-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Force Continuum
- Thread starter cosermann
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
GuyRelford
Master
I think this entire post is extremely well thought-out and dead-on accurate - the best I've seen on this topic.
+1 ninja!!
Guy
Keyser Soze
Shooter
- Dec 29, 2010
- 678
- 16
I pay no attention to the force continuum. If you follow it exactly and your suspect is a true resister he will continue to one up you in force until your in a lethal force situation. Also different officers have different skills. What may work for one may not work for another.
I found some officers are talking people up when they should be talking people down. If someone is agitated screaming, yelling intimidating, them will probably make things worse. Some people do not care if you are an officer. They have an ego and if anyone tries to flex on them they will accept your challenge. I do whatever is necessary to immediately take control of the situation, and no more than that amount of force. Ive never tazed or sprayed anyone but I am a big fan of taser after none verbal compliance.
From my experience if you appear to be in excellent shape, uniform squared away, and talk softly people will comply. Like the big guy from the green mile. Dont want to hurt no body boss but he certainly is capable if he has to. Kinda off topic but I love talking about the force continuum.
I found some officers are talking people up when they should be talking people down. If someone is agitated screaming, yelling intimidating, them will probably make things worse. Some people do not care if you are an officer. They have an ego and if anyone tries to flex on them they will accept your challenge. I do whatever is necessary to immediately take control of the situation, and no more than that amount of force. Ive never tazed or sprayed anyone but I am a big fan of taser after none verbal compliance.
From my experience if you appear to be in excellent shape, uniform squared away, and talk softly people will comply. Like the big guy from the green mile. Dont want to hurt no body boss but he certainly is capable if he has to. Kinda off topic but I love talking about the force continuum.
Keyser Soze
Shooter
- Dec 29, 2010
- 678
- 16
Dang that guy took getting shot like a boss. He hardly made a sound.
I'm not sure it is possible to draw a direct comparison of "continuum of force" of a LEO and a civilian.
Look at the first few levels on the LEO chart: Refusing to respond, being a dead weight, pulling away, etc. These would only be a concern if you were trying to control/apprehend someone. To you or I walking down the street, if a gang banger "refuses to respond" to us, it means he is ignoring us. He can continue to do that and I will be happy. Likewise, if someone wants to be dead weight while I walk by, that is fine. He's probably a dead weight on society, so a few extra seconds of it won't hurt anyone. As far as "pulling away," that would only have any meaning if I was trying to attack him, not the other way around.
Consider when, as a civilian, you need to even think about these things: self defense. You aren't trying to control anyone, detain anyone, etc. If someone attacks you, will you have time to start at a lower level of lethality? If you pull a can of mace and it doesn't work for whatever reason, will you have time to escalate, or have you already used up your several available milliseconds? If the mace doesn't work, do you have time to draw your asp and bring it into play? And so forth. . .
As has been often discussed, an attacker can close and hurt you before you can bring a handgun into action if he is within 21 feet. If that is the case, how do you think it would be possible for bring out a variety of different weapons to see which one works?
Relatively Ninja
Sharpshooter
I wish it was that simple, but if you truly followed that principle you could go to jail for murder and/or have your pants sued off by the victims family. In the civilian world your inability to avoid a fight doesn't grant you the right to use deadly force. It's a whole heck of a lot trickier to defend yourself when you consider the legal aftermath.
"Just because someone attacks you doesn't mean they deserve to die. But you always deserve to live."
Sigh...
Reading Comprehension. You start at item one and work your way to the last item on the list and can re-start at item one again at anytime as needed.
It really is that simple. By all means do not trust me but go talk to SEVERAL LAWYERS and pay them for THEIR opinions of the Laws of the State of Indiana. I have and I do so every 4-5 Years to stay current within the Law...
I am not a trained Ninja or a UFC Cage Fighter. If I cannot Avoid the Confrontation or I cannot Remove Myself from the Situation and I feel I am in Danger of my Death or Severe Bodily Harm then you can be for sure it will warrant the Death of whoever has put theirselves in that situation...
Relatively Ninja
Sharpshooter
There it is! I didn't see that big red disclaimer about feeling you're in danger of death in your other post. I was trying to point out the fact that there may be situations where you AREN'T in fear of death or severe bodily harm and you would have to defend yourself without killing your assailant.
Have you looked at what constitutes "serious bodily injury" per IN law?
It's far more broad than many seem to think it might be.
That says that if you reasonably fear that you may suffer a broken bone or simply being knocked out then deadly force is legally justified.
You can die from a single well placed punch to the head.
You DO NOT have to take a beating before deadly force is legal!
There aren't many attackers who wear boxing gloves or follow any type of "fair fighting" rules.
AND you need to realize that once you voluntarily engage in "mutually agreed combat" then your legal self-defense options shrink considerably.
Are you serious?!
I really had to add that part to quanitfy the 3 little rules that I wrote in my first post?!
No none at all. The first two items have worked literally around the World in a LOT of Countries even with me being stone cold drunk. If you are to oblivious to what is going on around you that you can not see a Bad Situation beginning to develop and Avoid (or Remove yourself) moving farther into that Situation then possibly then you should not be carrying a Tool that has the Capacity to take a life.
I think everyone needs to think outside the box. Here is how i deescalate situations and to this day have never had to progress beyond step two.
Verbal threats i.e. "im gonna kick your ass" ---Remove pants.
Blunt objects i.e. baseball bat -------------------Remove all clothing/apply lotion.
I'm having a training seminar if anyone is interested.
Verbal threats i.e. "im gonna kick your ass" ---Remove pants.
Blunt objects i.e. baseball bat -------------------Remove all clothing/apply lotion.
I'm having a training seminar if anyone is interested.
I do not know which I consider more disturbing the fact that I could see someone doing this, or the fact that someone would teach this technique...
But can you argue its effectiveness?
Well yeah...
Why would you like to attend the First training session?!
LOL!!!I'll take his word for it.
Relatively Ninja
Sharpshooter
Um... Yes. I'm not saying your 3 rules are wrong, I'm saying you're missing one. Avoidance and removal are, IMO, the best ways to end a fight. But you can't always avoid a confrontation. What if the threat is a nuisance? Maybe your buddy's friend is a little too drunk and he keeps punching you on the arm saying "Whatchya gonna do about that? Huh?" Are you really going to shoot that guy?
Yes, I have read those laws. And while they are broad, I think it would be pretty difficult to uphold your use of deadly force in court if all the other guy did was try and get in a fight with you. Also, I'm pretty sure (I could be wrong) that the mutual combat law doesn't really apply to someone who engages in combat for self defense. It's more for two people who both want to fight each other instead of one person attacking another. Again, I could be wrong on that and it's definitely a fine line.
The problem with all self defense cases is that after you're done in criminal court you can still be sued by the victim (or their family) in civil court. Even if you aren't charged with a crime or are acquitted of all charges you can still lose a civil case and have to pay damages for the injuries you inflicted. For example: the police that were involved in the Rodney King beating were acquitted of all charges in criminal court, but they lost the shirts of their backs in civil court. And then the feds took them to court for civil liberties violations and they lost there too.
Technically, you could die from a one in a million hit to the head, but that is extremely rare. It's so unlikely that it wouldn't hold up in court. "I shot him because it looked like he might hit me and he could have killed me with the first punch."
I've had some martial arts training, so maybe it's just my background that makes it clear how much wiggle room there is between avoidance and lethal force.
