TexasCHLforum.com

I have been searching the forum for a little while now looking to see if this topic has been brought up after I watched a video on the Houston news of a Wally world security guard (off duty police) pull a taser on a few kids. Now if you have seen the video the kids were sort of provoking it but it made me wonder about the use of deadly force if someone pulled a taser on you. Take one of the regular "deadly force is ok" scenarios that have been discussed on this forum but replace the perps weapon with a taser. Would the taser be described as a non-deadly weapon in court or would the situation justify the use of deadly force? What would you do in a situation where you are confronted with a BG with a taser?

Mhoward wrote:What would you do in a situation where you are confronted with a BG with a taser?

If he's threatening me or a loved one, and safe escape isn't guaranteed, my plan is to shoot the BG until he's no longer a threat.

Force has to repulsed with lesser or same force, excessive force where it is not warranted can lead to criminal charges. However, if someone is attacking with a Taser, I would assume it is an aggravated assault, and/or aggravated robbery and/or aggravated kidnapping in the making Justifying deadly force.

I don't think there is one set answer to this question. Deadly force is defined as force that is known or intended to cause, or by its use is capable of causing serious bodily injury or death. Does a Taser meet that definition? That is still being vigorously debated in various places, including the courts.

As a police officer, I was taught that someone going for my Taser justified the use of deadly force against them. The logic is that a Taser would disable me and stop me from protecting myself when they went for my gun to kill me. Part of that logic was that someone using a Taser on a police officer is attacking, not trying to escape. I don't know if the same logic would apply to me as a citizen or off-duty officer not in uniform. If a robber hits me with a Taser in an attempt to get my wallet and doesn't know I have a gun, I don't see this logic holding up. But I can use deadly force to stop a robbery attempt anyway, so the weapon doesn't matter.

What if it is just an assault attack? If I am in good physical condition and not one of the questionable subjects that are being debated as wrong to tase, I do not think deadly force would be seen as justified by a court. But I could be wrong.

One point I wanted to correct is that you are NOT limited to the exact same level of force used against you. You may not use excessive force and the escalation must be reasonable, but you are not as limited as some (especially non-CHLs) think. The classic example of this is the first CHL shooting where an elderly male was being beaten by a younger, stronger man. The disparity in physical force justified his upping his force level to a weapon.

My arguement is that I have a heart condition and such an electrical shock could kill me, not just disable me. So I see a Tazor as a deadly weapon.

Beiruty wrote:Force has to repulsed with lesser or same force, excessive force where it is not warranted can lead to criminal charges. However, if someone is attacking with a Teaser, I would assume it is an aggravated assault, and/or aggravated robbery and/or aggravated kidnapping in the making Justifying deadly force.

I think....

Attacking with a Teaser?

Good responses. I definitely agree that If I was threatened and couldn't get away I will have to draw. My thinking is just as what srothstein was taught, they could use the teaser to disable me in order to do me more harm. I assume I would treat a taser just as a handgun, if someone pulled it on me and I could not get away, I'm not great at dodging bullets, I would draw my own handgun. Now to add a scenario lets say I was at the grocery store in the parking lot with my family and I "stole" some disgruntled guys parking spot. He gets out shouting and pulls a taser and points it towards my family from a fairly close distance, I can't back up and get out fast as the parking lot may be full of people. Now I am sure that I would go ahead and draw and put the guy down but how would that be seen in court? Was my use of a deadly weapon (handgun) justified even though the BG had a so called non-lethal taser? I guess it all up to the jury but I will do whatever it takes to keep my family and myself safe.

I had to go watch the "don't tase me bro" video on YouTube. If you haven't seen it before check it out for a good laugh.

Beiruty wrote:Force has to repulsed with lesser or same force, excessive force where it is not warranted can lead to criminal charges. However, if someone is attacking with a Taser, I would assume it is an aggravated assault, and/or aggravated robbery and/or aggravated kidnapping in the making Justifying deadly force.

...there is no "lesser or same force"...you have been infected with talk of the continuum of force taught officers and security...civilian citizens are not bound by that in Texas...stay with PC9.31 and 9.32...you'll get it right...

Tasers are less than lethal usually but not always. Should call them less likely lethal. Some BG points one at me and I would drop him. It could kill you. Besides the issues from the shock some people fall straight back stiff as a board. I am 6'1 and sure that is a hard enough fall to possibly crack me noggin. I can't say I have heard of any bg's with tasers tho.

...I agree...lethal depends on the weapon and the effect on that particular subject...pepper spray or Mace would likely kill me within minutes...I am an asthmatic...others with heart problems could die from a Taser burst...

tasers and pepper/cs sprays are considered non lethal due to the fact that they do not have an LD 50 level basically meaning that at the level of electricity or capsacin they contain they do not cause the death of 50% of the subjects they are used on. with that said any electrical or chemical restraint system has for perhaps 1 half of 1% a lethal effect

JeepGuy79 wrote:Tasers are less than lethal usually but not always. Should call them less likely lethal. Some BG points one at me and I would drop him. It could kill you. Besides the issues from the shock some people fall straight back stiff as a board. I am 6'1 and sure that is a hard enough fall to possibly crack me noggin. I can't say I have heard of any bg's with tasers tho.

These types of weapons are known as 'less lethal' (no than) force options. It is well known that they can end up causing death, but the odds are very low.

A friend I went to high school with and then worked with as a police officer in his early years is a expert on these types of weapons http://www.policeone.com/columnists/steve-ijames/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; & http://www.strategosintl.com/staff_steveijames.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Being on my third pacemaker/defib unit, and having been 'shocked' a few times by it, I would consider being threatened by a tazer as being deadly force.

The electrial charge from a tazer would more than likely 'reprogram ' my internal unit, either making it kill me, or render it unable to save me. Either way, it would be deadly to me.

My attitude is when I am carrying a handgun, every confrontation by definition is an armed confrontation by virtue of the fact that I am armed. We can never lose sight of the fact that being armed changes everything.

Someone points a taser at me, I am shooting to stop the threat.

As srothstein points out, the justification is clear for a police officer. When disabled, they can get shot with their own handgun. Unfortunately, cops getting shot with their own handgun happens far too often (one time is too many).

Whether my handgun is visible or not makes no difference. I've seen too many CCTV videos where the perp cold cocks someone. In the act of looking for money or wallet, they can easily find the handgun. Or, simply the act of falling over could disclose the handgun in some way (even if only printing). Either way, if I am out, I am vulnerable to getting shot with my own handgun.

There are the scenarios where force is presumed to be reasonable, such as "aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery".

However, there is also the generalized justification defense under PC §9.31, specifically ""a person is justified in using force against another when and to the
degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force." Looking to PC §9.32, then I will argue that deadly force is immediately necessary since the possibility of having my own handgun used against me makes the Taser potentially deadly force. Remember, the standard uses the phrase "the actor reasonably believes", and I think this line of thought is reasonable.

...well said...