Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Use of physical force

  1. #1
    Regular Member self preservation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Owingsville,KY
    Posts
    1,039

    Use of physical force

    We all know by heart when we can and can not use deadly force, but how about plain physical force? My question comes from a conversation with a lady tonight that said that she was told that if she was at Wal-Mart and someone came up to her and punched her in the face, she could only call the police but not fight back. I told her that didn't sound right and that I would find her a KRS to prove otherwise. I have been reading through chapter 503 but most mentions of physical force are for "imminent death, serious physical injury, kidnapping, sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat, or other felony involving the use of force"

    I did find under KRS 503.050, "The use of physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable when the defendant believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by the other person". I'm not sure what KRS would apply to just a good old fashion punch to the face. Plus KRS 503.050 is "Use of physical force in self-protection -- Admissibility of evidence of prior acts of domestic violence and abuse". Would that apply to simple assault because it wouldn't be an act of domestic violence? What KRS say's that we can fight back?
    “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Edmund Burke

    self-pres·er·va·tion (slfprzr-vshn)
    n.
    1. Protection of oneself from harm or destruction.
    2. The instinct for individual preservation; the innate desire to stay alive.

  2. #2
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by self preservation View Post
    We all know by heart when we can and can not use deadly force, but how about plain physical force? My question comes from a conversation with a lady tonight that said that she was told that if she was at Wal-Mart and someone came up to her and punched her in the face, she could only call the police but not fight back. I told her that didn't sound right and that I would find her a KRS to prove otherwise. I have been reading through chapter 503 but most mentions of physical force are for "imminent death, serious physical injury, kidnapping, sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat, or other felony involving the use of force"

    I did find under KRS 503.050, "The use of physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable when the defendant believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by the other person". I'm not sure what KRS would apply to just a good old fashion punch to the face. Plus KRS 503.050 is "Use of physical force in self-protection -- Admissibility of evidence of prior acts of domestic violence and abuse". Would that apply to simple assault because it wouldn't be an act of domestic violence? What KRS say's that we can fight back?
    Definitions for Penal Code can be found here: http://lrc.ky.gov/KRS/500-00/080.PDF

    Definitions for Chapter 503 are here, and this will help you: http://lrc.ky.gov/KRS/503-00/010.PDF
    Physical force is defined in the above definitions for Chapter 503. Here it is:

    (4) "Physical force" means force used upon or directed toward the body of another person and includes confinement.

    Here is the definition of "imminent":

    (3) "Imminent" means impending DANGER, and, in the context of domestic violence and abuse as defined by KRS 403.720, belief that danger is imminent can be inferred from a past pattern of repeated serious abuse.

    This is the statute that protects our right to protect ourselves against phycial force:

    503.050 Use of physical force in self-protection -- Admissibility of evidence of prior acts of domestic violence and abuse.

    (1) The use of physical force by a defendant upon another person is JUSTIFIABLE when the defendant BELIEVES that such force is necessary to PROTECT himself against the USE or IMMINENT USE of UNLAWFUL PHYSICAL force by the other person.

    Notice the above only speaks about PHYSICAL FORCE and not DEADLY physical force.

    If another person UNLAWFULLY harms you in any way or confines you against your will you can defend yourself. The idea that one would have to allow someone to beat on them while attempting to call the police is absurd. Whoever told her that was ignorant!

    You can also protect yourself from IMMINENT use of force, which means someone that is threatening to harm you. You do NOT have to wait for them to touch you if they have threatened to cause you harm. You can make sure they cannot physically harm you. No ONE is required to be beaten before they can stop an imminent attack.
    Last edited by KYGlockster; 12-15-2012 at 09:41 PM.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •