Self defense laws

[judoka86]

TELL ME ABOUT SELF DEFENSE LAWS IN CANADA. I have heard many different stories like: you can knock him down, but if u go to the ground to pummel him then your the attacker. and what about if they die from a standing chokehold and they have a knife stuck in your leg or something like that. PLEASE GET BACK TO ME!!

[aes]

I am not sure if this is a Canadian or American thing but I had heard that if you are in fear for your life when attacked this may give you just cause for using more a more brutal counter attack.

 

IE if the attacker is much bigger than you or say a gang is attacking you, this would put you in greater danger and therefore you are justified in doing what you need to prevent this. Much the same as if the attacker pulls a knife or gun.

 

That being said once the situation has been improved by you eliminating the threat (knocking them down, breaking their arm etc) this does not give you the right to continue the beating.

 

However if you are attacked by say four people you need to eliminate a couple of them from the fight very early on in order to come out on top. One Ninjitsu practitioner stated he breaks the first guys arm to even the odds. Certainly to me it is hard to decide when you are in grave danger or not.

[Ironberg]

Anyone heard of the guy in Australia who killed a guy in the parking lot with a spin kick in the head. He's in court and I never was able to find the news on the outcome.

 

One question - let's say that if one was to defend themself and they didn't know how serious the strikes were in their combo and ended up breaking a few ribs, the jawbone, and some bad bruises in couple seconds of instrictive combos. Is the defender done for because he didn't realize the lethality of his strikes until the opponent was unconscience?

 

Could he explain in court that his training always included safety measures, and therefore - kept him from being able to understand the true strength of his art.

 

Questions like this are of concern to me, because without the benifit of some measure of self defense this defeats one the the primary reasons for martial arts. It looks like politics has defeated it.

[judoka86]

What about about the fact that if you were on an adrenaline rush and you inflicted more damage than you thought was possible?

[CanuckMA]

The boundaries change with different jurisdictions, but by and large, the language implies that you can use as much force as neccessary to disengage and escape.

 

Unfortunately, the better trained you are, the more carefull you need to be because a good lawyer will focus on the fact that with your training you should have better control.

[judoka86]

I have been reading a lot of these posts and, I think that aikido or even judo (to a lesser extent) is great if you just want to control the enemy and get him neutralized. I might not be right..... but you know. Some techniques in Aikido hurt for maybe a minute or two and are excrusiating but then the pain goes away, and in judo just dodge his attack, smack him with a backfist, throw him down,

 

and then just leave.

[Thuggish]

if a guy attacks you, pummeling him IS the only way to make sure he wont attack you anymore. do what you have to, just dont go absolutely insane, and explain calmly what happened to the authorities (only if you have to deal with them at all, that is. id prefer to simply hospitalize someone and leave.) if you were forced into action, and appear like a decent guy, youll be fine.

[torris]

I know in Texas, you can use up to and including lethal force to protect life and property. However, the law also indicates that you may only use reasonable force neccessary to stop the attack.

 

Would a block and joint lock have stopped the escalation. Maybe so, maybe not. But, regardless, I agree with the others that you probably should not have verbally accepted the challenge.

 

To continue to attempt to walk away would have been best. Block, and walk. Block, and walk. Block, Strike, and walk. Until he got the message.

[Bad_Vibes]

And when you do run from the fight and allow the bully to go on his bullying ways he will continue to terrorize people. Maybe your cousin, your wife, maybe rape your daughter some day. And most would reply the law is there to take car of people like that. That is little consulation(sp?) to someone whos loved one has been a victim.

 

Let's say a person is capable of stopping a person like this due to their martial arts abilities and they run and another person runs into that bully ten minutes later and is killed. Is the person that ran now liable? Yes that is a ridiculous question. But so is expecting someone to know how much of a threat someone is to them and basing the extent of their defense on that.

 

It blows my mind that we live in a world that is so concerned about the well being of thugs. Most thugs go years terrorizing people without ever paying a legal price. A decent citizen defends themselves once and the courts come down on them like they were John Dillenger or something.

[Rich_2k3]

To be honest if I was attacked in the street, for example on the way home after a night out, i wouldnt think about the law, i'd defend myself and do more than enough to make sure I could get away safely. I mean under the stress and adrenalin of a real attack, i think politics and the law would be the last thing on ur mind (unless ur an experienced fighter).