Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Tasers

  1. #1
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Anyone carry (OC or CC) a Taser? I mean, non-LEO citizen carry...

    Which Taser do you carry? (C2, X26c, M18, etc.)

    What's been your experience? What is your assessment of the Taser tool?

    Any issues? Any surprises?

    Have you used it on a person? (Training, fooling around,or for real.)

    Have you incorporated your Taser in your home self-defense plan?

    I'm thinking about getting one.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    Unfortunately, not legal for non-leo, Michiganders.

    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(uy2...e=mcl-750-224a

  3. #3
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    Hank,

    The C-2 is what I have.

    I have many problems with it.

    1) You have to register, and pay to register to buy it.

    2) There is no ability to practice by firing it.

    3) It is not comfortable on my belt like a handgun holster.

    All in all I think bear spray would be a better choice.


























    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  4. #4
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770

    Post imported post

    "Happiness is a warm shotgun!!"
    "I am neither a pessimist nor a cynic. I am, rather, a realist."
    "The most dangerous things I've ever encountered were a Second Lieutenant with a map and a compass and a Private who was bored and had time on his hands."

  5. #5
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    SFCRetired wrote:
    If I am in a situation where I fear for my life, the firearm I carry is, I feel,much more likely to stop the threat than the taser is.
    But what if you're NOT in fear for your life?

    What if you encounter a situation where some guy (your size or smaller) or some woman or some kid.....wants to fight but does NOT want to kill you or cause serious physical injury? The gun is pretty useless then. Wouldn't a less-than-lethal tool be good to have then?




    SFCRetired wrote:
    My question would concern whether, if you carried one and subsequently had to use your firearm, the prosecuting attorney would use the fact that you had one and didn't use it to paint you as a bloodthirsty criminal.
    What would make you think that?

    Has it ever happened?





  6. #6
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770

    Post imported post


    "Happiness is a warm shotgun!!"
    "I am neither a pessimist nor a cynic. I am, rather, a realist."
    "The most dangerous things I've ever encountered were a Second Lieutenant with a map and a compass and a Private who was bored and had time on his hands."

  7. #7
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    What if you encounter a situation where some guy (your size or smaller) or some woman or some kid.....wants to fight but does NOT want to kill you or cause serious physical injury?

    As a rule, I don't get into fights, although I have been in them. I don't go looking for them, but in the neighborhood I grew up in, they sometimes came to me.

    Which fighting technique are you familiar with? Have you ever actually been in a street fight?To the best of my knowledge, there is nostreet fighting disciplinethat does notinvolve the combatants punching, kicking, elbowing, kneeing, headbutting, biting, and using whatever is at their disposal to do damage to the opponent.

    Is it one of your postulates that getting punched, kicked, elbowed, kneed, headbutted, or bitten does not and can not causeserious physical injury?

  8. #8
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    SFCRetired wrote:
    Point #1: At my age and in my physical condition, almost any man or woman younger than me could do damage that could lead to my death. I don't fight. I will talk my way out of it, I will walk away if they will let me, and I won'tstart a confrontation. In those circumstances, an openly carried pistol provides a level of deterrence that I do not believe a taser would.

    I am also not convinced of the effectiveness of tasers under all conditions.
    No one has ever said that tasers are the right tools "under all conditions."

    You seem convinced of the effectiveness of guns under all conditions, however. I'd suggest that your, uhm, perceived susceptibility tosevere injury or deathby"almost any man or woman younger" than you might have something to do with that conviciton.




    SFCRetired wrote:
    Point #2: You ain't from Alabama, are you?

    No, it has never happened as far as I can determine. But the reality is that if you are carrying both a handgun and a taser and, for whatever reason, you choose the gun over the taser, a politically ambitious district attorney will make the most of it at your trial.

    I know the politicians here in this state all too well and I have no reason to believe that politicians elsewhere are any different. If a district attorney with ambitions toward a higher office or facing a tough opponent in the next election can make mileage out of your choice, he/she will.

    In the final analysis, I would rather have the known deterrence factor of the openly carried handgun than the unknown factors associated with carrying a taser.
    So, it's never happened. And there isalmost no logical basisfor it happening.

    But you make an assumption that it will happen--to you. For political reasons, ambition reasons, election reasons, etcetera, etcetera.

    Sorry, I don't see your logic. I think that you might just have a gun-first philosophy.

    Good luck with it. Hope it serves you well. But it's quite limiting, y'know.








  9. #9
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770

    Post imported post




    "Happiness is a warm shotgun!!"
    "I am neither a pessimist nor a cynic. I am, rather, a realist."
    "The most dangerous things I've ever encountered were a Second Lieutenant with a map and a compass and a Private who was bored and had time on his hands."

  10. #10
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    buster81 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    What if you encounter a situation where some guy (your size or smaller) or some woman or some kid.....wants to fight but does NOT want to kill you or cause serious physical injury?
    As a rule, I don't get into fights, although I have been in them. I don't go looking for them, but in the neighborhood I grew up in, they sometimes came to me.

    Which fighting technique are you familiar with? Have you ever actually been in a street fight?To the best of my knowledge, there is nostreet fighting disciplinethat does notinvolve the combatants punching, kicking, elbowing, kneeing, headbutting, biting, and using whatever is at their disposal to do damage to the opponent.

    Is it one of your postulates that getting punched, kicked, elbowed, kneed, headbutted, or bitten does not and can not causeserious physical injury?
    No.

  11. #11
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    buster81 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    What if you encounter a situation where some guy (your size or smaller) or some woman or some kid.....wants to fight but does NOT want to kill you or cause serious physical injury?
    As a rule, I don't get into fights, although I have been in them. I don't go looking for them, but in the neighborhood I grew up in, they sometimes came to me.

    Which fighting technique are you familiar with? Have you ever actually been in a street fight?To the best of my knowledge, there is nostreet fighting disciplinethat does notinvolve the combatants punching, kicking, elbowing, kneeing, headbutting, biting, and using whatever is at their disposal to do damage to the opponent.

    Is it one of your postulates that getting punched, kicked, elbowed, kneed, headbutted, or bitten does not and can not causeserious physical injury?
    No.
    So it's reasonable to be in fear for your life, or in fear that you will receive serious physical injury any time a combatant engages you and take measures accordingly.

    You asked "But what if you're NOT in fear for your life?" If you are not in fear for your life or in fear of serious physical injury (which may lead to the loss of your life), then you are not in a fight. Just retreat out of the situationand call the police.

  12. #12
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    buster81 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    buster81 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    What if you encounter a situation where some guy (your size or smaller) or some woman or some kid.....wants to fight but does NOT want to kill you or cause serious physical injury?
    As a rule, I don't get into fights, although I have been in them. I don't go looking for them, but in the neighborhood I grew up in, they sometimes came to me.

    Which fighting technique are you familiar with? Have you ever actually been in a street fight?To the best of my knowledge, there is nostreet fighting disciplinethat does notinvolve the combatants punching, kicking, elbowing, kneeing, headbutting, biting, and using whatever is at their disposal to do damage to the opponent.

    Is it one of your postulates that getting punched, kicked, elbowed, kneed, headbutted, or bitten does not and can not causeserious physical injury?
    No.
    So it's reasonable to be in fear for your life, or in fear that you will receive serious physical injury any time a combatant engages you and take measures accordingly.
    ...
    No.

  13. #13
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    buster81 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    buster81 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    What if you encounter a situation where some guy (your size or smaller) or some woman or some kid.....wants to fight but does NOT want to kill you or cause serious physical injury?
    As a rule, I don't get into fights, although I have been in them. I don't go looking for them, but in the neighborhood I grew up in, they sometimes came to me.

    Which fighting technique are you familiar with? Have you ever actually been in a street fight?To the best of my knowledge, there is nostreet fighting disciplinethat does notinvolve the combatants punching, kicking, elbowing, kneeing, headbutting, biting, and using whatever is at their disposal to do damage to the opponent.

    Is it one of your postulates that getting punched, kicked, elbowed, kneed, headbutted, or bitten does not and can not causeserious physical injury?
    No.
    So it's reasonable to be in fear for your life, or in fear that you will receive serious physical injury any time a combatant engages you and take measures accordingly.
    ...
    No.
    It wasn't a question. I'll make it one for you if you like. Under what circumstances would you not be in fear of serious physical injury and/or fear for your life while taking part in a fight?

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    My state is on "O-C only" state, With no permits required, but we are very limited on other means of defense. I guess the state govt. doesn't does want us to damage our criminals too much.

    We cannot carry or possess electronic weapons, And we are very limited on the chemical weapons we can legally possess. For instance, we can have a pepper-spray, but there can be no marking dye in it (Stupidity to the 9th degree IMO) And the pepper-spray must be a fairly low concentration of the active ingredient, and the container size is also limited too.

    But hey, we can shoot the attacker with a firearmif we fear for our life!!

  15. #15
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Nutczak wrote:
    My state is on "O-C only" state, With no permits required, but we are very limited on other means of defense. I guess the state govt. doesn't does want us to damage our criminals too much.

    We cannot carry or possess electronic weapons, And we are very limited on the chemical weapons we can legally possess. For instance, we can have a pepper-spray, but there can be no marking dye in it (Stupidity to the 9th degree IMO) And the pepper-spray must be a fairly low concentration of the active ingredient, and the container size is also limited too.

    But hey, we can shoot the attacker with a firearmif we fear for our life!!
    Wisconsin laws regarding guns, carry and/or self-defense are a mess. You have my sympathies.

    Maybe Wisconsin can issue one of those old Sen. Proxmire Golden Fleece awards to istself....you guys are getting raked.

  16. #16
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461

    Post imported post

    Under what circumstances would you not be in fear of serious physical injury and/or fear for your life while taking part in a fight?
    Did you forget about this Hank? Please enlighten us.

  17. #17
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    buster81 wrote:
    Under what circumstances would you not be in fear of serious physical injury and/or fear for your life while taking part in a fight?
    Did you forget about this Hank? Please enlighten us.

    Good question. There are several circumstances. Here's a general example.

    If I somehow was faced with a visiblyunarmed antagonist who started (I wouldn't start one)to fight with me for some reason petty reason (that's important) and who was of the same general size and age as I am (or smaller).

    Unless I knew that he was, a) a homicidal maniac,or b) some kind of MMA or martial arts dude who was not of sound mind at the time (e.g., impaired),I wouldn't be too too in fear of serious physical injury or death.

    I certainly wouldn't want to pull out a gun in such a case. I wouldn't even want to have one on me in such an event since I'd have to worry about it in several regards.

    I'm not, BTW, a particularly good street fighter, IMO. But I've been in a few. It hurts to be hit and, actually, it can hurt to hit someone.But I'd much rather take a punch and, say, get a black eye, or punch somone in the face and break his nose, than pull out a pistola and open up a panorama of decidedly chancy legal, moral and ethical outcomes--when it is simply a physical fight started by a guy (or a woman) who has no deadly weapon. C'mon. Guns are for serious attacks, not mild and routine 2 or 3 punch affairs.

    There are several other examples I could cite, this is just the first, and most general and easily convincing one that comes to mind...

    What do you think, B81?


  18. #18
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    SFCRetired wrote:
    Point #1: At my age and in my physical condition, almost any man or woman younger than me could do damage that could lead to my death. I don't fight. I will talk my way out of it, I will walk away if they will let me, and I won'tstart a confrontation. In those circumstances, an openly carried pistol provides a level of deterrence that I do not believe a taser would.

    I am also not convinced of the effectiveness of tasers under all conditions.
    No one has ever said that tasers are the right tools "under all conditions."

    You seem convinced of the effectiveness of guns under all conditions, however. I'd suggest that your, uhm, perceived susceptibility tosevere injury or deathby"almost any man or woman younger" than you might have something to do with that conviciton.




    SFCRetired wrote:
    Point #2: You ain't from Alabama, are you?

    No, it has never happened as far as I can determine. But the reality is that if you are carrying both a handgun and a taser and, for whatever reason, you choose the gun over the taser, a politically ambitious district attorney will make the most of it at your trial.

    I know the politicians here in this state all too well and I have no reason to believe that politicians elsewhere are any different. If a district attorney with ambitions toward a higher office or facing a tough opponent in the next election can make mileage out of your choice, he/she will.

    In the final analysis, I would rather have the known deterrence factor of the openly carried handgun than the unknown factors associated with carrying a taser.
    So, it's never happened. And there isalmost no logical basisfor it happening.

    But you make an assumption that it will happen--to you. For political reasons, ambition reasons, election reasons, etcetera, etcetera.

    Sorry, I don't see your logic. I think that you might just have a gun-first philosophy.

    Good luck with it. Hope it serves you well. But it's quite limiting, y'know.






    Hank... has your "postulate" been replaced with the new "gun first philosophy"? If so that new "philosophy" suffers from the same misguided arrogant elitist perspective of "knowing what is best for everyone".

    You do not seem to understand that in the real world there are people who have different circumstances than you... making your "opinion" of what everyone should do according to what you think is right a horribly elitist viewpoint. For some of us with physical limitations there is no such thing as just getting into a fight. Your dismissing that very real consideration for other people is........ foolish.

    Everyone makes decisions based upon their own personal set of circumstances/beliefs. What I decide to do in any area of my life may, or may not, be applicable for someone else and I do not have the right to tell anyone they should do what I think they should..... nor does anyone have the right to tell me what is proper simply because they do not walk in my shoes.

    Now... as for Tazers/sprays... to begin with citizens have the right to defend themselves... they do not have a duty to apprehend/arrest any criminals nor are they obliged to "be nice" to a criminal so that is not a consideration when considering those means. Some folks are young, strong, and just generally tough trained bad ass fighters able to deal with situations without needing an extra weapon besides their bodies. But... the vast majority of folks aren't bad asses by any means and some are so unable to physically deal with a fight of any kind an external weapon is the only intelligent choice.

    In a perfect cutesy poo kumbiya world just saying "That offends me!" would be enough to stop any and all altercations/differences of opinion. But those of us that live in the real world understand that there are vicious animals that look like humans out there and make decisions accordingly. Many of us understand that a Tazer often doesn't faze a criminal and sprays often get on the victim as much as it does the criminal.... and if those things don't work it will be way too late to utilize the tool that has the most chance of being effective.

    I've only been visiting this forum for a relatively short time yet I am impressed with the very high level of pragmatic, logical, and intelligent decisions I've seen posted throughout. And, not only astounded but, dismayed by some of the assumptions presented as "information".
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    bismarck, North Dakota, USA
    Posts
    68

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote

    Unless I knew that he was, a) a homicidal maniac,or b) some kind of MMA or martial arts dude who was not of sound mind at the time (e.g., impaired),I wouldn't be too too in fear of serious physical injury or death.
    in your own words you just said that an trained fighter is armed with his hands, on another thread that involved a drunk mma fighter you argued "
    It is a bad strategy to shoot an unarmed person."

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum60/26933-1.html

    go **** now please

  20. #20
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    buster81 wrote:
    Under what circumstances would you not be in fear of serious physical injury and/or fear for your life while taking part in a fight?
    Did you forget about this Hank? Please enlighten us.

    Good question. There are several circumstances. Here's a general example.

    If I somehow was faced with a visiblyunarmed antagonist who started (I wouldn't start one)to fight with me for some reason petty reason (that's important) and who was of the same general size and age as I am (or smaller).

    Unless I knew that he was, a) a homicidal maniac,or b) some kind of MMA or martial arts dude who was not of sound mind at the time (e.g., impaired),I wouldn't be too too in fear of serious physical injury or death.

    I certainly wouldn't want to pull out a gun in such a case. I wouldn't even want to have one on me in such an event since I'd have to worry about it in several regards.

    I'm not, BTW, a particularly good street fighter, IMO. But I've been in a few. It hurts to be hit and, actually, it can hurt to hit someone.But I'd much rather take a punch and, say, get a black eye, or punch somone in the face and break his nose, than pull out a pistola and open up a panorama of decidedly chancy legal, moral and ethical outcomes--when it is simply a physical fight started by a guy (or a woman) who has no deadly weapon. C'mon. Guns are for serious attacks, not mild and routine 2 or 3 punch affairs.

    There are several other examples I could cite, this is just the first, and most general and easily convincing one that comes to mind...

    What do you think, B81?
    What if your opponent who "was of the same general size and age as I am"were to somehow get an advantage in the altercation and was to incapacitate you. Would you not concern yourself with being killed while lying unconscious?

    Are you trying to say that you would use a tazer on this individual you were not scared of in the example above?

  21. #21
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    buster81 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    buster81 wrote:
    Under what circumstances would you not be in fear of serious physical injury and/or fear for your life while taking part in a fight?
    Did you forget about this Hank? Please enlighten us.

    Good question. There are several circumstances. Here's a general example.

    If I somehow was faced with a visiblyunarmed antagonist who started (I wouldn't start one)to fight with me for some reason petty reason (that's important) and who was of the same general size and age as I am (or smaller).

    Unless I knew that he was, a) a homicidal maniac,or b) some kind of MMA or martial arts dude who was not of sound mind at the time (e.g., impaired),I wouldn't be too too in fear of serious physical injury or death.

    I certainly wouldn't want to pull out a gun in such a case. I wouldn't even want to have one on me in such an event since I'd have to worry about it in several regards.

    I'm not, BTW, a particularly good street fighter, IMO. But I've been in a few. It hurts to be hit and, actually, it can hurt to hit someone.But I'd much rather take a punch and, say, get a black eye, or punch somone in the face and break his nose, than pull out a pistola and open up a panorama of decidedly chancy legal, moral and ethical outcomes--when it is simply a physical fight started by a guy (or a woman) who has no deadly weapon. C'mon. Guns are for serious attacks, not mild and routine 2 or 3 punch affairs.

    There are several other examples I could cite, this is just the first, and most general and easily convincing one that comes to mind...

    What do you think, B81?
    What if your opponent who "was of the same general size and age as I am"were to somehow get an advantage in the altercation and was to incapacitate you. Would you not concern yourself with being killed while lying unconscious?
    Is the person in your scenario visibly unarmed and is the basis for the fight of low importance ("petty" as I termed it)?

  22. #22
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    buster81 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    buster81 wrote:
    Under what circumstances would you not be in fear of serious physical injury and/or fear for your life while taking part in a fight?
    Did you forget about this Hank? Please enlighten us.

    Good question. There are several circumstances. Here's a general example.

    If I somehow was faced with a visiblyunarmed antagonist who started (I wouldn't start one)to fight with me for some reason petty reason (that's important) and who was of the same general size and age as I am (or smaller).

    Unless I knew that he was, a) a homicidal maniac,or b) some kind of MMA or martial arts dude who was not of sound mind at the time (e.g., impaired),I wouldn't be too too in fear of serious physical injury or death.

    I certainly wouldn't want to pull out a gun in such a case. I wouldn't even want to have one on me in such an event since I'd have to worry about it in several regards.

    I'm not, BTW, a particularly good street fighter, IMO. But I've been in a few. It hurts to be hit and, actually, it can hurt to hit someone.But I'd much rather take a punch and, say, get a black eye, or punch somone in the face and break his nose, than pull out a pistola and open up a panorama of decidedly chancy legal, moral and ethical outcomes--when it is simply a physical fight started by a guy (or a woman) who has no deadly weapon. C'mon. Guns are for serious attacks, not mild and routine 2 or 3 punch affairs.

    There are several other examples I could cite, this is just the first, and most general and easily convincing one that comes to mind...

    What do you think, B81?

    What if your opponent who "was of the same general size and age as I am"were to somehow get an advantage in the altercation and was to incapacitate you. Would you not concern yourself with being killed while lying unconscious?
    Are you trying to say that you would use a tazer on this individual you were not scared of in the example above?
    Is the person in your scenario visibly unarmed and is the basis for the fight of low importance ("petty" as I termed it)?
    Fixed it for you. Try answering both questions.

    The scenario was yours. Answer the question with something other than another question.




  23. #23
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    buster81 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    buster81 wrote:
    Under what circumstances would you not be in fear of serious physical injury and/or fear for your life while taking part in a fight?
    Did you forget about this Hank? Please enlighten us.

    Good question. There are several circumstances. Here's a general example.

    If I somehow was faced with a visiblyunarmed antagonist who started (I wouldn't start one)to fight with me for some reason petty reason (that's important) and who was of the same general size and age as I am (or smaller).

    Unless I knew that he was, a) a homicidal maniac,or b) some kind of MMA or martial arts dude who was not of sound mind at the time (e.g., impaired),I wouldn't be too too in fear of serious physical injury or death.

    I certainly wouldn't want to pull out a gun in such a case. I wouldn't even want to have one on me in such an event since I'd have to worry about it in several regards.

    I'm not, BTW, a particularly good street fighter, IMO. But I've been in a few. It hurts to be hit and, actually, it can hurt to hit someone.But I'd much rather take a punch and, say, get a black eye, or punch somone in the face and break his nose, than pull out a pistola and open up a panorama of decidedly chancy legal, moral and ethical outcomes--when it is simply a physical fight started by a guy (or a woman) who has no deadly weapon. C'mon. Guns are for serious attacks, not mild and routine 2 or 3 punch affairs.

    There are several other examples I could cite, this is just the first, and most general and easily convincing one that comes to mind...

    What do you think, B81?
    What if your opponent who "was of the same general size and age as I am"were to somehow get an advantage in the altercation and was to incapacitate you. Would you not concern yourself with being killed while lying unconscious?
    Is the person in your scenario visibly unarmed and is the basis for the fight of low importance ("petty" as I termed it)?
    Hank... please define "unarmed" since the following does a pretty good job of bolstering my often repeated statement that, in real life, there is no such thing as "unarmed" unless a person has no arms, legs, or teeth....... or... ummm... AIDs and a penis.

    From thefreedictionary.com

    deadly weapon n. any weapon which can kill. This includes not only weapons which are intended to do harm like a gun or knife, but also blunt instruments like clubs, baseball bats, monkey wrenches, an automobile or any object which actually causes death. This becomes important when trying to prove criminal charges brought for assault with a deadly weapon. In a few 1990s cases courts have found rocks and even penises of AIDS sufferers as "deadly weapons."

    So even some courts have recognized that body parts are "deadly weapons". Fists and feet fall under the category of... body parts that can be used as "deadly weapons" too.

    And... contrary to what may be believed the reason for the attack, even if it is "petty", has no bearing on whether the one attacked may use lethal force when in reasonable fear of immediate and imminent great bodily harm or death. If a friendly punch up turns into your opponent beating you to death responding with deadly force is justified at the moment it changes from a punch up to a deadly attack.

    By the way... what constitutes a serious attack varies from person to person. A punch to the chest for a young and fit man isn't as life threatening as a punch to the chest of an old fart with a bad heart and a pacemaker keeping him alive... (ummm that old fart would be... me) and that difference would make a huge difference in what response would be, not only wise and intelligent, but justified.

    In the real world it comes down to a simple question: "Will I end up going to the hospital or die right here?" Answering that question also answers the justification, or lack of justification, for a deadly response according to the law.

    In court it comes down to being able to show that had I not done what I did I would have gone to the hospital or died thereby showing justification for a deadly response according to the law.

    Allowing a fear of how things may play out in court to dictate how one responds to a for real threat of great bodily harm or death is.......... stupid because.......

    In order to go to court I first must survive to be able to BE in court. Hmmm... hard decision... go to court or do nothing because I'm afraid I'll end up in court and just let the dude kill me.... I respectfully submit that decision is a no brainer.

    Now.. to all who have persevered and read all this post... if there is any question in your mind about what the actual law is/says/how it applies please do not rely on what you read on this website alone... including the things I post. Do not rely upon what someone says... including what a police officer might tell you. It is, without a doubt!, in your best interest to actually search the applicable laws (available online) and spend the $100 or so for a chat with an attorney familiar with self defense laws to gain an accurate understanding of those laws. A few bucks spent now can save thousands of dollars and years of freedom later... and maybe your life.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

Posting Permissions

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