Tasers

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?

Click to expand...

Did you forget about this Hank? Please enlighten us.

Click to expand...

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?

Click to expand...

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?

Click to expand...

Is the person in your scenario visibly unarmed and is the basis for the fight of low importance ("petty" as I termed it)?

imported post

HankT wrote:

buster81 wrote:

HankT wrote:

Click to expand...

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?

Click to expand...

Did you forget about this Hank? Please enlighten us.

Click to expand...

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?

Click to expand...

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?

Click to expand...

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

Click to expand...

Is the person in your scenario visibly unarmed and is the basis for the fight of low importance ("petty" as I termed it)?

Click to expand...

Fixed it for you. Try answering both questions.

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

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?

Click to expand...

Did you forget about this Hank? Please enlighten us.

Click to expand...

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?

Click to expand...

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?

Click to expand...

Is the person in your scenario visibly unarmed and is the basis for the fight of low importance ("petty" as I termed it)?

Click to expand...

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.