Is a club considered "deadly force"?

[Ruark]

There are clear cut differences in the law between "force" and "deadly force" and specific code pertaining to when each can and can't be used. Using a gun or knife, for example, is considered using "deadly force," even if you just point it at a person. It's a critical legal distinction to make, particularly if you use "deadly force" in response to "force" which is allowable only under extreme, specific circumstances, e.g. somebody entering your home by "force."

That being said..... is a club, such as a piece of pipe or rebar, considered deadly force, or force? Say somebody is obstructing your passage or just grabbing your shirt collar or shoving you - "getting in your face," if you will - would striking him with, say, a piece of pipe be considered using "deadly force"?

[Beiruty]

Do you think being hit with a steel pipe or club on the head would kill someone?

[Tex1961]

The law actually states serious bodily injury or death. So yes a club would most likely be within that range.

[Grayling813]

The law actually states serious bodily injury or death. So yes a club would most likely be within that range.

During security guard license training for my church we were taught to use batons against arms and legs, avoiding head and neck areas, to protect against being accused of using deadly force.

[Ruark]

Do you think being hit with a steel pipe or club on the head would kill someone?

Of course. So would being hit with a fist, but using a fist isn't considered "deadly force." The question is not whether or not it would kill someone, but how it is classified in the law.

[Tex1961]

Do you think being hit with a steel pipe or club on the head would kill someone?

Of course. So would being hit with a fist, but using a fist isn't considered "deadly force." The question is not whether or not it would kill someone, but how it is classified in the law.

It's not that simple. You are allow to use force up to the level of force against you unless you are in fear for your life of death or serious bodily harm. Understand that your case will go before a grand jury and they will review all of the facts of the case. If you are a large young ex marine and you get into a fight with an 80 year old man most juries are going to have a hard time with you using a club against him. Now, if the situation was reversed then he would have a good case of being in fear of serious boldly harm or death from you and would stand a good chance of getting no-billed by the grand jury. And even then if it does go to trial, there are still 12 more people that you would have to justify your actions to..

[philip964]

The young adult son of a friend of mine, got in a fight in a pool hall and hit someone with a pool cue. I think he got 15 years.

So yeah it’s considered deadly force.

I was in a jury pool and the defendant got in a fight with his wife, he put his hands around her neck. She ended up with bruises on her neck, enough for the police to photograph.

The defendant was looking at a big time jail sentence.

[OneGun]

Do you think being hit with a steel pipe or club on the head would kill someone?

My grandfather was murdered by being beaten with a pipe when his store was robbed. So, yes!

[Caliber]

There are clear cut differences in the law between "force" and "deadly force" and specific code pertaining to when each can and can't be used. Using a gun or knife, for example, is considered using "deadly force," even if you just point it at a person.

Not totally correct.

Sec. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

[Ruark]

There are clear cut differences in the law between "force" and "deadly force" and specific code pertaining to when each can and can't be used. Using a gun or knife, for example, is considered using "deadly force," even if you just point it at a person.

Not totally correct.

Sec. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

As I understand it, according to a workshop I was in recently, this does NOT include actually pointing a gun at somebody, only exposing it or maybe placing your hand on it without drawing.

[Tex1961]

There are clear cut differences in the law between "force" and "deadly force" and specific code pertaining to when each can and can't be used. Using a gun or knife, for example, is considered using "deadly force," even if you just point it at a person.

Not totally correct.

Sec. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

As I understand it, according to a workshop I was in recently, this does NOT include actually pointing a gun at somebody, only exposing it or maybe placing your hand on it without drawing.

I have no problems here if any internet lawyer wants to chime in here. It was explained to me that pointing a gun at someone was considered deadly force. As per PC 9.04 displaying a firearm to show that you are able to defend yourself against potential deadly force or serious bodily injury changes if you draw and point your weapon at a person. I'm not an attorney and can only speak on the actual codes as they relate to carrying a handgun.

[Beiruty]

There are clear cut differences in the law between "force" and "deadly force" and specific code pertaining to when each can and can't be used. Using a gun or knife, for example, is considered using "deadly force," even if you just point it at a person.

Not totally correct.

Sec. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

As I understand it, according to a workshop I was in recently, this does NOT include actually pointing a gun at somebody, only exposing it or maybe placing your hand on it without drawing.

I have no problems here if any internet lawyer wants to chime in here. It was explained to me that pointing a gun at someone was considered deadly force. As per PC 9.04 displaying a firearm to show that you are able to defend yourself against potential deadly force or serious bodily injury changes if you draw and point your weapon at a person. I'm not an attorney and can only speak on the actual codes as they relate to carrying a handgun.

1) The original poster asked about using and not "threat of using" a club on others.
2) I support Tex1961 on "the draw and point at a threat" when force is justified, it is considered a force and not deadly force. So, if a person jabbed/punched/pushed a victim to the ground, the victim can present his deadly force and threaten the use of said deadly tool.
3) If a force is justified, the threat of use of a deadly force is justified.
4) Disparity of force is always a factor in the favor of the victim

[03Lightningrocks]

I do know that many a victim has been killed by a blunt object such as a club or such. I would think a club type weapon would be considered deadly force.

[ELB]

Federal Judge Benitez, who I think is the judge who has been noted for striking down some California laws that violate the second amendment, somewhat strangely, in my opinion, recently came to the conclusion that California’s law, preventing people from carrying or even possessing billy clubs does not violate the second amendment. I think this is a bit strange, because I think the Scotus has already ruled that clubs are protected arms within the meaning of the second amendment, but I would have to go double check that.

Anyway, in his opinion on the matter, he referred to billy clubs as “less than lethal.” So far this is the only legal reference I found so far as to whether a club might be in and of itself a deadly weapon, as opposed to being an object that can be used as a deadly weapon.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/di ... 644922/41/

[srothstein]

This is a very confusing section of the law and I will tell you how I was trained and how I believe.

Chapter 1, penal code definitions says:

"Deadly weapon" means:
(A) a firearm or anything manifestly designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of inflicting death or serious bodily injury; or
(B) anything that in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing death or serious bodily injury.

To understand this you really need to understand the serious bodily injury part. The law (Chapter 1 again) says:

"Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes death, serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.

If you ever see a scar, that is serious bodily injury because it is a permanent disfigurement. A black eye that swells shut might also qualify as protracted loss of the use of an organ. The rule of thumb I was taught is that if EMS had to treat them for the injury, it is probably going to be serious bodily injury.

As an aside, if the person says ouch or indicates he felt pain, it is bodily injury. That upgrades many assaults without people realizing how slight that rule is.

But note that the above is the definition of the weapon and not of the force used. Chapter 9 defines deadly force without defining force. It says:

"Deadly force" means force that is intended or known by the actor to cause, or in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing, death or serious bodily injury.

From the combination of the two, a firearm is deadly force if you shoot it, or possibly hit someone with it, but not just pointing it at someone. As mentioned, PC 9.04 says that the threat of deadly force is not deadly force in itself. A knife may be deadly force if used, but it depends on the manner of use and the knife. Pointing it is not deadly force. A club (or pool cue or baseball bat or steel pipe, etc) might be deadly force depending on how it is used. Hitting someone in the head with it would probably be deadly force, but a strike against the thigh or shin probably would not be. The intent and the injury would have to be considered. In the cases where a person has been punched and the victim died from it (more often than you would think), the fist could be considered a deadly weapon.

And now, to really confuse you, remember that the definition of the crime of deadly conduct (PC 22.05) says:

(a) A person commits an offense if he recklessly engages in conduct that places another in imminent danger of serious bodily injury.
(b) A person commits an offense if he knowingly discharges a firearm at or in the direction of:
(1) one or more individuals; or
(2) a habitation, building, or vehicle and is reckless as to whether the habitation, building, or vehicle is occupied.
(c) Recklessness and danger are presumed if the actor knowingly pointed a firearm at or in the direction of another whether or not the actor believed the firearm to be loaded.
(d) For purposes of this section, "building," "habitation," and "vehicle" have the meanings assigned those terms by Section 30.01.

Pointing the gun at someone is a class A misdemeanor unless you are justified under chapter 9. It is easy for an instructor who has not dealt with this on a daily basis to confuse the terms deadly force and deadly conduct, or to confuse a class by referring to both of them without stressing the differences.