Jbale22
Regular Member
Deadly force by a civilian is justified if a felony is being committed against you or another civilian. i.e. Assault, assault with a deadly weapon, murder man slaughter etc.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
CCDW......confused as hell now!!!!
- Thread starter self preservation
- Start date
langzaiguy
Regular Member
Here is one KRS pertaining to when you may use physical force and deadly force.
503.080 Protection of property.
(1) The use of physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable when the
defendant believes that such force is immediately necessary to prevent:
(a) The commission of criminal trespass, robbery, burglary, or other felony
involving the use of force, or under those circumstances permitted pursuant to
KRS 503.055, in a dwelling, building or upon real property in his possession
or in the possession of another person for whose protection he acts; or
(b) Theft, criminal mischief, or any trespassory taking of tangible, movable
property in his possession or in the possession of another person for whose
protection he acts.
(2) The use of deadly physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable
under subsection (1) only when the defendant believes that the person against whom
such force is used is:
(a) Attempting to dispossess him of his dwelling otherwise than under a claim of
right to its possession; or
(b) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary, robbery, or other felony
involving the use of force, or under those circumstances permitted pursuant to
KRS 503.055, of such dwelling; or
(c) Committing or attempting to commit arson of a dwelling or other building in
his possession.
(3) A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she
has a right to be.
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/503-00/080.pdf
503.080 Protection of property.
(1) The use of physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable when the
defendant believes that such force is immediately necessary to prevent:
(a) The commission of criminal trespass, robbery, burglary, or other felony
involving the use of force, or under those circumstances permitted pursuant to
KRS 503.055, in a dwelling, building or upon real property in his possession
or in the possession of another person for whose protection he acts; or
(b) Theft, criminal mischief, or any trespassory taking of tangible, movable
property in his possession or in the possession of another person for whose
protection he acts.
(2) The use of deadly physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable
under subsection (1) only when the defendant believes that the person against whom
such force is used is:
(a) Attempting to dispossess him of his dwelling otherwise than under a claim of
right to its possession; or
(b) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary, robbery, or other felony
involving the use of force, or under those circumstances permitted pursuant to
KRS 503.055, of such dwelling; or
(c) Committing or attempting to commit arson of a dwelling or other building in
his possession.
(3) A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she
has a right to be.
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/503-00/080.pdf
Last edited:
Jbale22
Regular Member
You are correct theft over $400 is a Class D felony, to explain my statement before a little more with the help of the KRS above, which can be defined as a "felony with force" so yes for petty theft or I guess non-violent theft you are not justified but robbery (theft by force) deadly force is justified.
self preservation
Regular Member
neuroblades, thanks for posting "3 things you must know" It is long but good reading. I guess after the class it just scared the hell out of me. Just like Saturday we had our annual parade in my town. As usual we had probably 1000+ folks that attended..And of course the "what if" poped in my head...What if in this crowd with hundreds of people, a person started shooting random??? I remember in class they said if you fire a shot you could be charged with wanton even if you dont hit anyone(innocent folks close to your line of fire that you COULD have or NEARLY hit). So if this happened I could be charged with 10, 100, 1000 cases of wanton endangerment if I use/attempt to use deady force!?!? So do I let this person kill 1, 10, 1000 or do I try to stop him before he can kill more and face possible criminal/civil charges? I know that no simple, dry cut, 100% without a doubt answer to this question is out there, but I guess I'm thinking more "legal minded" than I have in the past.
UnfetteredMight
Regular Member
As with many things in legalese, you must know the exact definitions of the words to understand the context.
Wanton means "of a cruel or violent action","deliberate and unprovoked". I'm not aware of any case in Kentucky where missed shots, that didn't hit anyone, where used to convict someone who was shooting in self defense. That's not to say that it hasn't happened, just that in my general law research, it hasnt come up.
I would find it implausible that you could convince a jury that missed shots were intended to harm anyone other than the perpetrator. Wanton endangerment is plainly about intent to cause harm with great indifference to life.
Now if you actually hit an innocent bystander? That's a whole new barrel of worms.
The key is practice with that sidearm until it's an extension of your arm, pray you never have to use it and pray harder that if you do, you never accidently shoot an innocent.
Personally the reality of hurting or killing an innocent would bother me more than a charge or conviction for doing it.
neuroblades
Regular Member
Maybe it's just me but in every place and situation I find myself I run different scenarios through my mind, a game of "What If's" if you will. I also read ALOT of different articles by different folks in the weapon's scene as well. I try to gather as many different POV's to help me learn as much as I possibly can about different aspects in the self defense mindset. One of these little nuggents of information dealt with a scenario that was mentioned here about what if you're in a crowd of people, like a parade setting and you encounter an "active shooter" situation, how would you try to engage. This situation happened to the writer of the article and taking a cue from what his CCDW instructor had mentiond to him in his concealed carry class, he found the best way to engage the shooter.
Being that the shooter was in a crowded area and there were innocents in close proximity to the shooter, the CC'er started to draw his weapon as he started to duck down as were the other innocents nearby. Once he was low to the ground he rapidly moved towards the active shooter and then delivered multi upward shots that would only hit the shooter and not hit the innocents nearby. This was a great piece of advice and helped to save many lives that day.
If you start noticing as you're out and about you'll see all kinds of possible good and bad situations, if you start running those through your head, you will learn how to solve a possible problem before it even occurs.
Granted those are under the best of situations, there can be a bad side as well. Let's say you're in a Wal Mart and someone starts opening fire, if you are nearby and deicde to try to engage and stop the shooter, you will no doubt have to draw your weapon at some point. Once you draw your weapon, IF an off duty officer is also in that same store and responds to engage the same shooter and gets there after you, he will see you, with weapon drawn and very possibly mistake you for the active shooter and you could possibly get killed in the process. Who really knows what could happen and rest assured, they do run the gambit!
Being that the shooter was in a crowded area and there were innocents in close proximity to the shooter, the CC'er started to draw his weapon as he started to duck down as were the other innocents nearby. Once he was low to the ground he rapidly moved towards the active shooter and then delivered multi upward shots that would only hit the shooter and not hit the innocents nearby. This was a great piece of advice and helped to save many lives that day.
If you start noticing as you're out and about you'll see all kinds of possible good and bad situations, if you start running those through your head, you will learn how to solve a possible problem before it even occurs.
Granted those are under the best of situations, there can be a bad side as well. Let's say you're in a Wal Mart and someone starts opening fire, if you are nearby and deicde to try to engage and stop the shooter, you will no doubt have to draw your weapon at some point. Once you draw your weapon, IF an off duty officer is also in that same store and responds to engage the same shooter and gets there after you, he will see you, with weapon drawn and very possibly mistake you for the active shooter and you could possibly get killed in the process. Who really knows what could happen and rest assured, they do run the gambit!
Last edited: