Legally speaking, deadly force is any force that can cause death or serious bodily injury. Serious bodily injury includes permanent disfigurement, long-term damage to a part of the body (such as a broken bone), rape, and even kidnapping.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
One night George Zimmerman, the head of his Neighborhood Watch program, observed Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-old football player, walk aimlessly through his neighborhood in the rain. Martin fit the description of burglars that had recently plagued the neighborhood. Zimmerman phoned the police and reported the suspicious activity. Martin, noticing Zimmerman observing him, fled from sight around a corner. Zimmerman told the police dispatcher that Martin had run, and the dispatcher asked Zimmerman where Martin was going. Because Martin ran, Zimmerman followed him to try to regain sight of him, all while still on the phone with the dispatcher. When the dispatcher realized what Zimmerman was doing, he told Zimmerman that he didn\u2019t need him to do that. Zimmerman responded, \u201cOK,\u201d asked for police response, arranged for a meeting, and hung up. Moments later Martin emerged from the shadows, verbally challenged Zimmerman, knocked him to the ground with a single punch, mounted him, and viciously beat him. Martin smashed Zimmerman\u2019s head against the sidewalk in what was described by an eyewitness as an \u201cMMA-style pound-and-ground.\u201d When Zimmerman screamed for help, to no avail, Martin put his hands over Zimmerman\u2019s mouth and nose, cutting off his breathing. In the struggle Zimmerman\u2019s jacket fell open, revealing his licensed pistol. Martin\u2019s hands moved to the side of Zimmerman\u2019s body near his gun, and Martin told Zimmerman that he was going to die. Unable to escape, believing that Martin was trying to take his firearm and fearing unconsciousness and death, Zimmerman drew and fired a single, fatal shot into Martin\u2019s heart. If Zimmerman had shot Martin while they were upright and fighting with fists, he would have violated proportionality. But after Martin knocked him to the ground, straddled his body, and beat him to near unconsciousness, Martin\u2019s barehanded attack transformed into deadly force. Zimmerman\u2019s gun became proportionate to the deadly force against him and was therefore lawful. Despite his open-and-shut case, Zimmerman was enmeshed in a battle that played itself out as much in the limelight as in the courtroom. Prosecutors, politicians, media personalities, and lawyers behaved both unethically and illegally as they worked to condemn him for life to further their self-interests. Luckily, Zimmerman had world-class legal representation in the defense team of Mark O\u2019Mara and Don West, who executed a flawless defense. Zimmerman was also lucky to have had a fair jury that wanted true justice. They acquitted him after only a few hours of deliberations. Unfortunately, despite now being free, his life is forever changed and continues to be in danger of vigilante \u201cjustice.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Police are trained to respond to an altercation with a variety of tools and strategies that range from harmless to deadly. Together these tools and strategies form what is called the \u201ccontinuum of force.\u201d This continuum typically begins with physical presence, then verbal commands, and escalates all the way to lethal force. A police officer escalates or de-escalates along this continuum, as the situation requires. Private citizens should do the same thing.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Carrying a gun without also carrying something less forceful is a lot like having a jackhammer as your only tool.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
According to the Department of Justice, we are five times more likely to face a simple assault or battery (a non-deadly force threat) than we are an aggravated assault or battery (a deadly force threat). And this statistic is conservative. The number is probably far greater because many simple assaults are never reported to the police.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
While it is important to ensure your safety, and I wouldn\u2019t hesitate to continue shooting until my deadly force attacker was no longer an imminent deadly threat, the more bullet holes you put in your attacker the more likely it will be seen as a duration-of-force problem. No one looks at a body with 30 bullet holes or 45 knife slashes and says, \u201cClassic case of self-defense.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
What if during the non-deadly portion of the attack, you suffered an injury that prevented retreat? What would have been a safe avenue when you were still healthy is no longer safe now that you are injured. You are now under no duty to try to make the attempt because safe retreat is no longer possible.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
But what if you retreat as required and your attacker pursues you? Is it enough that you\u2019ve retreated once? Have you now \u201cchecked that box?\u201d Unfortunately, no. You must continue to fall back until it isn\u2019t safely possible to do so any longer\u2014to \u201cretreat to the wall.\u201d Only once your safe path out ends or becomes unsafe has your duty to retreat been satisfied.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Every state with a duty to retreat has at least one exception to that duty: You do not have to retreat when you are in your home. This principle is called the Castle Doctrine.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
In practical application, Avoidance refers to a legal duty to take advantage of a safe avenue of retreat before resorting to the use of force against an attacker.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
The criminal justice system, seeking to be practical, applies a two-part test to see if a defendant acted reasonably. The first test is called \u201cobjective reasonableness\u201d and the second, \u201csubjective reasonableness.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
I recommend you document your self-defense training. Underline or circle the passage on the Tueller drill in this book and put the date in the margin. Hold on to the dated receipt of your purchase. Now you possess solid documentation to prove you knew the Tueller Drill.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
When I took Massad Ayoob\u2019s Lethal Force Institute, Level I class about 20 years ago, all of us in the class took extensive notes. (That class is still taught today, as MAG-40.) Mas suggested that we make a copy of those notes, keep the copy in an accessible place as a reference, and place the originals in a sealed envelope, and mail them to ourselves, receipt required upon delivery. If necessary, that USPS-dated envelope can be unsealed in court later to prove what we had learned as of that date\u2014presumably a date earlier than the later use-of-force event.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Where objective reasonableness decides whether you did what Reasonable Ralph would have done, subjective reasonableness looks at whether you had a genuine, good faith belief that what you were doing was reasonable.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Please don\u2019t ever flee the scene, hide from the police, or destroy evidence. If you do, the judge may tell the jury to consider such conduct as evidence that you possessed a consciousness of guilt, and give the jury a consciousness of guilt jury instruction.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Reasonable mistakes do not doom your claim of self-defense. If you reasonably think your attacker\u2019s fake gun was real, you are allowed to treat it as if it were real. We are not required to make perfect decisions in self-defense, we are merely required to make reasonable decisions in self-defense.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
It should go without saying that something that increases your likelihood of jail and doesn\u2019t help your survival is a bad idea. For example: If you inscribe \u201cThug Killer\u201d on your pistol\u2019s slide, will that turn a clean self-defense shoot into a murder conviction? Maybe not. But could it turn a marginal self-defense shoot into manslaughter? Quite possibly.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
To quote the excellent Rory Miller from his book Facing Violence: \u201cIt is better to avoid than to run, better to run than to de-escalate, better to de-escalate than to fight, better to fight than to die.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWhen I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.\u201d<\/p>Corinthians 13:11, NKJV<\/em><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\nOf course, anyone with a car must, from time to time, go to a gas station. It\u2019s unavoidable. While you\u2019re there, however, be aware that you\u2019re at a watering hole. You have enough distractions just gassing up; don\u2019t add more by checking your smartphone for emails. Keep your eyes up and look around. Don\u2019t allow yourself to be surprised.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Where else are there environmental dangers? John Farnham\u2019s oft-repeated warning \u201cthe three don\u2019ts\u201d nicely summarizes how to avoid the vast majority of bad situations: Don\u2019t do stupid things. Don\u2019t go to stupid places. Don\u2019t hang out with stupid people.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Also, maintain your skills. If all you do is read this book once, then shelve it, and don\u2019t make any effort to keep the information fresh in your mind, then you won\u2019t be able to make effective use of this critical knowledge under stress when you most need it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
The key to minimizing your legal liability to indictment, prosecution, conviction, or lawsuit is to understand how your use-of-force will be judged.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
These highlights are from the Kindle version of The Law […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":15162,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"yoast_head":"\n
The Law of Self Defense Highlights<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n