Is using deadly force on an unarmed person EVER justified?

a reply to: TorqueyThePig


I firmly believe use of deadly force can be justified against an unarmed person. Thus far other posts throughout this thread have mentioned analysis of a given attacker's build in assessing the danger of an incoming threat. And while that's always a wise strategy, I have met men who are never "unarmed" even when not carrying a weapon of any kind. A fair fight does not exist when struggling for one's life. Size or build of an attacker means very little when he or she hooks a thumb in one's rib cage, nostril or other bit of cartilage and begins to tear, or decides to bite down on some part of one's anatomy and rip.

Never underestimate an unarmed attacker. On the other hand, some legitimate fear for one's life should be necessary (pertaining to anyone, the police included) before the application of deadly force. Unfortunately, the time it takes to make that decision could be just enough for an unarmed attacker to render irreparable physical damage. It is a very precarious line to walk between using deadly force to save life, and irresponsible misuse that takes it unnecessarily.

Or so it seems to me.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
Is using deadly force on an unarmed person EVER justified?

Yes...in two situations:

a) the person is much stronger than you and can easily beat you to a pulp

b) if the unarmed person was about to kill you and you had no other option but to defend yourself

Otherwise...in the case of a police officer...the answer is "it depends"

"Is using deadly force on an unarmed person EVER justified?"

Yes, it is justifiable. It boils down to situation and intent, its not always justifiable but it can be dependent on certain criteria.

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

YES! Although many say they don't believe in using deadly force against an unarmed person, they would most likely be the first to complain if they were being savagely beaten, a police officer arrived and tried to intervene using only physical force, only to be knocked out and the attacker resumed beating them. "Why didn't the police officer shoot him?" It's easy to have a point of view or opinion, as long as the situation doesn't involve you.

I worked over 20 years inside Texas prisons. There are PLENTY of folks who could and would kill another person with their bare hands. Correctional officers DO NOT have guns or batons on them in Texas prisons. Ad. Seg. officers carry batons regularly only because they have to protect the inmates they work with, not themselves. All guns are kept outside the fence. Now, if an inmate should touch that fence, game over. No warning shout or shot. Bang Bang, you're dead. Is that justified? Not only yes, but state law demands perimeter security officers use deadly force, or face some very serious consequences.

Police have a very tough job, as do many other professions. Using deadly force can ruin a persons life, but sometimes, people have to make decisions in a split second. They get to deal with the emotional issues later. Even for the private citizen, it can be a life changing event. It is necessary sometimes. Until people can experience someone else's job, don't second guess them. That's what courts are for.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: deadeyedick



You believe that you would be shot for verbally asasulting an officer?



Interesting.



If that was the case I would have shot thousands of people.

I have a way with words that can bring most people to the point of wanting to harm me. Perhaps you would not want to harm me the first time i disrespect you but i also have a strong will that can chip away at your mental well being one step at a time. Did you notice in my post i did not say it would be justified from verbal but it is a strong possibality.

British police can manage it so why cant American cops?

originally posted by: crazyewok
British police can manage it so why cant American cops?

Britain isn't America?

Sure. If the unarmed person is trying to attack the armed person, then yes, deadly force is permissible. An unarmed person can still kill you with their bare hands, especially if they are much larger and stronger than you. The most obvious example would be a female trying to defend herself from an attacking male. Males tend to be larger and much stronger than females, and more often than not, can easily overpower, injure, and kill them with their bare hands alone. To level the playing field, a female should be armed so she can neutralize an attacker quickly. A potential rape victim has every right to shoot the would-be rapist even if he is unarmed. This also applies to men, too.

However, I do not think this case applies to Ferguson. Cops, for starters, are different from your average citizen. They are supposed to be trained and equipped to apprehend suspects alive unless in a life or death situation. The more information that gets released, the more it makes me think this was not a life or death situation, and the kid should have been arrested. Alive.

originally posted by: crazyewok
British police can manage it so why cant American cops?

Because our police forces are staffed mainly by guys with low IQs and serious power issues. Seriously. People have been turned away from the police academy because they were too smart.

a reply to: retiredTxn

Great post and thank you for your service.

I have a high respect for CO's.

a reply to: crazyewok

American cops manage to do so too, a majority of the time. However on some occassions deadly force is justified and used.

en.wikipedia.org...

Browse through the list. There have been many British police officers assaulted to death during an encounter with an unarmed individual or even a group.

Would they have been justified to use deadly force in those situations?

a reply to: deadeyedick

Not quite sure I am following you.

That being said I would never punch someone over words let alone shot them.

a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Take your blanket assumptions to another thread.

There is no room for blantant police bashing here.

This thread is about the justification of using deadly force against an unarmed attacker.

Thanks for calling me low IQ and accusing me of having power issues. Unreal.

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Yes. Disproportionate size disadvantage against someone's potential great bodily harm, injury or death. Its sometimes referred to as "Disparity of Force."


Self-Defense Shooting and Disparate Force - USA Carry
www.usacarry.com/self-defense-shooting-disparate-force/‎CachedSimilar

"Apr 16, 2013 ... Self-Defense Shooting and Disparate Force It is a terrible thing when ... Ability =
Means– Aggressor has (or reasonably appears to have) weapon or power to ...
Disparity of Force is defined as a situation that any reasonable ..."

a reply to: OrphanApology
Hmmm...ok....so a cop can't defend themselves. Gotcha

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: crazyewok
British police can manage it so why cant American cops?

Britain isn't America?

Stupid reason.


You need to explain.

Im not denying a cop has the right to shot a armed suspect with a gun.


But a Unarmed American is no diffrent to a unarmed brit the situation is the same in that case.

Saying Britain isnt american is a cop out,

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: crazyewok

American cops manage to do so too, a majority of the time. However on some occassions deadly force is justified and used.

en.wikipedia.org...

Browse through the list. There have been many British police officers assaulted to death during an encounter with an unarmed individual or even a group.

Would they have been justified to use deadly force in those situations?

But police here just take that risk as part of the job. If your so concerned about your own arse dont be a policeman.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig

But to those who feel that there is never justification in shooting an unarmed person I leave you with this video and ask if you were in the same situation would you have used deadly force?

Respectively snipped by me.

Yes. Yes I do. It depends on the situation.

I call to mind Rudy Eugene AKA the Miami Cannibal AKA The Bath Salts Zombie - whose motive and pathopsychology is still unknown - who after being repeatedly told to desist from eating his victim's face - continued to do so, resulting in his shooting death.

Miami Cannibal Attack - Wiki

a reply to: crazyewok

So just because I signed up for a dangerous job means that I do not have a right to protect myself? Even while someone is bashing my head in with their fists?

That kind of makes me believe that you see police officers as beneath one who is not.

I view myself equal to everyone else and feel that if a person that is not an officer has the right to use deadly force against an unarmed attacker I do too.

So do you think I should be able to use deadly force against an unarmed attacker if I am off duty?

a reply to: auroraaus

That is another great example.

I am sure that the victim appreciated the officers actions in that situation.

Thank you.