Less or Non-Lethal SD

[molonlabetn]

I'm sure there are many folks on here who carry, and/or are very familiar with the different types of self-defense tools which are more appropriate for encounters in which deadly-force is not justified or possible...

What advice do you have in choosing?

I currently don't carry any intermediate SD tools other than my ability to reason, my fists, and a decent pocket-knife (which wouldn't be my first resort unless it's all I had)... This is a question I've long pondered.

OC/Pepper-spray

Baton/ASP

Taser

Stun-Gun

Other???

[Guest GlocKingTN]

IMHO, OC gas is great, unless you cant aim very good, or the wind is blowing in the wrong direction. Then it may do more harm than good. Because I have had a 3 second burst, in the face, and it hurts like HELL! You cant see, or taste, or smell, or swallow, or get enough water. And thats for the first 2 hours after the contact.

I dont think I would care for the baton or stun gun. I may would consider the Taser though.

[creeky]

I try to disarm them with my charm.

(If that fails a quick kick to the groin.)

[Guest jcoyle6]

In places where I can go neither a knife or gun I bring my Surefire E2d. It can go anywhere.

I was under the impression that private citizens could carry a collapsable baton without the need for "cerrtification"

It was my understanding that the law only applied to security/ guards and not the general public. Can anyone find TCA which deals with this issue?

[molonlabetn]

My thoughts on this are:

OC/Pepper spray - short range, and the face might be difficult to hit... spraying their body/clothes will have little effect. The fog types can be counterproductive, as well.

Taser - one shot... not much use in the case of multiple attackers or ineffective hit.

Stun-gun - Getting warmer... gotta be close though, I don't like that idea... If I gotta be close, I am positive that my fist is going to hit harder.

Baton - Would probably be my first (uneducated) choice... the need for certification is a question in my mind, as well.

Honestly... If I were to buy something right now, it would be a stun-baton, a combination of the 2 which seem to be both effective and quickly repeatable.

[DaveTN]

I have not used a taser. I have used a baton or Mag-Lite on many occasions, no matter how big or doped up they were they dropped like rocks.

I have used most forms of mace and gas. It depends on the person; I have had guys fall down and cry and I have had times where it had absolutely no effect. It’s for dogs, not people.

If you are not justified in using deadly force and you can’t talk your way out of it; either use your hands or run.

From everything I have seen the taser seems to be the most effective. But seeing how people are dropping dead I doubt it will be an option much longer. (if it even is now for a civilian)

[Guest GlocKingTN]

You can buy Tasers at some gun shops. They had one where I bought my G17. I believe it was 350,000 volts, but cant remember the price.

[Schadenfreude]

I think this is the part of the code that applies to non security personel

I have the certificate, I got mine at TAC2 if I remember correctly it cost around $20 & took 2 or 3 hours it basically was along the same lines of a carry permit class covered what strikes are considered lethal vs non lethal with some class time & then some time wailing on your training partner with a training baton while heavily padded. it was great for stress relief.

T.C.A. 39-17-1308.9

(9) By any person possessing a club or baton who holds a certificate that the person has had training in the use of a club or baton for self-defense that is valid and issued by a certified person authorized to give training in the use of clubs or batons, and is not prohibited from purchasing a firearm under any local, state or federal laws; or

[The Rabbi]

I cannot think of a situation where someone would not be justified in using deadly force but would be justified using a Taser or OC spray.

[molonlabetn]

I cannot think of a situation where someone would not be justified in using deadly force but would be justified using a Taser or OC spray.

I guess I'm thinking more of a situation where I am in a location where I cannot carry a firearm, if I am in a very crowded area, or otherwise do not have a safe back-stop.

I could also see the benefit in having the option in the event of some drunk trying to pick a fight, and being able to stop him without getting into a brawl or having to potentially kill him.

[The Rabbi]

I guess I'm thinking more of a situation where I am in a location where I cannot carry a firearm, if I am in a very crowded area, or otherwise do not have a safe back-stop.

I could also see the benefit in having the option in the event of some drunk trying to pick a fight, and being able to stop him without getting into a brawl or having to potentially kill him.

I could see a situation where you couldn't carry. I might opt for a walking stick.

As for the drunk, I don't hang around generally where drunks are. If I can get away from one, I'll do that. If I have to run, I'll do that too. But if I can't do those things he'd better be prepared for a very long nap. The issue would be that if you merely tased him the police would be getting a call "officer, I just asked this guy for a cigarette and he tased me for no reason at all."

[Guest Kingfish]

I think a baton is a great idea. I am not able to run from anybody anymore. If I must stand my ground and fists are not enough, and I do not have or cannot use my gun (crowd, backstop, etc.) then a baton I think would be the best choice for me.

[Guest EasilyObsessed]

Looking forward to reading more opinions on this. I just started working at Vandy so I am unable to carry. That, combined with a 10+ minute walk to the med center has made me start looking into some other form of self-defense.

[fury2neon]

I carry a fire extinguisher in the car, a good blast of that to the face can incapacitate someone and the tank makes a nice club. But then its not something to carry into a restaurant or sporting event. But then I live over a restaurant and I don't go to sporting events much. It can keep someone from reaching into the car at an intersection though.

[DaveTN]

I cannot think of a situation where someone would not be justified in using deadly force but would be justified using a Taser or OC spray.

I can think of a bunch of them. But first let me ask this question …… Can you kill someone in Tennessee if you think you are about to get your azz beat? You can’t in the states I’m familiar with.

[The Rabbi]

I can think of a bunch of them. But first let me ask this question …… Can you kill someone in Tennessee if you think you are about to get your azz beat? You can’t in the states I’m familiar with.

Uh, boy.

TN law (and common law as well) states that one can use deadly force to counter a threat of death or serious bodily harm.

Now I ask, can beating someone with fists result in death or serious bodily harm? Seems to me the answer is yes. It seemed that way to the fellow in the movie presentation when I took the carry permit class. And from comments by people who have been on the receiving end, it sure seems like it too.

So the answer would appear to be yes. I know in some states there is some weird "equivalence" doctrine whereby if he "only" has a knife I cannot use a gun against him. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me (knives are far more lethal at contact range than guns) and I guess it didnt to the lawmakers here either.

[DaveTN]

Well anyway…. What I was getting at in Illinois if you believe an unarmed person is going to commit a battery on you; you can use whatever force a “reasonable person†(that means a jury) would feel is necessary. You could punch them, hit them with a baton, zap em’ with a taser; and you would be okay. But if you shot them you would go to prison. (Maybe not if you are a liberal democrat from Chicago; but it still would not be good.)

Sorry I’m using Illinois as an example, but I’m crystal clear on the deadly force laws in Illinois; I’m still learning Tennessee’s.

Oh… and BTW… even in Illinois if someone threatens you with a knife; go ahead and drop them they are bought and paid for.

[molonlabetn]

I simply see non/less-lethal as a tool to avoid escalation of an unexpected, undesirable situation... for instance, juveniles who have decided to 'rough' you up... it wouldn't turn out well to shoot them as the first option, without evidence of some disparity of force.

The 'what-if' possibilities are endless for advantages/disadvantaged to using a non/less-lethal weapon... just like there are for using a deadly-weapon. The potential need for either is slim, but I'd rather have the best option available in that unlikely event.

[Guest ETS_Inc]

Speaking as a Carry Permit Instructor, I'd caution that you be pretty damn sure you can articulate just why you felt your life was in danger, or why you were in fear of serious bodily harm. The problem with "serious bodily harm" is that it isn't clearly defined. Now, if someone comes at you with a gun or knife, that's obviously a lethal threat. But, if someone is only armed with their bare hands, that's a tough call.

Maybe they appear to be a doped-up bodybuilder, compared to your wheelchair-ridden person. There's obviously a huge disparity of force. Or, maybe they're a 6'5", 350# male, attacking a 4'11", 100# woman. Or, they grab for your throat and begin to squeeze. Again, their intentions are fairly obvious.

But, what if they are comparable size to you, and they simply threaten to bloody your nose, or blacken your eyes? In a very public setting, with a multitude of witnesses? Do you really think lethal force is justified? If so, you're sadly mistaken, and might consider retaining an attorney.

There are reasons police officers carry batons, chemical sprays, and tasers. They, like their guns, are simply tools. They are stops along the Force Continuim. (The Force Continuim is a measure of escalation of force, beginning with the spoken word, going to yelling, open hand strikes, closed fist strikes, spray/chemical weapons, impact weapons, tasers, and finally, lethal force.) Not all situations can be resolved by asking your attacker to stop, and conversely, not all situations need to be settled with lethal force.

There's an old saying that goes: "If the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, all of your problems begin to look like nails." It's true. It's beneficial to have more than one tool available to you, whether you're building a house, or protecting yourself.

Now, it's time for a short story:

About 3-4 weeks ago, I was out with a friend, having a few beers. We were laughing, smiling, and generally enjoying ourselves. There is a homeless person who frequents the Murfreesboro public square. This gentleman is known to harass people and just generally be a nuisance. It's pretty clear that he hasn't been on his meds for a long time. Well, this homeless guy is in the bar, sipping on a free water, and starts verbally accosting my friend and I, asking if we're laughing at him. We ignore him, and go back to our beers. During the course of the evening, he keeps taunting us, asking us to go outside. After awhile, he wasn't paying attention, so we step out, en route to a different bar. That place was dead, so we elected to return to the first place. On the way back, I stopped at my car, and placed my ASP baton in my front pocket, in case it was needed.

We return to the bar, and go back to enjoying ourselves. Shortly thereafter, I had to step outside to answer my phone (it was karaoke night, and the music was too loud to hear). As I stepped outside, I noticed the homeless guy, about 15 feet away. While I was on the phone, he kept running his mouth, which I ignored. (Oh, I forgot to mention that the guy had a folding knife in his right front pocket, a leatherman on his right hip, and a fixed, 2-2 1/2" blade in a sheath, on his belt, stuck into his left, front pocket.) After I got off the phone, and started to head back into the bar, he came closer to me, in an aggressive fashion. There were about 6-8 witnesses across the street, by the way. I ordered him to stay back, and not come any closer, which he ignored.

Considering that he was acting aggressively, was obviously armed with multiple edged weapons, and was well within 21 feet, I knew that the situation was about to go from bad to worse, and decided to defend myself in an appropriate manner. I removed the baton from my pocket, extended it, brought it up to my shoulder in the correct position for a swinging blow, and again ordered him to step back. All the while, I was yelling "Stop. Don't come any closer. I am afraid of you.", making sure the people across the street heard it. He then pulled two knives out and crouched down a bit, taking up a very aggressive stance. I began to retreat, knowing that a baton versus two knives are not the best odds. I'd most likely stop him, but not before being sliced for my efforts, and that was definitely not high on my list of priorities.

I retreated across the street, making sure the witnesses heard me telling him to stop, because I was afraid for my life. He elected not to pursue, so I stood my ground, waiting for my friend. That's when the homeless guy went to his bike and unwrapped a large chain, with an equally large lock attached to one end, and began swining it. Well, being smarter than I am tough, I retreated further down the street, until he walked in the opposite direction. I then returned to get my friend, so we could leave. That's when the witnesses told me that the guy had dropped his chain before walking away. So, I ran across the street and took possession of it (the homeless guy was at least 30-40 feet away). When he saw that I had his chain, he decided to come back, yelling that I was stealing his property.

I ran around the corner to my car, opened the trunk, and threw the chain inside. Just then, a police officer drove by on routine patrol, and my friend flagged him down. I made a report, not leaving out any details, even the fact that I pulled my baton before the homeless guy had actually pulled a knife. The officer who took the report told me that they had actually discussed this particular homeless guy during roll call, and they weren't surprised to hear what he had done. The evening ended with the homeless guy in jail on aggravated assault charge, and me at home, still in possession of my baton.

Had I been armed, would I have been justified in using lethal force? Certainly. He was acting aggressively, which fulfilled the need for intent. He was in possession of at least 3 knives, fulfilling the requirement for capability. And, he was well within 21 feet of me, fulfilling the need for opportunity. If I had used lethal force, I have no doubt that it would have been ruled a justifiable shooting. (The fact that I had 3-4 beers in my notwithstanding. I was far from inebriated.) However, I didn't have a lethal weapon on me, and the baton was able to keep my attacker at bay long enough for me to beat a retreat until he decided to venture off elsewhere.

[DaveTN]

The issue would be that if you merely tased him the police would be getting a call "officer, I just asked this guy for a cigarette and he tased me for no reason at all."

Let me give you all this piece of advice from a former cop. If you ever have a run in with someone, have to threaten force… or whatever. DO NOT JUST LEAVE.

Be the first caller… be the “complainantâ€. If safe to do so wait for the Officers to arrive, if it isn’t safe let them know where you are.

If you leave there is only one side to the story… theirs.

I can’t tell you how many times Officers have had to put out a pick-up on someone because the Officer did not get to talk to them. A couple of days later you are stopped, arrested by an Officer that doesn’t know anything about the case, your vehicle is towed and you are jailed.

[Guest Len]

Interesting conversation here. Does anyone know a good place to get trained to use a baton and where then to purchase one? Recommendations?

Also, I have heard their is training in using OC spray available, but have never seen such. Anyone know anything about this?

[The Rabbi]

Speaking as a Carry Permit Instructor, I'd caution that you be pretty damn sure you can articulate just why you felt your life was in danger, or why you were in fear of serious bodily harm. The problem with "serious bodily harm" is that it isn't clearly defined. Now, if someone comes at you with a gun or knife, that's obviously a lethal threat. But, if someone is only armed with their bare hands, that's a tough call.

Maybe they appear to be a doped-up bodybuilder, compared to your wheelchair-ridden person. There's obviously a huge disparity of force. Or, maybe they're a 6'5", 350# male, attacking a 4'11", 100# woman. Or, they grab for your throat and begin to squeeze. Again, their intentions are fairly obvious.

But, what if they are comparable size to you, and they simply threaten to bloody your nose, or blacken your eyes? In a very public setting, with a multitude of witnesses? Do you really think lethal force is justified? If so, you're sadly mistaken, and might consider retaining an attorney.

There are reasons police officers carry batons, chemical sprays, and tasers. They, like their guns, are simply tools. They are stops along the Force Continuim. (The Force Continuim is a measure of escalation of force, beginning with the spoken word, going to yelling, open hand strikes, closed fist strikes, spray/chemical weapons, impact weapons, tasers, and finally, lethal force.) Not all situations can be resolved by asking your attacker to stop, and conversely, not all situations need to be settled with lethal force.

There's an old saying that goes: "If the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, all of your problems begin to look like nails." It's true. It's beneficial to have more than one tool available to you, whether you're building a house, or protecting yourself.

Now, it's time for a short story:

About 3-4 weeks ago, I was out with a friend, having a few beers. We were laughing, smiling, and generally enjoying ourselves. There is a homeless person who frequents the Murfreesboro public square. This gentleman is known to harass people and just generally be a nuisance. It's pretty clear that he hasn't been on his meds for a long time. Well, this homeless guy is in the bar, sipping on a free water, and starts verbally accosting my friend and I, asking if we're laughing at him. We ignore him, and go back to our beers. During the course of the evening, he keeps taunting us, asking us to go outside. After awhile, he wasn't paying attention, so we step out, en route to a different bar. That place was dead, so we elected to return to the first place. On the way back, I stopped at my car, and placed my ASP baton in my front pocket, in case it was needed.

We return to the bar, and go back to enjoying ourselves. Shortly thereafter, I had to step outside to answer my phone (it was karaoke night, and the music was too loud to hear). As I stepped outside, I noticed the homeless guy, about 15 feet away. While I was on the phone, he kept running his mouth, which I ignored. (Oh, I forgot to mention that the guy had a folding knife in his right front pocket, a leatherman on his right hip, and a fixed, 2-2 1/2" blade in a sheath, on his belt, stuck into his left, front pocket.) After I got off the phone, and started to head back into the bar, he came closer to me, in an aggressive fashion. There were about 6-8 witnesses across the street, by the way. I ordered him to stay back, and not come any closer, which he ignored.

Considering that he was acting aggressively, was obviously armed with multiple edged weapons, and was well within 21 feet, I knew that the situation was about to go from bad to worse, and decided to defend myself in an appropriate manner. I removed the baton from my pocket, extended it, brought it up to my shoulder in the correct position for a swinging blow, and again ordered him to step back. All the while, I was yelling "Stop. Don't come any closer. I am afraid of you.", making sure the people across the street heard it. He then pulled two knives out and crouched down a bit, taking up a very aggressive stance. I began to retreat, knowing that a baton versus two knives are not the best odds. I'd most likely stop him, but not before being sliced for my efforts, and that was definitely not high on my list of priorities.

I retreated across the street, making sure the witnesses heard me telling him to stop, because I was afraid for my life. He elected not to pursue, so I stood my ground, waiting for my friend. That's when the homeless guy went to his bike and unwrapped a large chain, with an equally large lock attached to one end, and began swining it. Well, being smarter than I am tough, I retreated further down the street, until he walked in the opposite direction. I then returned to get my friend, so we could leave. That's when the witnesses told me that the guy had dropped his chain before walking away. So, I ran across the street and took possession of it (the homeless guy was at least 30-40 feet away). When he saw that I had his chain, he decided to come back, yelling that I was stealing his property.

I ran around the corner to my car, opened the trunk, and threw the chain inside. Just then, a police officer drove by on routine patrol, and my friend flagged him down. I made a report, not leaving out any details, even the fact that I pulled my baton before the homeless guy had actually pulled a knife. The officer who took the report told me that they had actually discussed this particular homeless guy during roll call, and they weren't surprised to hear what he had done. The evening ended with the homeless guy in jail on aggravated assault charge, and me at home, still in possession of my baton.

Had I been armed, would I have been justified in using lethal force? Certainly. He was acting aggressively, which fulfilled the need for intent. He was in possession of at least 3 knives, fulfilling the requirement for capability. And, he was well within 21 feet of me, fulfilling the need for opportunity. If I had used lethal force, I have no doubt that it would have been ruled a justifiable shooting. (The fact that I had 3-4 beers in my notwithstanding. I was far from inebriated.) However, I didn't have a lethal weapon on me, and the baton was able to keep my attacker at bay long enough for me to beat a retreat until he decided to venture off elsewhere.

Nice story. Too bad you didn't dust the guy, who doubtless went on and threatened and probably injured someone less capable.

Obviously circumstances will dictate reaction and we can play this game all night. But if you look like a victim ("I was just minding my own business") and can articulate a pretty reasonable threat ("and he thought I looked at him wrong and started after me with his fists clenched and ignored my command to stop") then I doubt anyone is really going to try to put you in jail. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor to prove wrong-doing, not the victim to justify himself.

As for "force continuum" it reinforces my contention that police officers shouldn't train private citizens. Force continuum is for LEs who are under strict scrutiny for their actions and must justify them to superiors, investigators, and possibly juries. It is not for private citizens who enjoy the "mantle of innocence." If someone wants to carry this stuff, OK. But as I said at the outset, if it warrants using a taser then it warrants using bullets. And I could easily see a prosecutor setting someone up by asking, if you were so scared why didn't you shoot him? And if the answer is that you weren't really that scared, well that looks pretty bad.

[Guest sermon8r]

Instead of 45ACP

LOL

[DaveTN]

As for "force continuum" it reinforces my contention that police officers shouldn't train private citizens.

Anyone that is qualified should be able to train citizens in firearms training. Only lawyers, preferably someone from the States Attorney’s office in the county you live in should be able you teach the laws.

Look at all the signatures in the gun forums. It sometimes seems that half of them are some kind of certified firearms instructors, but when you ask a legal question they are either clueless or give you their interpretation. Do you really want to risk your very freedom on the advice of someone who is an IT guy during the day and plays a firearms instructor at night?

Force continuum is for LEs who are under strict scrutiny for their actions and must justify them to superiors, investigators, and possibly juries. It is not for private citizens who enjoy the "mantle of innocence."

I hope no one here ever has to find out just how wrong that statement is.

If someone wants to carry this stuff, OK. But as I said at the outset, if it warrants using a taser then it warrants using bullets. And I could easily see a prosecutor setting someone up by asking, if you were so scared why didn't you shoot him? And if the answer is that you weren't really that scared, well that looks pretty bad.

Again… I would have to see that simply being scared justifies the use of deadly force in Tennessee.

[molonlabetn]

A threat of harm is not absolute... meaning, it is not black vs. white or non-threat vs. deadly-threat. There is a huge difference between a testosterone-laden idiot who wants to knock you down or punch you for whatever reason, and an ill-intentioned mugger/rapist/murderer/crazy-homeless who is desperate or will delight in your permanent suffering. One requires potentially lethal-force, the other is simply someone looking for a fight (unless there is an articulable disparity of force, causing the result of such an encounter to be more severe than a black-eye and wounded ego).

Would I shoot somebody who wanted to push me around for 'eyeing his girl' or something? No... but if I couldn't get away, I'd like to be able to use a more legitimate method of halting his aggression than participating in a brawl.

If a weapon is present, yeah, there will be lead flying... but when confronting someone who wants to assert their ego (or insanity), to intimidate you or rough you up, it is not likely that drawing a handgun would be justified. If I draw, I'm drawing to fire, not to one-up an aggressor who could easily call my bluff and continue... Then what? I shoot somebody for approaching me simply because I was afraid? That wouldn't end well for me.

This is one issue in which I completely agree with Dave. Defensive force does not start at the deadly level.