Threat as justifiable force

[seamusTX]

All by itself, it's fine; but Look here.

I can't find a direct link regarding the McDermott decision.

- Jim

[stevie_d_64]

All by itself, it's fine; but Look here.

I can't find a direct link regarding the McDermott decision.

- Jim

I remember that one...

I've resided myself to the fact, and incorporated it into my mindset of how would "Steve", or [insert your name here], a "reasonable" person conduct his or herself...

It's a daily gut check...

[txinvestigator]

I think we need a new topic about this. Let's try to get this cleared up:

PC §9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force
is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by
the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose
is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly
force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

I read that as saying if force is justified, you can draw your weapon as a threat to use deadly force if necessary in order to stop the unlawful force being used against you. (...as long as the actor's purpose
is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly
force if necessary...)

How else can this be taken? imo it is pretty straight forward. What about you guys?

Better read it more carefully. It does not mean that if someone threatens you with simple force that you could then draw your weapon.

It does not mean that if someone pushes you that you can draw your weapon.

It does does not say that the THREAT to use deadly force is justified whenever the actual use of force is justified. Remember, force and deadly force are different. It says that the threat of force is justified if the actual use of force is justified.

All that says is that the threat of using deadly force does not equal deadly force.

If a person threatens you with an edged weapon or impact weapon and you draw down on the person and they surrender, then you DID NOT use deadly force. That's what the second sentence in 9.04 means.

As a police officer, I used that section to draw down on people I was not justified at that time in shooting.

[Rex B]

This is where the BG says "You don't have the [appendages] to pull that trigger!" and calls your bluff, walking toward you.

What now?

[txinvestigator]

This is where the BG says "You don't have the [appendages] to pull that trigger!" and calls your bluff, walking toward you.

What now?

It is off topic, but you move for cover that can seperate you, if available. If the person advances to a position that you believe he can deliver the assault, then you fire.

[nitrogen]

Here was the understanding I left with the last time TXinvestigator and Charles took us all to task for misunderstanding this:

You can use the threat of deadly force, and it counts as regular force.

You can draw your weapon when you might be able to use regular force to repel an attack. The thing to remember is, you might be able to draw your weapon and threaten deadly force, but if you cannot legally use deadly force, you've just produced a weapon that you cannot use, and boxed yourself into avcorner.

Do I have the understanding right yet, guys?

[Rex B]

That's what I was thinking.

I'm 6'3" 200 lbs, but I'm not a fighter. No training in that, no real experience, and I'm no longer a young man.
If your basic ex-con tatooed BG starts come at me I doubt I could prevail.
I also see my use of deadly force as being legally indefensible.

I think I'll buy some pepper spray for those gray areas.

[KRM45]

That's what I was thinking.

I'm 6'3" 200 lbs, but I'm not a fighter. No training in that, no real experience, and I'm no longer a young man.
If your basic ex-con tatooed BG starts come at me I doubt I could prevail.
I also see my use of deadly force as being legally indefensible.

I think I'll buy some pepper spray for those gray areas.

Bingo!

[oilman]

The other day I re-read the threads regarding the threat of deadly force because of an incident that occurred to a family member. What I understand is that you are justified in threatening deadly force only if you are justified in using deadly force.

[ElGato]

The other day I re-read the threads regarding the threat of deadly force because of an incident that occurred to a family member. What I understand is that you are justified in threatening deadly force only if you are justified in using deadly force.

Yes

[40FIVER]

I am 5'8" tall and weigh around 145 pounds. I have wished my whole life that I was taller and heavier. Now I think that being small will give me more lattitude concerning the disparity of force thing. And the older and more feeble I get the greater the lattitude.

40FIVER

[txinvestigator]

Well heck, then what could I do in this situation:


Walking to walmart, talking to girl. Random guy walks up and asks for money or something. I say no. He gets mad and starts walking faster towards me screaming obscenaties or "I'm gonna kick your ***!" type stuff. I have my handgun and pocket knife. Use of both would constitute the use of deadly force. All he's doing is walking over and verbally threatening.

What can I do? Just say "please stop coming over" and if he doesn't let him start hitting me before I can do anything to protect myself? I'm a small dude (5'6" 145). I was hoping that section I apparently misunderstood would allow me to keep crazy people from even getting close to me.

If you believe allowing him to strike you OR pulling your weapon are your only options then you need to get additional training. And I don't mean this to be an attack on you, I write it for your legal protection.

There are many things you can do. You should place your hand out and in a loud firm voice you tell to to stop and not come closer. Say that you feel threatened and will defend yourself. Tell the girl, in a loud voice, to call 911.

You do all of this loudly because you want people around you to hear. You want proof that you attempted to de-escalate.

You are not required to allow him to strike you before you defend yourself. However, you need to have less-lethal options at your disposal. That is why MANY of us carry OC. I have years of martial arts training, and I am pretty confident in my ability to defend myself; however, I will use OC in a heartbeat before I would go hands on.

All of that said, pulling a weapon at the point where is he yelling at you and approaching would likely get you arrested. Let us assume that you DO produce a weapon and he says, "oh, what are YOU gonna do, shoot me? He continues to walk up on you. Now you have a weapon in your hand you really cannot legally use.

Would you shoot him? At what distance? What is your legal justification?

No, it is incumbent upon those who carry the means to take life also have a means of defense that is not designed to kill.

And as a second point,

I was hoping that section I apparently misunderstood would allow me to keep crazy people from even getting close to me

. Crazy people? You want to pull you gun whenever a "crazy" person approaches you? That statement is a prosecutors dream.

[carlson1]

Does anyone have a good place to purchase OC? My wife has a small one she carries on a her key chain. We have a small can in each vehicle. I am sure it is time to change those out and I am sure they are making better spray by now.