I've had this question buggin me for a while now and sure could use a little input. Here's the thing........ I've trained in the Martial Arts for over 13 years from styles around the world and am a certified instructor as well. I also have a firearms permit. Should the need ever arise to use my firearm vs. my training (Hopefully Never). What's the law's take on that? Should I have used my training to disarm the attacker or open fire because my life was in danger???
What should I do......?
- Thread starter Evader1
- Start date
XavierBreath
New member
First, in what state do you live?
What is the political climate in the court system in your area?
Do you have a CCW?
Do you have any history of assault?
Realize that every situation is unique, but........You should not use a gun unless there is an imminent threat to your life or the lives of others. I assume the same would hold true regarding martial arts training.
It is my contention that a MA background can be played to a jury to look as though a trained martial artist had other options than to use a gun. For this reason, I believe if a martial artist uses a gun, he will be at a disadvantage in a jury trial. That being said, if you follow the law and have to use your gun in justifiable self defense, you should not ever see a jury unless your DA is prosecuting cases for political gain.
As a martial artist though, you no fewer rights than Joe Citizen.
Criminals will not check with you first to see if you are a martial artist and then agree to fight you in the syle you wish. You will likely be attacked by three at once with a couple more waiting in the wings for when #1 and #2 land on their butts. Unless you are capable of defending and surviving a simultaneous attack by 3-5 criminals who will not follow your rules, who will use any weapon at hand, and who will stomp you after you are unconcious, perhaps you should consider engaging street threats with a gun. That is the reality of an attack outside the dojo.
What is the political climate in the court system in your area?
Do you have a CCW?
Do you have any history of assault?
Realize that every situation is unique, but........You should not use a gun unless there is an imminent threat to your life or the lives of others. I assume the same would hold true regarding martial arts training.
It is my contention that a MA background can be played to a jury to look as though a trained martial artist had other options than to use a gun. For this reason, I believe if a martial artist uses a gun, he will be at a disadvantage in a jury trial. That being said, if you follow the law and have to use your gun in justifiable self defense, you should not ever see a jury unless your DA is prosecuting cases for political gain.
As a martial artist though, you no fewer rights than Joe Citizen.
Criminals will not check with you first to see if you are a martial artist and then agree to fight you in the syle you wish. You will likely be attacked by three at once with a couple more waiting in the wings for when #1 and #2 land on their butts. Unless you are capable of defending and surviving a simultaneous attack by 3-5 criminals who will not follow your rules, who will use any weapon at hand, and who will stomp you after you are unconcious, perhaps you should consider engaging street threats with a gun. That is the reality of an attack outside the dojo.
Why is this statement past tense?
Sorry, grammer error. " Should I use" would be the right one. I live in Pa, I have a permit and a clean record. True that if a PERSON were to use a knife or gun directly in front of me I may be able to disarm them. However, as you say, which would more like be the case.... if there's multiple PERSONS with weapons I would have no choice but to draw my side arm, especially if my girlfriend were with me I would not want her life in danger from oncoming attacks while I was fighting. I pray to God this situation never arises, but again having the knowledge will help.
XavierBreath
New member
You are under no obligation to disarm a person who threatens your life or the life of someone you love. You have a right to preserve your life. If that means you must take a life, then you retain your right to self preservation.
How the incident is scrutinized before a jury may be different between someone who is trained in MA and one who is not if your MA background is deemed relevant to the case. The outcome should remain the same though. It's my belief that a jury raised on Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee can be as dangerous as one raised on cop shows. Many times an uneducated jury will believe another route was possible when it was not. That is the danger. It does not give you any fewer rights though.
How the incident is scrutinized before a jury may be different between someone who is trained in MA and one who is not if your MA background is deemed relevant to the case. The outcome should remain the same though. It's my belief that a jury raised on Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee can be as dangerous as one raised on cop shows. Many times an uneducated jury will believe another route was possible when it was not. That is the danger. It does not give you any fewer rights though.
Point well taken!!!! Unfortunately in today's society it seems some people would rather you roll over or walk away, when in reality you don't always get that luxury of being nice. It's a shame that self defense is viewed as wrong by some who will never experience or know what "Self Defense" really is. I mean look what's going on with the Pizza Hut incident. I don't know what ALL the facts are because I wasn't there, but there's an example. What should the delivery guy have done?
Do whatever is safest for you and your family. Every move I've ever seen to disarm has always come with a caveat.
"You will probably get cut"
"you will get cut"
"you may get shot"
Which is true in any situation, IMO. I'm not against martial arts, I'm for using the right tool for the right job. For example, if you are in a situation involving more distance, you may be better off shooting your attacker. Don't think about law, just do what you need to do.
Afterwards, get a good lawyer and a good expert witness. If you acted properly, he'll tell the jury you did what you were trained to do.
This is probably a better question to pose to a lawyer or DA in your area. Personally I think I would choose whatever I felt would give me the greatest chance of survival. If you're really good maybe you can take a guy's knife from him faster and easier than you could get out of reach and draw. If not....
Me, I think that it has to be a personal decision. I don't know martial arts (and I can't even draw so that means I know of no arts 
) and with what I have right now, I couldn't learn and use even if I wanted.
So I train on the firearm. I know my limitations, I know what I can, and can't do, when it comes hand to hand, so I put all my decisions on immediate danger with either retreat, if possible (again, due to my limitations), or firearm.
I've had to go over what I would do with knowing myself and then creating a plan. That is what you, and all the others here, have to do for yourself.
Good luck
.
Wayne
) and with what I have right now, I couldn't learn and use even if I wanted.So I train on the firearm. I know my limitations, I know what I can, and can't do, when it comes hand to hand, so I put all my decisions on immediate danger with either retreat, if possible (again, due to my limitations), or firearm.
I've had to go over what I would do with knowing myself and then creating a plan. That is what you, and all the others here, have to do for yourself.
Good luck
.Wayne
Here in Portland there was a case where an asian martial arts instructor found a kid spray painting his building. He had just repainted from previous grafitti. Apparently the guy got so riled up he chased the kid and proceeded to beat the Holy Shiite out of him..... the kid got a way from him a few times but ended up being shoved into a road by the martial arts instructor. Where he was then hit by a drunk driver 
.
I haven't looked at the outcome, but the one thing I did hear, which applies to your case; is that the martial arts instructor is being charged with use of a LETHAL weapon. Apparently certain levels of certification will qualify you as this: with only your bare hands.
So if you are the real stuff as apposed to a mall ninja
, you might want to see what the law in your area is. Because I know for sure that the martial arts instructor is in deep doo-doo, since he was not justified in the use of a lethal weapon. (But who wouldn't be pissed if you caught guys spraypainting your freshly painted building?)
So whereas guys like me might get away with throwing a few punches in self defence if it was necessary, I don't think you would get that same luxury in the eyes of the legal system. I mean, we have all heard of cases where those who were CLEARLY defending themselves are punished in some way.
Remember:
"With great power, comes great responsibility."
*Shoots web and swings across building*
.I haven't looked at the outcome, but the one thing I did hear, which applies to your case; is that the martial arts instructor is being charged with use of a LETHAL weapon. Apparently certain levels of certification will qualify you as this: with only your bare hands.
So if you are the real stuff as apposed to a mall ninja
, you might want to see what the law in your area is. Because I know for sure that the martial arts instructor is in deep doo-doo, since he was not justified in the use of a lethal weapon. (But who wouldn't be pissed if you caught guys spraypainting your freshly painted building?)So whereas guys like me might get away with throwing a few punches in self defence if it was necessary, I don't think you would get that same luxury in the eyes of the legal system. I mean, we have all heard of cases where those who were CLEARLY defending themselves are punished in some way.
Remember:
"With great power, comes great responsibility."
*Shoots web and swings across building*
This is some really great info guys. I've always trained for different circumstances both with my knowledge of MA and my firearms, afterall, certain situations call for different actions. Plus for anyone who's ever been in a real fight or altercation knows you don't have time to think, you have to just react. You see the threat, access the situation and react as quickly as you can all within a split second. Guess I'd rather be in a court room then in a Funeral Home! Now as far as running a kid down for spray paint, that was just foolish. You're right that "with great power comes great responsibilty". Apparently this "instructor" didn't take it serious enough and is now learning the hard way. Again, I don't know all the facts of the situation though. But even I couldn't justify smacking someone around for spray paint alone.
BerettaCougar
New member
I personally dont know the person, and this might be a rumor (Dont you just love those)
But this guy that works out where I work out, is a small time pro boxer and he is considered a lethal weapon.... And if he fights someone or hit someone he can be charged with use of a lethal weapon.
for him to defend himself he has to have the same justifications that would call for firearm use... basically last option.
But this guy that works out where I work out, is a small time pro boxer and he is considered a lethal weapon.... And if he fights someone or hit someone he can be charged with use of a lethal weapon.
for him to defend himself he has to have the same justifications that would call for firearm use... basically last option.
One of my fellow aikido classmates, who also was a black-belt in another art, carried a concealed handgun with the thought that it was there if he really needed it, but in most situations, his martial arts skills would be more appropriate. His reasoning was that if he needed to defend his use of martial arts in a court room, he could say that he had not used the most deadly tool at his disposal and had thus exercised restraint in his response to an attacker.
Would it really be considered restraint? See that's where I think the problem could come in. I am registered as a Black Belt. However, a bullet could paralize someone just as a strike or kick to the neck or spine could. So where would it be considered restrained to shoot someone? And would you shoot to kill or shoot to immobilize???
BerettaCougar
New member
If you kill something it is immobilized
I think you misunderstood me. The use of his nongun skills would be exercising restraint ("I could of just shot him."). One of the features of aikido is that one uses only enough force to control the opponent. If they quit before you had to hurt them, then you don't HAVE to hurt them. If that is not enough, then you take it a little further. You have shown restraint in that you did not use any more force than you had to. If the attacker gets seriously hurt or killed, you could probably demonstrate that only did what you had to do, which could include the use of a firearm.
I see what you're saying. That's a valid point. I believe the sidearm should be your last resort, but if need be to use it wisely and quickly. Although a friend of mine ran into some trouble a few days ago while he was in the city. He was walking by a few guys hanging on a side walk during the afternoon, as he walked by, one of them said he (my buddy) stepped on his shoe and to come over there and apologize. My friend said that he didn't from a small distance and proceeded to walk away. At which point they started cursing and telling him to come over and apologize again. Realizing that this might turn to something my buddy just walked away. The 3 guys then drew knives out and started walking towards him before he turned around. What these fellas didn't know was that my buddy has a permit and pulled his shirt up to reveal the .38 revolver sitting on his hip. The guys stopped for a moment, looked at each other then figured it was a bluff and began walking to him again knives in hand. Well he pulls his .38 out and pointing towards the ground cocks the hammer back and says "I don't want any trouble you understand"??? Well the 3 of them freeze dead in their tracks, look at one another and then laugh saying it was only a joke and they didn't mean anything. So they turned around and walked away and went down another st corner. Lets hope that any altercation with a weapon ends this easily and quietly............................!
In my limited martial arts training (2nd class brown belt, shingitai jujitsu) we talk about use of force often in the advanced class. Just a bit of basic info in case anyone doesn't know. Joe the whitebelt has much more latitude should he be involved in an altercation than his 3rd degree black belt instructor. The theory is that the instructor should have a greater degree of control. So in the hypothetical barfight, if the whitebelt breaks the guy who pushed him's (grammer?) arm he would be less scrutininzed that if the instructor did it. So, the more training you have, the more controlled you are required to be.
Now, in the case of someone attacking me (also an LEO) I am more likely to wait on the firearm option just because of the fact that I am very comfortable hand to hand. BUT, the instant that I feel that my life or health or that of another is in danger, I will go immediately to lethal force. If that means a jujitsu technique, a baton to the head, or a firearm, it all comes to the same thing- lethal force and justification. If I am justified in shooting someone, I am also justified in beating them in the head (or a boxer using his hands to the head). As far as my martial art goes, if I hit a person in the stomach, it is not considered lethal force. If I attempt to break the cartilage under the adam's apple, it is considered lethal force.
Perhaps some of this is tangential to the topic, but I hope it is good info nonetheless.
Now, in the case of someone attacking me (also an LEO) I am more likely to wait on the firearm option just because of the fact that I am very comfortable hand to hand. BUT, the instant that I feel that my life or health or that of another is in danger, I will go immediately to lethal force. If that means a jujitsu technique, a baton to the head, or a firearm, it all comes to the same thing- lethal force and justification. If I am justified in shooting someone, I am also justified in beating them in the head (or a boxer using his hands to the head). As far as my martial art goes, if I hit a person in the stomach, it is not considered lethal force. If I attempt to break the cartilage under the adam's apple, it is considered lethal force.
Perhaps some of this is tangential to the topic, but I hope it is good info nonetheless.
XavierBreath
New member
If your friend is cocking the hammer back on a DA wheelgun in self defense, you might tell him to get a bit of training. I hope he lowered the hammer without incident during the adrenaline dump.