TexasCHLforum.com

I would like to remind everyone that a Taser is less than lethal ... not non lethal. I think its justified in this case.

fm2 wrote:

Maybe so, but that's how bg's get paid, close the distance, get their weapon into play, and control the situation.

That's why we need bridge skills (empty hand, pre-fight skills, etc..) to improve our odds agains these ambushes.

Not to mention that "day in, day out"....you are much more likely to need/use simple empty hands skills than you would need to draw your weapon.

killerfly128 wrote:I would like to remind everyone that a Taser is less than lethal ... not non lethal. I think its justified in this case.

Is it less-than-lethal, or just less lethal? Is there an official designation?

Lethal means capable of causing death. A fish bone can be lethal if you choke on it. Minor injuries can lead to death.

People have died very shortly after being struck with a Taser, so it's difficult to call them non-lethal. Most of those cases involved people who were strung out on multiple drugs. Some involved falls after the use of the Taser.

I checked what the company, TASER International, says. They refer to their products as safer than the use of hands-on force. They seem avoid the term lethal.

Anyway, to reiterate what I wrote earlier, the justification here is based on the use of force to commit robbery. The potential lethality of the weapon is not an issue.

- Jim

KC5AV wrote:

killerfly128 wrote:I would like to remind everyone that a Taser is less than lethal ... not non lethal. I think its justified in this case.

Is it less-than-lethal, or just less lethal? Is there an official designation?

I believe officially they are called Less Lethal, but the terms including non-lethal and less-than-lethal are used synonymously

seamusTX wrote: Anyway, to reiterate what I wrote earlier, the justification here is based on the use of force to commit robbery. The potential lethality of the weapon is not an issue.- Jim

Absolutely.

Okay, I admit it. All of these semantics have thoroughly confused me. If a guy points a taser at me, what is the general consensus? Can I defend myself with a handgun?

Purplehood wrote:Okay, I admit it. All of these semantics have thoroughly confused me. If a guy points a taser at me, what is the general consensus? Can I defend myself with a handgun?

I consider a taser or stun-gun a potential threat to at least do bodily injury to me, so I WILL be using force to resist, and deadly force if necessary. A taser can incapacitate you and they could be able to take your weapon and use it on you.

Purplehood wrote:If a guy points a taser at me, what is the general consensus? Can I defend myself with a handgun?

I don't know what the consensus is.

I would draw and also have pepper spray in hand. As I wrote earlier, unless the assailant was a lunatic, he would most likely beat feet.

If he had indicated an intent to rob, kidnap, or commit sexual assault, the justification for the use of deadly force would be ironclad.

If he was just a nut who wanted to shock someone, I would try the pepper spray first if possible. If I had to shoot to stop the attack, I thnk I would have a good chance of walking, but I'm not as sure in that case.

I certainly am not going to let someone incapacitate me to find out what he does next.

- Jim

KC5AV wrote:

killerfly128 wrote:I would like to remind everyone that a Taser is less than lethal ... not non lethal. I think its justified in this case.

Is it less-than-lethal, or just less lethal? Is there an official designation?

Tomato Tomato (kinda loses it ring when you read it dosent it)