Stun Gun Treated as Deadly Weapon

[KLB]

Hitting someone with a hand-held stun-gun that causes no permanent damage might strike some as a not very serious offense, but aggravated battery is no joke in terms of potential sentencing. Under Florida law aggravated battery is a second-degree felony good for up to 15 years in prison. That’s a legit stretch.

Most of us are probably accustomed to thinking of a stun-gun as a non-deadly weapon, in large part because that’s how these devices tend to be used by law enforcement—as a non-deadly means to compel compliance by a suspect, as opposed to going to the deadly force of a firearm.

In that context, stun guns are, indeed, non-deadly force. A key facet of this application, however, is that the stun gun is being used defensively, rather than offensively. (Such police use of a stun gun may appear to be offensive in nature, but in fact if the use is lawfully justified the “offense” was committed by the suspect being subject to the stun gun.)

https://lawofselfdefense.com/stun-gun-u ... ly-weapon/

[Jusme]

Poor reporting at best, but running away from an accident scene, even if a passenger, does not demonstrate, reasonable thinking. Being spooked, is not a reasonable justification, for chasing people, with a stun gun.
I have no issue with using anything available for self defense, but this guy sounds like a poster child, for why the left wants to take away any means of self defense.JMHO

[ELB]

Poor reporting at best, but running away from an accident scene, even if a passenger, does not demonstrate, reasonable thinking. Being spooked, is not a reasonable justification, for chasing people, with a stun gun.
...

I have read several news story on this.

The crowd's story is that the stungunguy became agitated, then threatened people with his stun gun, then attacked someone, and then tried to "flee the scene."

Stungunguy says the crowd got angry with him and his sister (who was not involved in the accident), made comments that made him fear for his safety, and he tried to leave for his own safety but was pursued. One account by the police says he was being chased, then he turned and zapped the guy chasing him. There is a video of him zapping some guy who does look considerably more powerful than him (and the guy being zapped seems to hardly feel it). (By the way, I think Branco got it wrong, the guy was not a passenger, he was the driver).

It is noted that he called his sister from the scene of the accident and she drove to the scene to be with him. This kind of cuts against him trying to flee responsibility for the accident.

He sounds a little screwy but I will reserve judgment about his guilt until there's more reliable detail about what happened.

What I find a bit alarming is the apparent claim by the police or DA that the civilian-grade stun gun used as designed is a deadly weapon (capable of serious bodily injury or death) when it's used "offensively" but not when it's used "defensively". Zapping some one with a stun gun is either non-lethal force, or it is lethal force regardless of the reason for the zapping.

If I use baseball bat to smack you on the head that is deadly force. It might be justified (I caught you breaking into my house at 3am) or it might not be (you were walking down the street minding your own business), but either way it's deadly force.

The taser manufacturers and the cops claim their police-grad zap guns are non-lethal, despite the occurrences of death associated with them. If the courts sustain the allegation that a civilian stun gun can be a deadly weapon when used as designed, then this undercuts the classifying the police version as non-lethal.

This is more analogous to the "punching" situation, where the threat of getting punched doesn't ordinarily justify you shooting someone -- because a punch is not deadly force -- but if you get punched, fall down, and bang your head hard enough to die or sustain a serous brain injury, the punch now becomes "deadly force".

[Liberty]

If I am threatened offensively by someone bearing a stungun, I will assume I am in grave danger of getting killed or receiving great bodily harm. Being made totally inherit and incapacitated would leave one vulnerable and defenseless against a deadly attack.