After watching this channel for years it seems that sooooo many altercations someone may encounter and any accompanying legal problems can be solved and avoided with an OC spray.
You are not wrong...I have stopped more encounters with OC spray than using my firearm. At worst, the legal ramifications MIGHT be simple assault if you are wrong (yeah, there are those rare persons who may have asthma or other breathing issues but they probably shouldn't be messing with you if that is the case).
@@papimaximus95 I've trained a lot to retrieve, hold, and deploy it consistently, and with milk and a garden hose at-hand gave myself a spicy spa treatment so I know how it feels. The experiment conclusion; _not good._ I've heard John say it is actually a bronchio-dilator a few times, and Tim has said it _can_ kill, providing an anecdote. I trust John's opinion on this one.
John, maybe a crazy question, but is there a litigation advantage to using a mouse caliber (22lr) in a defensive situation? Is there any advantage to not killing the aggressor?? I believe Claude Werner is correct in his philosophy of a small caliber is fine, in that your objective is to break contact, not subdue and arrest.
The objective is to stop the threat. If you can stop the threat by breaking contact because they run or provide you an opportunity to run, great. But that's not a reliable means. If a .22 is all you can carry, or you choose that because you're an expert, you better be damn good with it to put a hole in the right place to make the attacker stop. The primary wounding in handgun rounds is from tissue crushing, and the area of a 9mm (.355 inches in diameter) is nearly 3 times that of a .22 (.22 inches) and that difference is significant.
Massad Ayoob, when discussing disparity of force and women v men, an additional factor is cultural disposition where women aren't conditioned for violence
As a 55 year old 6' male to the general public I have an advantage to most people. Unfortunately I have major physical disabilities. I would love to spend time on the mats training but, the very real possibility of having the nickname of "wheels" from a simple fall is a real problem. Disparity of force is real and issue and can show up where you may not expect.
In many states if he is raping her or she reasonably believes she is about to be raped it's justified used of deadly force, and disparity of force isn't relevant in that defense.
Ive never seen someone make the argument that bc someone was dressed a certain way they deserved it. Seems to me to always be they are stating how to make urself less of a target just like not being abosrbed into ur phone makes u less of a target. In neither scenario is the victim being blamed for the attack
If a woman gave a man who was larger and stronger than her a helluva run for his money in a fight either she likely was well trained in REAL self defense tactics AND worked out to achieve an abnormally high degree of strength Or He was both weak for his size and had little to no abilities of knowledge on how to hurt someone quickly and effectively do serious harm to a person in a fight Im 6'2" 235 ish very adept at street style no rules SD and I wrestled from 5th grade till I graduated HS My job at that time was so physical all I needed do to stay in shape was eat a sensible dinner My wife is 5'11" about 165 was a BIG jock in HS while we were still dating she use to try to play fight and wrestle with me consently saying how she could give me a run in a fight I would simply play along One day while we were both in my bedroom at my home she throws me into a behind my back head lock and says "lemmie see you get outta this big guy" I asked you're serious? She tightened her arm around my neck and said "bet your azz" I simply reached over grabbed the fingers on the arm she had across my neck pulled it off sidestep picked her up off the ground over my shoulder tossed her onto my king sized bed before she finished her bounce me and my 230lbs were seated on her hips and I had both her arms pinned avove her head on the bed she was completely immobilized helpless and at my mercy desbite her best physical efforts she couldn't move whatsoever and yes I kept her that way untill she said uncle multiple times Little later she admitted she never would've thought she could be so easily effortlessly and quickly rendered helpless in a fight I replied that WAS NOT a fight that was me exercising great care and restraint to immobilize you without hurting you An attacker would've beat you up badly very quickly I am over 50 now carry EVERYWHERE I go and also carry a small can of OC spray on my person and a HUGE can of bear spray in my vehicles incase I find myself about to be attacked by an unarmed person as believe me when I say if your choice is either I punch you dead in the face or I spray you with OC you WILL be glad I chose the OC
Hey John, just curious. If a defender has martial art experience, is Jiujitsu, Muay Thai, Wrestling, etc and has used their gun defensively, have their ever to your knowledge been prosecutors that used that against them? ie. The defendant used a gun when they were trained in x,y,z? If that makes sense
You have no obligation to use hand to hand combat. If it has escalated to physical violence, at a deadly level, then you don’t have to scrap or wrestle with them. Use what you choose.
"They take the plaintiff as they find then. If I punch a hemophiliac in the face with what would normally be a you know and they hemorrhage to death, guess what, that's murder...doesn't matter if I punched them in a normal non-fatal way" Not entirely true. First, the "eggshell-plaintiff" rule is a civil rule (torts), and not directly used in criminal law. Usually, you will see this in criminal law as a variation of the "felony-murder" rule. Whereby, if someone dies (by any means) during the commission of a felony, you are criminally liable for murder. The example presented would NOT be murder. This is why we have various degrees of homicide. Worst case scenario you would get involuntary manslaughter in my state. Even in Arizona it appears that fact pattern would NOT be murder but possibly negligent homicide.
This is the part of self defense law that I completely disagree with. If I’m on a jury where a defender uses deadly force to stop an unarmed attack and the defender is 100% using self defense (is not aggressive in anyway), and has no other reasonable defense, there is no way I’m voting guilty. I don’t think people should use deadly force if they can defend themselves any other way and I certainly wouldn’t, but disparity of force seems to protect aggressive, violent bullies by splitting hairs.
Disparity of force is actually a protection for the self defender. By default, you *cannot* shoot someone unarmed. But you can then argue the suspect was so big or strong or skilled that you had to shoot them.
Okay, John, Tim here is a question for you. I have severe back problems, and I mean severe. I also have advanced osteoporosis in my spine and hips. 2 years ago, I lost my balance and fell on my butt and I fractured some vertebrates. So any fall or punch can kill me or paralyze me. If someone attacked me I would have no choice but to shoot them. Would you say that in my situation, I have the right to shoot if they try to get to me after I warned them
You wouldn't need to warn your attacker before shooting them. In your situation, what matters is your subjective perception and objective knowledge of the situation. I would recommend having some official documentation from your doctor describing your vulnerabilities added to your medical records.
@@elendarulianreo exactly. If anyone had the notion that you should notify a potential attacker of your disabilities, that's as about as smart a notion as having to "Lock your house or car", for someone to burglarize it, since an open door is just too much a temptation. Sadly though, there are places where people are that dumb and come up with laws like that. Hello California, New York.
I like to hear more on this subject, I am 70 years old, I am not decrepit, but I cant run for more than a few seconds, I dont have marcial arts training and due to arthritis I can not form a solid fist. If attacked by an unarmed young fellow (say under 40), can I use deadly force?
If you are in fear of death or great bodily harm, the answer is probably yes. In that situation age is one disparity and arthritis could possibly be a second disparity.
More than likely yes. If a 25 year old assaulted a 70 year old, it's likely they could die or be permanently injured, so they would be justified in using deadly force (I.e, a gun). Now if the 25 year old is in a wheel chair, maybe that's different. Doesn't work the other way around though. If a 70 year old assaulted the 25 year old, it's unlikely for the younger man to be killed or seriously injured, so a gun would probably be excessive. Now if the 70 year old is 6'5 and absolutely ripped with proverbial "old man" strength, maybe that's different. There's always exceptions to the rule, but generally a 25 year old is stronger than the 70 year old, so the 70 year old has more leeway in terms of using deadly force. It really just depends on the situation, the district attorney and the jury you get sometimes.
You may have to "just take a whoopin" but you never have to just accept being sexually assaulted. Deadly force is justified if necessary to prevent rape.
Fisticuffs fighting is just ducking stupid man. Nobody wins in those situations, your hands all fucked up, and people can easily get killed from landing on something hard.
It's a sad day, indeed, when basic truths (trend data) can get you punished on the likes of UA-cam. Primatology also echoes such truths but activist psychologists are given the moral weight, nowadays. Appreciate the perspective, as always.
After watching this channel for years it seems that sooooo many altercations someone may encounter and any accompanying legal problems can be solved and avoided with an OC spray.
You are not wrong...I have stopped more encounters with OC spray than using my firearm. At worst, the legal ramifications MIGHT be simple assault if you are wrong (yeah, there are those rare persons who may have asthma or other breathing issues but they probably shouldn't be messing with you if that is the case).
@@papimaximus95 I've trained a lot to retrieve, hold, and deploy it consistently, and with milk and a garden hose at-hand gave myself a spicy spa treatment so I know how it feels. The experiment conclusion; _not good._
I've heard John say it is actually a bronchio-dilator a few times, and Tim has said it _can_ kill, providing an anecdote. I trust John's opinion on this one.
John, maybe a crazy question, but is there a litigation advantage to using a mouse caliber (22lr) in a defensive situation? Is there any advantage to not killing the aggressor?? I believe Claude Werner is correct in his philosophy of a small caliber is fine, in that your objective is to break contact, not subdue and arrest.
The objective is to stop the threat. If you can stop the threat by breaking contact because they run or provide you an opportunity to run, great. But that's not a reliable means. If a .22 is all you can carry, or you choose that because you're an expert, you better be damn good with it to put a hole in the right place to make the attacker stop.
The primary wounding in handgun rounds is from tissue crushing, and the area of a 9mm (.355 inches in diameter) is nearly 3 times that of a .22 (.22 inches) and that difference is significant.
Such good content
Never underestimate the speed in crocks when sport mode has been activated
I would like to see this guy break down the Real Life Goodfellas in Louisiana video. I'm super curious about that.
I think the one you are referring to is already on the other channel
@@ASPextra Thanks. I'll go search for it.
Massad Ayoob, when discussing disparity of force and women v men, an additional factor is cultural disposition where women aren't conditioned for violence
good video
As a 55 year old 6' male to the general public I have an advantage to most people.
Unfortunately I have major physical disabilities. I would love to spend time on the mats training but, the very real possibility of having the nickname of "wheels" from a simple fall is a real problem.
Disparity of force is real and issue and can show up where you may not expect.
Important topic, but if attacked by greater numbers of person, what goes into shooting anyone in particular? Hand of one is hand of all?
In many states if he is raping her or she reasonably believes she is about to be raped it's justified used of deadly force, and disparity of force isn't relevant in that defense.
Ive never seen someone make the argument that bc someone was dressed a certain way they deserved it. Seems to me to always be they are stating how to make urself less of a target just like not being abosrbed into ur phone makes u less of a target. In neither scenario is the victim being blamed for the attack
If a woman gave a man who was larger and stronger than her a helluva run for his money in a fight either she likely was well trained in REAL self defense tactics AND worked out to achieve an abnormally high degree of strength
Or
He was both weak for his size and
had little to no abilities of knowledge on how to hurt someone quickly and effectively do serious harm to a person in a fight
Im 6'2" 235 ish very adept at street style no rules SD and I wrestled from 5th grade till I graduated HS
My job at that time was so physical all I needed do to stay in shape was eat a sensible dinner
My wife is 5'11" about 165 was a BIG jock in HS while we were still dating she use to try to play fight and wrestle with me consently saying how she could give me a run in a fight I would simply play along
One day while we were both in my bedroom at my home she throws me into a behind my back head lock and says "lemmie see you get outta this big guy" I asked you're serious? She tightened her arm around my neck and said "bet your azz" I simply reached over grabbed the fingers on the arm she had across my neck pulled it off sidestep picked her up off the ground over my shoulder tossed her onto my king sized bed before she finished her bounce me and my 230lbs were seated on her hips and I had both her arms pinned avove her head on the bed she was completely immobilized helpless and at my mercy desbite her best physical efforts she couldn't move whatsoever and yes I kept her that way untill she said uncle multiple times
Little later she admitted she never would've thought she could be so easily effortlessly and quickly rendered helpless in a fight
I replied that WAS NOT a fight that was me exercising great care and restraint to immobilize you without hurting you An attacker would've beat you up badly very quickly
I am over 50 now carry EVERYWHERE I go and also carry a small can of OC spray on my person and a HUGE can of bear spray in my vehicles incase I find myself about to be attacked by an unarmed person as believe me when I say if your choice is either I punch you dead in the face or I spray you with OC you WILL be glad I chose the OC
One thing: self-defense on the street 100% has rules.
Hey John, just curious. If a defender has martial art experience, is Jiujitsu, Muay Thai, Wrestling, etc and has used their gun defensively, have their ever to your knowledge been prosecutors that used that against them? ie. The defendant used a gun when they were trained in x,y,z? If that makes sense
You have no obligation to use hand to hand combat. If it has escalated to physical violence, at a deadly level, then you don’t have to scrap or wrestle with them. Use what you choose.
👏
"They take the plaintiff as they find then. If I punch a hemophiliac in the face with what would normally be a you know and they hemorrhage to death, guess what, that's murder...doesn't matter if I punched them in a normal non-fatal way"
Not entirely true. First, the "eggshell-plaintiff" rule is a civil rule (torts), and not directly used in criminal law. Usually, you will see this in criminal law as a variation of the "felony-murder" rule. Whereby, if someone dies (by any means) during the commission of a felony, you are criminally liable for murder. The example presented would NOT be murder. This is why we have various degrees of homicide. Worst case scenario you would get involuntary manslaughter in my state. Even in Arizona it appears that fact pattern would NOT be murder but possibly negligent homicide.
John is turning into Jack Black
😄"Peaches Peaches Peaches Peaches Peaches"
I wish I could be Jack Black. I think he’s figured something out about life that the rest of us haven’t.
Facts lol
This is the part of self defense law that I completely disagree with. If I’m on a jury where a defender uses deadly force to stop an unarmed attack and the defender is 100% using self defense (is not aggressive in anyway), and has no other reasonable defense, there is no way I’m voting guilty. I don’t think people should use deadly force if they can defend themselves any other way and I certainly wouldn’t, but disparity of force seems to protect aggressive, violent bullies by splitting hairs.
Disparity of force is actually a protection for the self defender. By default, you *cannot* shoot someone unarmed. But you can then argue the suspect was so big or strong or skilled that you had to shoot them.
Okay, John, Tim here is a question for you. I have severe back problems, and I mean severe. I also have advanced osteoporosis in my spine and hips. 2 years ago, I lost my balance and fell on my butt and I fractured some vertebrates. So any fall or punch can kill me or paralyze me. If someone attacked me I would have no choice but to shoot them. Would you say that in my situation, I have the right to shoot if they try to get to me after I warned them
You wouldn't need to warn your attacker before shooting them. In your situation, what matters is your subjective perception and objective knowledge of the situation. I would recommend having some official documentation from your doctor describing your vulnerabilities added to your medical records.
@@elendarulianreo exactly. If anyone had the notion that you should notify a potential attacker of your disabilities, that's as about as smart a notion as having to "Lock your house or car", for someone to burglarize it, since an open door is just too much a temptation. Sadly though, there are places where people are that dumb and come up with laws like that. Hello California, New York.
I like to hear more on this subject, I am 70 years old, I am not decrepit, but I cant run for more than a few seconds, I dont have marcial arts training and due to arthritis I can not form a solid fist. If attacked by an unarmed young fellow (say under 40), can I use deadly force?
If you are in fear of death or great bodily harm, the answer is probably yes. In that situation age is one disparity and arthritis could possibly be a second disparity.
More than likely yes. If a 25 year old assaulted a 70 year old, it's likely they could die or be permanently injured, so they would be justified in using deadly force (I.e, a gun). Now if the 25 year old is in a wheel chair, maybe that's different.
Doesn't work the other way around though. If a 70 year old assaulted the 25 year old, it's unlikely for the younger man to be killed or seriously injured, so a gun would probably be excessive. Now if the 70 year old is 6'5 and absolutely ripped with proverbial "old man" strength, maybe that's different.
There's always exceptions to the rule, but generally a 25 year old is stronger than the 70 year old, so the 70 year old has more leeway in terms of using deadly force.
It really just depends on the situation, the district attorney and the jury you get sometimes.
You may have to "just take a whoopin" but you never have to just accept being sexually assaulted. Deadly force is justified if necessary to prevent rape.
Rape is great bodily harm.
LOL @ dated pop-culture reference.
Apparently, at ASP, the test is: Do you laugh at 13yo jokes about troubles of men of the sea.
Fisticuffs fighting is just ducking stupid man. Nobody wins in those situations, your hands all fucked up, and people can easily get killed from landing on something hard.
Age, sex, size, ability
It's a sad day, indeed, when basic truths (trend data) can get you punished on the likes of UA-cam. Primatology also echoes such truths but activist psychologists are given the moral weight, nowadays.
Appreciate the perspective, as always.