where you do not even stand a chance to present your CCW. Be safe my fellow posters.