Can You Use a Gun in Defense of a Taser

smoking357 · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

I've always heard that lethal force can only be used to defend against lethal force.

In this story, a gun was used to defend against a taser. Tasers are sold as non-lethal. Can you use a gun to retaliate if someone throws a snowball at you?

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/breaking/6557924.html

Doug Huffman · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

The common law elements of self-defense are four; be innocent of instigation, be in reasonable fear of bodily harm, use sufficient force only to deliver oneself from evil, attempt to withdraw.

If you have been tasered then you know that it hurts. 'Hurt' doesn't count? Amputation under anesthesia too?

Marco · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

Less-lethal weapons, less-than-lethal weapons, non-lethal weapons, non-deadly weapons, or, more recently, compliance weapons are weapons intended to be less likely to kill or to cause great bodily injury to a living target than a conventional weapon.

Would treat the attacker the same I would any other person attacking with a weapon (conventional or not).

jadedone4 · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

I'd have to believe that "intent" would factor in HEAVILY into any scenario/equation here.

Why would anyone "want" to taser someone else? - is there any question of the "harm" that could be inflicted; and thus the intention of the act?

Don't know of any "sane" reason to taser someone - without the intent to do exactly as the manufacture stipulates on the label (unless there is a beer-bong involve and hazing of some sort - but I do not recall much from that time in my life...:what:

AWDstylez · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

People often die from getting tasered. Fire away.

R a Z o R · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

The common law elements of self-defense are four; be innocent of instigation, be in reasonable fear of bodily harm, use sufficient force only to deliver oneself from evil, attempt to withdraw.

If you have been tasered then you know that it hurts. 'Hurt' doesn't count? Amputation under anesthesia too?

Before I took any defensive actions of a person acting agressively towards me with an unknown object being pointed at me ...

1.] First after making sure of the weapon being pointed , I would check the manufacture's date and serial number of the taser .

2.] I would next check for other weapons .

3.] Then I'd ask if I had done anything to offend them to cause them to desire me pain ?

4.] I would then ask them if they had a cell phone and if they would mind calling 911 .

--------------

However in the case described ...

It was a case of racial profiling and the cop acted stupidly . Ya Follow ?

Jim675 · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

A non-lethal weapon will still disable me and allow the BG full access to my own weapon.

Hands are (usually) non-leathal weapons, am I obligated to be beat senseless before drawing?

zigziggityzoo · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

In my state, I am allowed to use lethal force if I am in fear of "serious bodily harm," among other things.

Were I to be threatened with a taser, and the perp knew I was armed, I personally feel that I would be justified in using my firearm to fend off the perp. Why? Because, were I to be incapacitated, he could easily take control of my firearm and then end my life.

Not only that, I consider being tazed (aka electro-musculonervous interruption) "serious bodily harm."

TheMrMitch · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

A taser would place the victim at the mercy of the attacker who's reason for tasering could notbe ascertained as 'innocent' at the moment.

It would fall under 'disparity'.

Sheriff · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

smoking357 wrote:

Tasers are sold as non-lethal.

False.

http://www.taser.com/legal/Documents/Warnings%20-%20Law%20Enforcement.0408.pdf

quote from above link:

"TASER devices are designed in probe-deployment mode to temporarily incapacitate a person from a safer distance while reducing the likelihood of serious injuries or death. When used as directed, TASER devices have been found to be safer and more effective than other traditional use-of-force tools and techniques. However, it is important to remember that the use of force and physical incapacitation, by their very nature, involve risk that someone will get hurt or may even die from factors that include, but are not limited to: physical resistance, exertion, individual susceptibilities, and/or unforeseen circumstances."

dbc3804 · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

I think that when the guy said "you're dead now" he sealed his fate.

Danny

Felid`Maximus · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

A taser would disable someone leaving them open to any type of lethal attack. If disabled by a taser what is to prevent them from then taking your gun and shooting you, or coming up and slitting your throat with a knife or just stomping the life out of you?

Not to mention a taser is often shaped like a handgun and may not be distinguishable.

If I understand the taser technology, it is not a device reliant on pain coercion to stop someone. The electricity interferes with your neural control over your muscles, meaning that with the right hit you won't have the ability to resist.

The shock from the Taser may not usually be lethal in itself, but a Taser and a person together could be a lethal combination.

Nutczak · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

Someone threatening using a taseragainst me? I would shoot.
I think this comes back to the saying "I would rather be judged by 12, than be carried by 6"
I do not care what a persons intentions are, I do not need to be physically disabled by the thing so I can then be robbed, beaten, or whatever their plans may be.

What if someone threatened you with a box-cutter, chances are itmost likelynot kill you, but it will cause alot of pain and disfigurement.

How about pepper-spray, or other defensive chemicals? it will not kill you, but it disables you to a point of total incapacitation, we do not know what their intentions are after using a less-lethal weapon.

smoking357 · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

Felid`Maximus wrote:

A taser would disable someone leaving them open to any type of lethal attack. If disabled by a taser what is to prevent them from then taking your gun and shooting you, or coming up and slitting your throat with a knife or just stomping the life out of you?

So, for anyone carrying a gun, any use of force above a minimal level can then be met with lethal force?

Marco · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

Sheriff wrote:

smoking357 wrote:

Tasers are sold as non-lethal.

Click to expand...

False.

http://www.taser.com/legal/Documents/Warnings%20-%20Law%20Enforcement.0408.pdf

quote from above link:

"TASER devices are designed in probe-deployment mode to temporarily incapacitate a person from a safer distance while reducing the likelihood of serious injuries or death. When used as directed, TASER devices have been found to be safer and more effective than other traditional use-of-force tools and techniques. However, it is important to remember that the use of force and physical incapacitation, by their very nature, involve risk that someone will get hurt or may even die from factors that include, but are not limited to: physical resistance, exertion, individual susceptibilities, and/or unforeseen circumstances."

Like the probes striking a zippo in your pocket and you burst into flames.

ScottyT · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

smoking357 wrote:

Felid`Maximus wrote:

A taser would disable someone leaving them open to any type of lethal attack. If disabled by a taser what is to prevent them from then taking your gun and shooting you, or coming up and slitting your throat with a knife or just stomping the life out of you?

Click to expand...

So, for anyone carrying a gun, any use of force above a minimal level can then be met with lethal force?

IMO, YES! I have little to no combat training (hand to hand) and I am a pretty big guy (tall, thick, not a fatty), so I must assume that anyone coming at me with the intention of visiting any harm upon me is capable of inflicting serious bodily harm.

The BG obviously believes he can harm me enough to accomplish his goals, so I am going to believe him! Never underestimate your opponent.

HankT · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

Jim675 wrote:

A non-lethal weapon will still disable me and allow the BG full access to my own weapon.

zigziggityzoo wrote:

Were I to be threatened with a taser, and the perp knew I was armed, I personally feel that I would be justified in using my firearm to fend off the perp. Why? Because, were I to be incapacitated, he could easily take control of my firearm and then end my life.

Felid`Maximus wrote:

A taser would disable someone leaving them open to any type of lethal attack. If disabled by a taser what is to prevent them from then taking your gun and shooting you, or coming up and slitting your throat with a knife or just stomping the life out of you?

This is why I favor the development of a firearmtechnology that would allow a specially equipped handgun to fireonly whenthe owner of a gun pulled the trigger.

Some work on this technology was done back in the 1990s but it's been stalled since then.

It had aLOT going for it.

If it could be made to work as reliably as, say, aout of the box mid-priced1911, I would definitely buy one as a carry gun. Obviously, other benefits would accrue from such a secure-fire-gun (SFG).

If I had a SFG when the guy with only a Taser threatened me, I would probably not shoot the guy.

ScottyT · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

HankT wrote:

If I had a SFG when the guy with only a Taser threatened me, I would probably not shoot the guy.

I sure would. It is never acceptable to be incapacitated at the hands of your enemies, regardless of what weapon (if any) they are using against you. You have no idea what their intentions are.

HankT · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

ScottyT wrote:

HankT wrote:

If I had a SFG when the guy with only a Taser threatened me, I would probably not shoot the guy.

Click to expand...

I sure would. It is never acceptable to be incapacitated at the hands of your enemies, regardless of what weapon (if any) they are using against you. You have no idea what their intentions are.

There's no certainty that a Taser attacker is going to be successful. Especially some untrained jabrone.

Distraction and distanceare the tools I would badly want touse first. Remember, Tueller can work both ways.

I really don't ever want to shoot a person who does not have a knife or a gun. Too much cost.

SouthernBoy · Aug 3, 2009

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

The common law elements of self-defense are four; be innocent of instigation, be in reasonable fear of bodily harm, use sufficient force only to deliver oneself from evil, attempt to withdraw.

If you have been tasered then you know that it hurts. 'Hurt' doesn't count? Amputation under anesthesia too?

In Virginia, there is no "duty to retreat"... it is a "stand your ground" state. However, I might suggest the prudent man would seek alternate avenues IF such can be done safely.

Can You Use a Gun in Defense of a Taser

Banned

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned

Banned

Founder's Club Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Activist Member

Regular Member

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

State Researcher

Regular Member

State Researcher

Regular Member