Knives in self defense???

[mk.ultra]

I've always wondered about this...when does it become legal to use a knife in self defense? Does the perpetrator have to physically attack you with a lethal weapon first? Or can you pull out your knife if a perp is running at you with a baseball bat or something?

 

[Alvaro Candanedo]

You need to aks that question to a lawyer. Don't know in the States, but here in Panamá, there is something called "proportionality" meaning, in short, that you can't use lethal force, to defend from a non-lethal attack, the most extreme example being shooting or hacking somebody to pieces with a machete, because he called you names.
You would need, I guess, to be able to prove in a court of law, that you were in fear for your life or were actually in mortal danger (I think that your example of the baseball bat could qualify, provided it was not wielded by a little kid -sorry for the bad joke-).

 

[almasy87]

It's a big balancing act and contributing factors would include: whether or not the assailant is armed, the kind of weapon the assailant has, location, ability to retreat, local laws concerning duty to retreat, reasonable ability to defend yourself using nonlethal means (if you're a 5 foot female being attacked by a 7 foot male, you'll get in less trouble for using a knife than a 6 foot male being attacked by a 6 foot male), etc. etc.

In reality, you're going to get in some trouble no matter what the situation is. If you're going to use a knife for self defense, then you need to make sure that it would be completely obvious to anyone who will hear about it later (courts) that your life was in immediate danger and that you had no other choice.

And the "life in immediate danger" bit is the key. If someone tries to mug you and demands money, your only choices are to run or give up the money. Even brandishing the knife in the situation will get you in trouble, and may even escalate the situation to the point that the mugger uses lethal force. Even if a mugger punches or kicks you, you still can't (legally) use a knife if giving up your money would end the confrontation.

As for the baseball bat question, it's marginal, but I'd probably pull out a knife at that point and announce my clear intent to use it should the attack continue. A person can be killed quite easily with a bat. If the bat attacker continues the attack after clearly being warned that you are armed and intend to react with lethal force, then it stands to reason that it is the complete intent of the attacker to cause you serious harm or even death, and thus knife may be warranted in that situation.



Knives seem to have a worse stigma than guns and thus much care has to be taken when considering a knife as a self defense weapon. From a legal standpoint, it's safest to carry a knife that is legal in every way (blade length, opening mechanism, etc.) as a tool (NEVER label a knife as a weapon in the presence of an officer) and maintain it to make sure it is sharp if it ever needs to be used in self defense. Even then, you'll need to know all the laws in your area regarding what lengths you have to go to to escape or end a confrontation without violence before resorting to something as serious as a knife.

 

[tom19176]

Different states equals different legal requirements for self defense to be justifed. In NY, where almost all weapons are illegal, you can use deadly force in response to a robbery, to terminate a arson, murder or attempted murder, and rape. When it comes to self defense the burden is some what unclear as to what you can do.

 

[bubblewhip]

here's the ultimatum. If you think your going to be 6 feet under or someone else is, pull out whatever you got (gun, knife, flashlight), if not then just do whatever you can to get out of there. It's better to be alive in court than to be in court with death.

 

[stabman]

If someone tries to mug you and demands money, your only choices are to run or give up the money. Even brandishing the knife in the situation will get you in trouble.

Not necessarily.
How do you know the mugger is willing to take your cash and leave?
What if you cannot run far (bad knees)?
How about all those times the mugger stabbed/shot the victim because the amount of cash they handed over wasn't "enough" for the criminal jerk?
You have to be in reasonable fear for your life; that's pretty much it. Given the reality of violent crime, you might very well be in very reasonable fear for your life.
Or you might not.
Of course each situation will be different, and if you have a read on the mugger which tells you that handing over some cash will make it all good, then that's generally the right thing to do.
Blanket statements of what is or isn't allowed often fall short of full truth.

 

[Jesse B.]

To repeat what others have said, my understanding (at least in California) is that it is legal to use a knife in self-defense when you genuinely believe your life is in immediate danger. However, if you manage to subdue your attacker, your attacker stops fighting or attempts to flee and you continue stabbing and slashing, the guilt now shifts to you. This is part of the reason why knives are not the best option for self-defense.

 

[stabman]

However, if you manage to subdue your attacker, your attacker stops fighting or attempts to flee and you continue stabbing and slashing, the guilt now shifts to you. This is part of the reason why knives are not the best option for self-defense.

Yep.
Although the same sort of thing goes for any type of force used, which is why avoidance is so much better.:thumbup:
Unknowledgeable jury members tend to think that one stab/bullet/strike will do the trick, and that anything above that is overkill, and the prosecutor won't go out of their way to show them that this is not true.
As soon as you are safe from continued attack, leave (and call it in for full legality being on your side).

 

[mk.ultra]

It's a big balancing act and contributing factors would include: whether or not the assailant is armed, the kind of weapon the assailant has, location, ability to retreat, local laws concerning duty to retreat, reasonable ability to defend yourself using nonlethal means (if you're a 5 foot female being attacked by a 7 foot male, you'll get in less trouble for using a knife than a 6 foot male being attacked by a 6 foot male), etc. etc.

In reality, you're going to get in some trouble no matter what the situation is. If you're going to use a knife for self defense, then you need to make sure that it would be completely obvious to anyone who will hear about it later (courts) that your life was in immediate danger and that you had no other choice.

And the "life in immediate danger" bit is the key. If someone tries to mug you and demands money, your only choices are to run or give up the money. Even brandishing the knife in the situation will get you in trouble, and may even escalate the situation to the point that the mugger uses lethal force. Even if a mugger punches or kicks you, you still can't (legally) use a knife if giving up your money would end the confrontation.

As for the baseball bat question, it's marginal, but I'd probably pull out a knife at that point and announce my clear intent to use it should the attack continue. A person can be killed quite easily with a bat. If the bat attacker continues the attack after clearly being warned that you are armed and intend to react with lethal force, then it stands to reason that it is the complete intent of the attacker to cause you serious harm or even death, and thus knife may be warranted in that situation.



Knives seem to have a worse stigma than guns and thus much care has to be taken when considering a knife as a self defense weapon. From a legal standpoint, it's safest to carry a knife that is legal in every way (blade length, opening mechanism, etc.) as a tool (NEVER label a knife as a weapon in the presence of an officer) and maintain it to make sure it is sharp if it ever needs to be used in self defense. Even then, you'll need to know all the laws in your area regarding what lengths you have to go to to escape or end a confrontation without violence before resorting to something as serious as a knife.

Thank you for the incredibly thorough answer

 

[almasy87]

Not necessarily.
How do you know the mugger is willing to take your cash and leave?
What if you cannot run far (bad knees)?
How about all those times the mugger stabbed/shot the victim because the amount of cash they handed over wasn't "enough" for the criminal jerk?
You have to be in reasonable fear for your life; that's pretty much it. Given the reality of violent crime, you might very well be in very reasonable fear for your life.
Or you might not.
Of course each situation will be different, and if you have a read on the mugger which tells you that handing over some cash will make it all good, then that's generally the right thing to do.
Blanket statements of what is or isn't allowed often fall short of full truth.

That's why I described it as a balancing act. Ideally, the totality of circumstances would be considered. Someone with bad knees who pulled a knife would probably be given more leniency than a healthier person, but unfortunately, that's not always the case. The consequences of such an act still depend greatly on the opinions and attitudes of officers and the court.

Using SD as a legal defense isn't as easy as some people would like to believe, even if the defender was completely in the right to do so. A court may choose to convict a victim who used a knife in SD even if any decent person would consider the action justified. That's why I like to err on the side of caution and try to dissuade people from thinking too much about knives as self defense weapons. It's certainly an option, but I just don't want people to get too ("trigger happy" doesn't seem to fit, but whatever:thumbup and use a knife when they really shouldn't.

If you're truly concerned about your safety, you might want to pick up some pepper spray as a primary SD option. I'd recommend Fox Labs 5.3. If an attacker is determined enough (or high/drunk enough) to keep attacking you after getting hit with that, then I think even the authorities could figure out that you were in real danger. On the other hand, if the pepper spray stops the attack, then you're out of danger and you won't get in too much (if any) trouble.

A TASER (not a regular, crappy stun gun...I mean an actual TASER here) is another option, but they're quite expensive ($280-$300 is the cheapest you'll find) and you only get one ($25) shot unless you have an extra cartridge.

Putting guns aside, some Fox Labs 5.3 on your belt and a knife in your pocket is the safest bet. Not only is Fox Labs 5.3 very effective on its own, but the mere fact that you have a less-lethal option will go a long way in your defense should the worst happen.

 

[zignal_zero]

Not necessarily.
How do you know the mugger is willing to take your cash and leave?
What if you cannot run far (bad knees)?
How about all those times the mugger stabbed/shot the victim because the amount of cash they handed over wasn't "enough" for the criminal jerk?
You have to be in reasonable fear for your life; that's pretty much it. Given the reality of violent crime, you might very well be in very reasonable fear for your life.
Or you might not.
Of course each situation will be different, and if you have a read on the mugger which tells you that handing over some cash will make it all good, then that's generally the right thing to do.
Blanket statements of what is or isn't allowed often fall short of full truth.

i know things vary, greatly, from state to state, but (in FL) you are correct. if someone tried to rob you and witnesses confirmed it was a "give me your wallet, or i'll kill you" situation, it's a done deal. yes sir, i shot him twice in the chest because i didn't want him to kill me.

as for whole - once it's over, deal. BIG TIME! too many people forget a very important rule: "attack the threat until there is no threat" you're not attacking a person, you're attacking a threat. a man pointing a gun at you is a threat, a man laying two feet from his gun with a sucking chest wound, barely consious, well..... not so much. do NOT shoot him again lots of bad juju that nobobdy wants.

 

[almasy87]

as for whole - once it's over, deal. BIG TIME! too many people forget a very important rule: "attack the threat until there is no threat"

This is exactly why I recommend Fox Labs 5.3. I've heard enough LEOs talk about how awful it was to get sprayed with it during training to know that it's a very good at ending dangerous situations. And as I said, if an assailant is willing to fight through it just to keep coming at you, then most people would say that it's a safe best that you've found reasonable justification for escalating your use of force.

 

[zignal_zero]

This is exactly why I recommend Fox Labs 5.3. I've heard enough LEOs talk about how awful it was to get sprayed with it during training to know that it's a very good at ending dangerous situations. And as I said, if an assailant is willing to fight through it just to keep coming at you, then most people would say that it's a safe best that you've found reasonable justification for escalating your use of force.

very sound logic :thumbup: the ability to show you attempted a less lethal option, first, goes a long way. not to mention, when someone is trying to hurt me, i like it better when i'm difficult for them to see

 

[Jesse B.]

+1 on the pepper spray. I had to use it once on two people and let's just say they didn't come back for seconds. Obviously it's not 100% effective but overall it's a great option. Plus it comes in gel and foam formulations as well as spray.
I know people who live in states where you're allowed to shoot someone for sneezing on you are thinking (but what about the guns???) Well not all of us live in those states and even those who do might want to at least think through the idea of escalation of force during a hypothetical confrontation.

 

[swamp]

I've always wondered about this...when does it become legal to use a knife in self defense? Does the perpetrator have to physically attack you with a lethal weapon first? Or can you pull out your knife if a perp is running at you with a baseball bat or something?

Where I am, if someone is running at you with a baseball bat........well we consider that a lethal weapon. His bat is longer than your knife, so I would rather use the 10mm Glock 20 with Double Tap HP loads.

 

[Reeper22]

I've always wondered about this...when does it become legal to use a knife in self defense? Does the perpetrator have to physically attack you with a lethal weapon first? Or can you pull out your knife if a perp is running at you with a baseball bat or something?

Self defense laws may vary from state to state. Generally, courts apply a "reasonable person" standard, for what a "reasonable person" in YOUR shoes, with your life experiences, would believe. To apply deadly force, you must have an imminent threat of deadly force or great bodily harm. You want to know who decides what's reasonable? The jury. True story.

P.S. "Duty to retreat" is one of those things that varies between states. States that adopt laws similar to the Model Penal Code (typically more liberal states), if you can safely retreat when threatened, you MUST retreat no exceptions. In Florida, there is no duty to retreat ever. If you end up killing someone in self-defense, the burden is on you to prove that the force was appropriate. There are elements to a self-defense...defense. All the elements must be satisfied or you have an imperfect defense, which may or may not mitigate liability, but not alleviate all criminal charges.

 

[almasy87]

P.S. "Duty to retreat" is one of those things that varies between states. States that adopt laws similar to the Model Penal Code (typically more liberal states), if you can safely retreat when threatened, you MUST retreat no exceptions. In Florida, there is no duty to retreat ever. If you end up killing someone in self-defense, the burden is on you to prove that the force was appropriate. There are elements to a self-defense...defense. All the elements must be satisfied or you have an imperfect defense, which may or may not mitigate liability, but not alleviate all criminal charges.

Another thing to remember is that those laws are open to interpretation as well. There have been cases in states with castle laws (no duty to retreat in the home) where people have used in self defense and the court still decided that they should have retreated.

Again, whether it be pepper spray, a TASER, or any other less lethal defense option, using it first will demonstrate that you tries to use as little force as possible, and this the escalation of force by using something like a knife was only done out of necessity.

 

[SwampVoodoo]

Generally speaking, you would need to show that you have a reasonable belief that you are in imminent risk of death or severe bodily harm in order to use a knife (deadly force) in a self defense situation.

If you are being physically attacked by two UNARMED people that are considerably larger than you, and they have demonstrated in some way that they intend to cause further harm, would you be justified in using deadly force (a knife)? IN MOST CASES, YES. Of coarse, Duty to retreat laws must be considered, and you better be able to MAKE A JURY BELIEVE that you acted reasonably in order to protect your life.

Every human being has the God given RIGHT to reasonably defend his life and loved ones against harm.

Laws Reading Duty to Retreat are extremely varied from state. Here in Louisiana, for example, deadly force can be used against anyone (armed or not) that attempts to enter your vehicle unlawfully while you occupy it. Anywhere else in the US, that would be murder.

 

[Reeper22]

Generally speaking, you would need to show that you have a reasonable belief that you are in imminent risk of death or severe bodily harm in order to use a knife (deadly force) in a self defense situation.

If you are being physically attacked by two UNARMED people that are considerably larger than you, and they have demonstrated in some way that they intend to cause further harm, would you be justified in using deadly force (a knife)? IN MOST CASES, YES. Of coarse, Duty to retreat laws must be considered, and you better be able to MAKE A JURY BELIEVE that you acted reasonably in order to protect your life.

Every human being has the God given RIGHT to reasonably defend his life and loved ones against harm.

Laws Reading Duty to Retreat are extremely varied from state. Here in Louisiana, for example, deadly force can be used against anyone (armed or not) that attempts to enter your vehicle unlawfully while you occupy it. Anywhere else in the US, that would be murder.

This summer I interned for the District Attorney's Office in NYC and saw a 16 year old kid arraigned for 2nd degree murder. In this case, the kid stabbed someone else ONE time with a pocket knife and killed him. It was argued by the defense that the victim was a Latin King and he and his gang had been beating him up and harassing him. The defense also argued that the stab was a clear case of self defense using these facts: one stab wound, and he was being attacked by a gang member. The kid had no criminal history and his entire extended family was present for the arraignment. He was held on remand (without bail) on 2nd degree murder charges.

 

[joe-bob]

I've always wondered about this...when does it become legal to use a knife in self defense? Does the perpetrator have to physically attack you with a lethal weapon first? Or can you pull out your knife if a perp is running at you with a baseball bat or something?

To me, that situation would qualify, but as happens in so many hypothetical questions, a knife would be a particularly poor choice of weapon in your situation, because in order to use it, the attacker is already in the process of bashing in your skull. Another reason why a knife is a bad choice of weapons is that it has so little stopping power, (this is why swords were invented), a drug-crazed adrenaline-pumped attacker isn't going to notice much that he's been stabbed.