Lethal Force Vs Pepper Spray

[Mountain Man]

I appreciate the comments of those who have replied to my comment about tear gas and fighting against such groups as ANTIFA. The more I think about it, the more I realize that any weapon used against you can be deadly, and so it would be appropriate to respond with a firearm.

When I made the comment about using tear gas against ANTIFA, I was thinking of a recent event where the mayor of Portland (?) was being harassed by an ANTIFA thug; his response was to soak the guy's face in tear gas; he successfully stopped the harassment by doing so.

So I think that sometimes tear gas would be the appropriate weapon to use; but sadly, we are coming to a time when the only thing you'll be able to do is shoot the attacker with your gun.

Sadly pepper spray, mace, and tear gas will be listed as weapons in September when SB554 takes effect into Oregon law. Conceal carring those or any weapon into a school or any Gov't building will result in a class C felony. In Oregon anything that is used as a weapon toward you can be met with lethal force.

There are certain cities with ordinance laws. Portland for example: It is illegal to conceal carry with a loaded pistol. The mag must be separated, with an empty chamber. There are a few other cities that do the same but the elected sheriff's don't enforce it.
The dems, liberals, and progressives are pushing for more gun control every week. There's a Pastor trying to get Ballot Measure 17 which will require a permit for every single firearm purchase/transfer. And it's a Shall Issue by the sheriff permit. With a side of high capacity mag ban.

Ballot Measure 18 is just an ouright ban on all modern semi-auto firearms.

Would you like to know more?

Gun Confiscation Update. – Oregon Firearms Federation

 

[Jimbo]

Sadly pepper spray, mace, and tear gas will be listed as weapons in September when SB554 takes effect into Oregon law. Conceal carring those or any weapon into a school or any Gov't building will result in a class C felony. In Oregon anything that is used as a weapon toward you can be met with lethal force.

There are certain cities with ordinance laws. Portland for example: It is illegal to conceal carry with a loaded pistol. The mag must be separated, with an empty chamber. There are a few other cities that do the same but the elected sheriff's don't enforce it.
The dems, liberals, and progressives are pushing for more gun control every week. There's a Pastor trying to get Ballot Measure 17 which will require a permit for every single firearm purchase/transfer. And it's a Shall Issue by the sheriff permit. With a side of high capacity mag ban.

Ballot Measure 18 is just an ouright ban on all modern semi-auto firearms.

Would you like to know more?

Gun Confiscation Update. – Oregon Firearms Federation

One of the greatest things about our government is that it is "of the people, by the people, for the people"; at least that was the original intent.

A key aspect of this is that the people have the right to keep and bear arms. You can actually be armed in order to have a fighting chance against someone who attacks you, even if they are a lot bigger than you.

As far as protecting yourself against a tyrannical government, I can think of a situation where that would actually be realistic - if an ANTIFA mob shows up at your house. In my honest opinion, ANTIFA is nothing more than Hitler's SA, the street thugs he employed to terrorize and intimidate the German people in his quest to gain total power. In our case, ANTIFA is being employed by the Left to terrorize and intimidate the American people in their quest to gain total power.

If an ANTIFA mob shows up at your house, they might not be so bold if you and your family are armed. In fact, they might not even come where you live if they believe that most of the people in the area are armed. This is the sort of government abuse that we can effectively stand up against. And this is a key reason why the Left want to take away our guns, either outright or little by little.

 

[dad]

The reason I mentioned ANTIFA is because they specialize in "low grade" fighting, that is, with low-grade weapons, such as bats and chains. If you respond to a bat with a gun, you are just liable to find yourself in jail on a murder charge. In those cases, it would be really handy to have something less deadly than a gun with which to respond.

Ill do some double checking on the bat but unless you are going to the ballpark or at the ballpark a bat can and probably should be considered a deadly weapon. I know I would never wait to find out how well someone can swing it before choosing to use deadly force. I am always prepared to use deadly force but pray I never have to. But I believe the only thing worse than having to take a life is losing a family member because I was unwilling or unable to defend that person

 

[ChanceMcCall]

The reason I mentioned ANTIFA is because they specialize in "low grade" fighting, that is, with low-grade weapons, such as bats and chains. If you respond to a bat with a gun, you are just liable to find yourself in jail on a murder charge. In those cases, it would be really handy to have something less deadly than a gun with which to respond.

If someone comes after me with a bat - I guarantee you I'm in fear of my life which is all the legal justification necessary to use a firearm in most places.

 

[TSiWRX]

If someone comes after me with a bat - I guarantee you I'm in fear of my life which is all the legal justification necessary to use a firearm in most places.

And that's where one must use care - the "in some places" can be all that differentiates the legality of one's use of lethal force.

Andrew Branca (author of The Law of Self Defense) writes of this difference, as well as highlights the idea of "proportionality of response," in a great article in a recent article in PDW -

Proportional Response: Understanding Self-Defense Statutes

By Andrew Branca Proportionality, the third principle of the law of self-defense, is often the one for which most of

www.personaldefenseworld.com

 

[bigx5murf]

Did anyone watch the video of that patriot prayer guy that got assasinated by an antifa member? He was letting off his pepper spray just as he got shot.

The problem with an escalation of force continuum, close range gun fights are a game won/lost by fractions of a second. If you're attacker is going straight for lethal, while you're going for non lethal first. You're the loser.

 

[Bassbob]

I’ll take lethal force for $500 Alex.

 

[Keystone19250]

I was surprised that only one post included the use of or conversations about Tasers or Stun Guns, although considered less lethal they can and will cause death in individual’s with underlying health issues such as heart issues. And then there is the officer in the news recently who reported to other officers during a traffic stop gone bad that she had deployed her taser on the vehicle driver however she had grabbed her gun and shot him.

 

[TSiWRX]

Did anyone watch the video of that patriot prayer guy that got assasinated by an antifa member? He was letting off his pepper spray just as he got shot.

The problem with an escalation of force continuum, close range gun fights are a game won/lost by fractions of a second. If you're attacker is going straight for lethal, while you're going for non lethal first. You're the loser.

Absolutely -

However, to jump to lethal force without sufficiently satisfying AOJP is, well, murder....

The crux of the issue is that engaging the threat always carries the potential of escalation.


----


And I thought the Patriot Prayer/ANTIFA incident was an unprompted shooting - that although supposedly Danielson intended to bring the bear spray to-bear, he had not actually discharged it, that it instead vented when one of the rounds discharged by the killer struck the canister: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_of_Aaron_Danielson_and_Michael_Reinoehl

Isn't the pepper-spray/lethal-response shooting this one, instead? --->

Man shot, killed during Denver protests; suspect acting as security guard in custody

One person was shot and killed near the Denver Art Museum Saturday afternoon. A suspect is in custody, police said.

www.newschannel5.com

The unlicensed security guard (shooter) was later determined to have no affiliation with ANTIFA - https://www.foxnews.com/us/denver-s...uster-shooting-death-pleads-not-guilty-report
and

Attorneys in Denver protest shooting debate relevance of victim’s right-wing affiliations

The Denver District Attorney’s Office argued in court filings that some information about Lee Keltner’s political views, and about the character of the people he attended the rally with, should not…

www.denverpost.com

^ I don't see any further updates after the August, 2021 reports. Anyone local keeping tabs on the trial?

Given what the media has reported so far, the Dolloff/Keltner incident looks much more complicated than straight-up self-defense.

 

[TSiWRX]

I was surprised that only one post included the use of or conversations about Tasers or Stun Guns, although considered less lethal they can and will cause death in individual’s with underlying health issues such as heart issues. And then there is the officer in the news recently who reported to other officers during a traffic stop gone bad that she had deployed her taser on the vehicle driver however she had grabbed her gun and shot him.

I was the one, I think (https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/lethal-force-vs-pepper-spray.8752/#post-108279).

Absolutely - "less lethal" is not the same as "non-lethal." There's definitely more than just semantics, there.

And just as there can be concerns of deaths ( Force Science actually has an excellent, small, library of this that is easily digested by laypersons, such as myself - force science taser deaths ), there are additional problems with its implementation, in terms of civilians.

• First and foremost being that most of what average-Joe/Jane civilians with little-to-no actual self-defense training refers to as "tasers" are actually simple "stun-gun," pain-compliance devices.
• Second, true TASERs that are available for civilian purchase are not inexpensive devices - nor are they any more compact than modern Compact/Sub-Compact class handguns.
• Third, true civilian TASER devices are -just like their LE cousins- single-cartridge fed devices. With law-enforcement, TASER (as well as other less-lethal deployment is often supported with standby lethal-force (usually from a partner), in case that one cartridge fails ["drive stun" is, again, pain-compliance]) and escalates to a lethal threat.

And of course fourth, as you noted, training is an issue - Potter can be heard on the video yelling "TASER! TASER! TASER!" before mistakenly deploying her handgun instead. This, from someone who was ostensibly training a rookie at the time.....