Deadly force justified?


knd578

New member
First off, im new here and from NC and so glad i found this forum. I am new to CCW and awaiting my permit.

So for the most part i know what justifies the use of deadly force, however, i am still new and learning so go easy on me:smile: One particular scenario that im not quite sure on and want some input.

Lets say i am robbed in daylight (person approaches me and demands i give over money) and i see no weapon on the person and they are just making verbal demands. I would think this is not reason for deadly force, however, what if they threatened to kill me (keeping in mind i have not seen a weapon) , had their hands in their pockets or better yet, its night and i cant see where their hands are or if they even have a weapon? This is where im confused and hope i can get a little clarification or any other variations in this scenario that would or would not constitute deadly force. Thanks!!
 

Wild Dog

Banned
In the scenario that you described in which no weapon is presented, then I would use my superior hand to hand skills to disable my attackers. Not to toot my own horn, but I'm at the top of a foodchain, while a gun makes things easier I'm just as deadly with my bare hands.
 

bofh

Banned
Instead of coming up with hypothetical scenarios, learn the legal concepts behind the lawful use of deadly force in your state. Take an actual defensive handgun training class that contains such information and the proper training on how to deal with self defense situations. See NCGS § 14-51, such as:

§ 14-51.3. Use of force in defense of person; relief from criminal or civil liability.

(a) A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that the conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat in any place he or she has the lawful right to be if either of the following applies:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another.
(2) Under the circumstances permitted pursuant to G.S. 14-51.2.

(b) A person who uses force as permitted by this section is justified in using such force and is immune from civil or criminal liability for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman who was lawfully acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer or bail bondsman identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman in the lawful performance of his or her official duties. (2011-268, s. 1.)
Are you in a reasonable fear of imminent death or imminent great bodily harm? It will depend on the actual situation. There are no cookie-cutter answers to this.
 

XD40scinNC

New member
If you have been threatened, are in fear for your life and you cannot determine the assailant is not armed or a threat (hands in pockets, where he could have a knife, brass knuckles, or a gun).
 

bofh

Banned
what if they threatened to kill me
This
The problem with hypothetical scenarios that focus on only a few aspects is that they are not representative of real scenarios. A purely verbal lethal threat (without a weapon) may or may not justify self defense with lethal force. It depends on the circumstances that the OP didn't mention.

A few sources for the OP:

Bruce Eimer | Judicious Use of Deadly Force
Massad Ayoob | Judicious Use Of Deadly Force
 

Blueshell

Banned
First off, im new here and from NC and so glad i found this forum. I am new to CCW and awaiting my permit.

So for the most part i know what justifies the use of deadly force, however, i am still new and learning so go easy on me[emoji2] One particular scenario that im not quite sure on and want some input.

Lets say i am robbed in daylight (person approaches me and demands i give over money) and i see no weapon on the person and they are just making verbal demands. I would think this is not reason for deadly force, however, what if they threatened to kill me (keeping in mind i have not seen a weapon) , had their hands in their pockets or better yet, its night and i cant see where their hands are or if they even have a weapon? This is where im confused and hope i can get a little clarification or any other variations in this scenario that would or would not constitute deadly force. Thanks!!
Deadly force encounters are rarly clear-cut. There is no way anyone can say "yes it's always ok to shoot in this situation" or "no you should never shoot in this situation". It's all going to depend on the fact-dependant situation, the DA's political aditude towards guns in your state, and what kind of lawyer you can afford.
 

Waffles

New member
Or ice tea & Skiddles ;)
Absent of any other signs of weapons, other folks with the would be robber, I'd cut and run. Just saying I'm going to rob you is insufficient to shot the bum. Just turn and run. Now if he comes after you, another story.
 

Blueshell

Banned
Absent of any other signs of weapons, other folks with the would be robber, I'd cut and run. Just saying I'm going to rob you is insufficient to shot the bum. Just turn and run. Now if he comes after you, another story.
I have a medical problem that keeps me from running, at least very fast for very far. Sure under adrenaline anyone can be superman for a moment, but I'll be in ER soon after.
 

sandetl

New member
If you can't fight and you can't run, then possibly self defense class would also be out but maybe not, sounds like you need pepper spray and a whistle.
 

Blueshell

Banned
If you can't fight and you can't run, then possibly self defense class would also be out but maybe not, sounds like you need pepper spray and a whistle.
Did you seriously just suggest a whistle?

A ******* whistle?

Dear lord, forget I said anything. I'm out.
 

sandetl

New member
Sorry, I didn't not mean anything demeaning towards you. Not knowing your physical limitations, and provided that deadly force isn't justified as many many times it is not going to be, I was just offering a backup that would allow you a way out and something that would either make them run off or get someone else's attention to assist you or at least call the police if needed.
 
B

Bikenut

Guest
Sorry, I didn't not mean anything demeaning towards you. Not knowing your physical limitations, and provided that deadly force isn't justified as many many times it is not going to be, I was just offering a backup that would allow you a way out and something that would either make them run off or get someone else's attention to assist you or at least call the police if needed.
There is a thing called disparity of force. Disparity of force means one side has more force available to use against the other side so 2, 3, 4, more, against one is a disparity of force. But there is more... 1 young guy against one old fart is also a disparity of force. Even a healthy old man against a sickly young woman can be a disparity of force.

There is a lie from anti gunners called the unarmed man. No one is ever unarmed. Everyone was born with the weapons of fists, feet, elbows, and teeth (even though mine spend the night in a glass of water), that are just as deadly as guns, knives, ball bats, and tire irons. And just one strong young man intent on doing great harm armed with only his fists/feet/elbows/teeth represents a deadly disparity of force to an infirm old man/woman.

I'm an old fart with a bad heart (one punch to the chest and I'm dead), along with COPD (pepper spray has the potential to get on me too leaving me gasping with no breath left for a whistle), and two replaced knees. I can't run, I can't fight, and just 1 young guy armed only with his fists and feet definitely has me at a disadvantage because he represents the ability to exert more force attacking me than I can defending from him. The only thing that cancels out that disparity of force is..... my gun.
 

XD40scinNC

New member
Absent of any other signs of weapons, other folks with the would be robber, I'd cut and run. Just saying I'm going to rob you is insufficient to shot the bum. Just turn and run. Now if he comes after you, another story.
That's good if you can, many of us are beyond those days. The majority of the people I see at the range, and interested in buying a gun for defense are older and doing so as they know they can't run or fight a younger stronger person.
 

XD40scinNC

New member
If you can't fight and you can't run, then possibly self defense class would also be out but maybe not, sounds like you need pepper spray and a whistle.

I can't fight and I can't outrun a younger man, but the last ******* thing on my list for self-defense is pepper spray and a whistle.

Besides in NC, my CHP (concealed handgun permit) does not give me the right to carry pepper spray concealed.
 

sandetl

New member
I can't fight and I can't outrun a younger man, but the last ******* thing on my list for self-defense is pepper spray and a whistle.

Besides in NC, my CHP (concealed handgun permit) does not give me the right to carry pepper spray concealed.
A whistle wouldn't be on my list either but sometimes your gonna have to give them your lunch money and hope they leave...sometimes. If you insist on using deadly force, your probably going to have a take a little bit of a beating to justify deadly force.

It floors me that pepper spray is regulated anywhere. When my daughters got the keys to their car/truck at 16 years old, I put pepper spray on their key chains before they ever drove off the first time by themselves.
 

sandetl

New member
The majority of the people I see at the range, and interested in buying a gun for defense are older and doing so as they know they can't run or fight a younger stronger person.
Problem is that you could pull your gun in this case because your older and hope they retreat but if they don't and they have no weapons, chances are deadly force is still not yet likely to be justified. One could argue that now you have your gun out, you are afraid they are going to take it from you and use it on you and maybe depending on your area, your condition, and thought processes there, it could work as a defense.

It's never cut and dry. Thats why it's so hard to discuss scenarios, too many variables, plus region of the country is going to play maybe even the biggest role on whether you were justified or not.
 

sandetl

New member
I will give you the craziest example of using deadly force and being acquitted and this IS a TRUE story. First let me say, I would never recommend doing this and the likihood of another being acquitted for this, well you would have a better chance of winning the lottery.

Old man gets his mailbox bashed all the time. He lives on a back dirt road and local teens like to drink on weekends and take a baseball bat to mailboxes from the back of pickup trucks for fun. So finally after complaining to the local law enforcement and to the post office he decides to set on his porch with his gun handy. He says his intent was to scare them so they would stop in court. Now the kids come by, hit his mailbox and he shoots, hits, and kills one of the boys in the back of the truck. He was acquitted.

Jury mostly live in the country also and it's not uncommon for anyone in that area to have to replace their mailbox more than one or twice for the same reason. This is a very real community. They are going to think differently in this region about this problem than jurors from somewhere else. Luck of the draw sometimes.
 
B

Bikenut

Guest
Problem is that you could pull your gun in this case because your older and hope they retreat but if they don't and they have no weapons, chances are deadly force is still not yet likely to be justified. One could argue that now you have your gun out, you are afraid they are going to take it from you and use it on you and maybe depending on your area, your condition, and thought processes there, it could work as a defense.

It's never cut and dry. Thats why it's so hard to discuss scenarios, too many variables, plus region of the country is going to play maybe even the biggest role on whether you were justified or not.
Incorrect... one does not "pull your gun" because of age nor does one "pull your gun" hoping the assailant will retreat... the gun is only brought out when there is an imminent threat of death or grave bodily harm regardless of how old you are... or aren't.

If that imminent threat isn't there then there is no reason to "pull your gun".... regardless of age.

And I will repeat what I said in an earlier post... there is no such thing as an unarmed man/woman because humans are born with the weapons of fists, feet, elbows, knees, and even teeth that are just as deadly as guns, knives, tire irons, ball bats, cars, and rocks.
 

New Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
48,996
Messages
621,084
Members
74,044
Latest member
faheem416
Top