Maximum Distance for Self-Defense Shooting

[Crash]

I've had a CHL for more than almost 15 years and, when renewing it, the maximum distance at which I've had to do the shooting part of the testing is 15 yards. Is this because shooting in a self-defense situation at more than 15 yards would not be defensible in court? I read a magazine article today that stated that this is the case. However, I also read an article a couple of years ago that stated that 25 yards or so is the maximum distance at which one would be (might be?) justified in shooting an attacker. I'm 70 and if a young, fit person charged at me with a club, knife, etc., from much under 25 yards I'm pretty sure I couldn't run away fast enough to escape my attacker. I guess this might be a "situational" decision based on the nature of the threat, the vulnerability of the person being attacked, etc.

Opinions?

Crash

[mreavis]

I'm no lawyer.

But, projectile weapons having the role they do in self defense and attacking these days; I have heard of no, or doubt they have any law limiting the range you can defend yourself in. Of course there will be questions about self defense if you end up getting in a 1500 yard sniper battle with another guy. But if your in a field and a guy starts shooting at you. I wouldn't not shoot back because he is over 25 yards away. Fight or flight would be a choice you need to make based on the situation. But your attackers distance should not stop you from fighting back if running away is impossible or a worse option.

[apostate]

I don't believe the test has any meaningful relationship to what's legally justifiable.

[srothstein]

The test has no connection with what is legally justifiable. It is based somewhat loosely on police testing standards, which also only require a maximum of 15 yards (and only 5 rounds per year at that range).

The rule on what distance is justifiable is probably a twisting of a test created by a Lt. (I thin) Tueller. This test was to show a comparison of an officer's reaction time to how fast a person armed with a knife can attack. It has since been twisted despite the author's objections into what is called a 21 foot rule.

But as one example of how far away a defensive shooting can be, I know of a police officer who shot at over 100 yards. He was being attacked by a sniper from that distance and returned fire. While many times the practice is different for citizens and police, the same law actually covers both sets of actions in self-defense cases.

[OldCannon]

Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy.

[Keith B]

There is no set distance. When you get in a self-defense shooting situation it all boils down to the individual event. That includes location, background objects, people and other things between you and the attacker, etc. Every shooting situation you might be presented with will have different obstacles or challenges. However, most self-defense shootings would more than likely be within that less than 15 yard distance as they will be a robber, mugger, rapist, etc that is trying to get to you and closing the distance or already on you.

I was involved in two different shooting situations as LEO many years ago. On one I had drawn down on the person as they were running toward a 24 hour quick stop. I didn't immediately have a clear shot as my angle had him in the line of fire for the glassed area of the store. However, in about 1 second he would have had a brick wall in the background before he got inside and I would have taken a shot. Another officer had a clear line of fire immeadiately and shot the guy with his .357 from about 25 yards. The bullet hit him in the middle of the back and the guy dropped, so I never fired. Just remember, LEO's will be shooting at a fleeing felon, where you more than likely will only be shooting at someone who would be an aggressor and moving toward you.

I did have one scenario recently where I had a person come in from behind my left side to get in my face. I caught a glimpse of him about 1/2 second before he was on me. I was backed up against a truck, but did have time to quarter toward him as he got to me and push him away as he shoved against me. I also had my hand behind me and under my shirt ready to draw as I pushed him away in case he had a weapon or continued an attack. Luckily he had nothing in his hands, did not re-close the short distance, and was only verbally attacking me from that point on. I was able to get him away to move farther away and go on in the store. A call had been made to 911 to respond. The guy came back out of the store and shouted expletives at me as he left before police arrived. I didn't pursue it any farther than just telling the officer the story and giving him the license number of the vehicle. Had that guy wanted to, he would have easily been able to stab me before I could respond as he came at me from a blind area.

[Scott in Houston]

What's the maximum distance I can be attacked? Is there a legal definition for that?
If not, then the same should be true of self defense... IANAL (thank God). ;)

[OldCannon]

What's the maximum distance I can be attacked? Is there a legal definition for that?
If not, then the same should be true of self defense... IANAL (thank God). ;)

There is no number. That's precisely the point of the link I made earlier. There. Is. No. Number.

[Scott in Houston]

What's the maximum distance I can be attacked? Is there a legal definition for that?
If not, then the same should be true of self defense... IANAL (thank God). ;)

There is no number. That's precisely the point of the link I made earlier. There. Is. No. Number.

I know... that was the point of my post as well. How could you define the maximum to be attacked? It was rhetorical, and meant to make a point, but I guess I didn't do it well enough. Or I should have used the rhetorical font! ha

[Heartland Patriot]

The test has no connection with what is legally justifiable. It is based somewhat loosely on police testing standards, which also only require a maximum of 15 yards (and only 5 rounds per year at that range).

The rule on what distance is justifiable is probably a twisting of a test created by a Lt. (I thin) Tueller. This test was to show a comparison of an officer's reaction time to how fast a person armed with a knife can attack. It has since been twisted despite the author's objections into what is called a 21 foot rule.

But as one example of how far away a defensive shooting can be, I know of a police officer who shot at over 100 yards. He was being attacked by a sniper from that distance and returned fire. While many times the practice is different for citizens and police, the same law actually covers both sets of actions in self-defense cases.

I've heard a bit about the 21 foot rule. IIRC, it is SUPPOSED to show that if you let someone get within that distance, and they have a knife, that they very likely can get you before you can get a firearm out of a holster and into operation. It has gotten twisted into something along the lines of "if they aren't within 21 ft. then you shouldn't shoot"...of course, we can guess what kind of dimbulbs and political types would twist things that way. The types that refuse to let reality intrude.

[OldCannon]

What's the maximum distance I can be attacked? Is there a legal definition for that?
If not, then the same should be true of self defense... IANAL (thank God). ;)

There is no number. That's precisely the point of the link I made earlier. There. Is. No. Number.

I know... that was the point of my post as well. How could you define the maximum to be attacked? It was rhetorical, and meant to make a point, but I guess I didn't do it well enough. Or I should have used the rhetorical font! ha

Yeah, such a font would have helped.

In case it wasn't rhetorical though: There. Is. No. Number.

[CC Italian]

Obviously there is no max distance just remember that every bullet that leaves the barrel YOU own and while shooting at 25 yards might seem doable at the gun range imagine it in a real life situation. Your already in carbine and rifle territory if able! If someone is a threat to you at that distance they have a gun! 25 yards, that's 75 feet and I know you said you’re longer in the tooth but I would still be looking for cover if I was returning fire! I live in Harris County and in one of the most highly populated parts. Shooting a moving target under stress at that distance with a handgun and many possible innocent bystanders near by is not a good scenario! I would take cover first if all possible!

In all likelihood I assume your chances are just as good winning the lottery then getting into a gun fight at 25yards! This is something that I think Keith already addressed. I think this is more likely to happen with law enforcement, probably a state trooper more then anything.

[tbrown]

I had one instructor who called it the CYA rule. Can You Articulate?

Can you articulate why the mugger at arms length with a knife needs to be shot?
Can you articulate why the robber across the room who just murdered the store clerk needs to be shot?
Can you articulate why the suicide bomber 25 yards away running toward a school bus full of children needs to be shot?

It doesn't absolve you from the responsibility for your bullets if you miss. However, if you make the shot and can articulate why it was necessary, you really stack the deck in your favor for what follows.

[gigag04]

Practicality should answer any questions on this issue. DUCY?

[jonnypunk]

[quote="mreavis"]I'm no lawyer.

But, projectile weapons having the role they do in self defense and attacking these days; I have heard of no, or doubt they have any law limiting the range you can defend yourself in. Of course there will be questions about self defense if you end up getting in a 1500 yard sniper battle with another guy. But if your in a field and a guy starts shooting at you. I wouldn't not shoot back because he is over 25 yards away. Fight or flight would be a choice you need to make based on the situation. But your attackers distance should not stop you from fighting back if running away is impossible or a worse optio

yeah! there's no other choice but to fight.. running is not good option..