If someone is armed, and you somehow disarmed him by taking his gun, is it legal to kill him even though he is now unarmed? (in the United States)
2006-07-07 05:00:56 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
cuz i know this officer who go to prison for killing a robber who had dropped his gun.
2006-07-07 05:04:17 · update #1
nope it is manslaughter at that point.
you have disarmed him - he is no longer a "threat" they say
2006-07-07 05:03:08 · answer #1 · answered by . 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I believe if you feel your life was being threatened you'd have a good argument for killing him. But, a hot-shot lawyer would argue that you shot an unarmed person, so it'd be risky. Perhaps the smartest thing to do would be to hold him at gunpoint and summon police so that you can tell your story (even then, if he denies it happened the way you said it did, you're still sunk). Unfortunately, our legal system isn't black-and-white; there are way too many gray areas. -RKO-
2006-07-07 12:05:58 · answer #2 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES, even in Canada. While the person is armed, there is a threat. Once disarmed, the threat no longer exists. To kill that person, is to murder. Murder is against the law in all of the Americas, North, south and Central. Not to mention the rest of the WORLD.
2006-07-07 12:05:22 · answer #3 · answered by Insight 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well you have many options here... distract him and run in the other direction as fast as you can screaming .. throw something at his head hoping you have a good arm then run away .... wrestle the gun from him and accidentally shoot him ..... but i don't think its legal to shoot an unarmed person even if they are dangerous you could however shoot him in the leg just to make sure and knock him out with a blow to the head that should do the trick i think
2006-07-07 12:05:39 · answer #4 · answered by whoami 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pretty much, but there would be an investigation, and you better have a good lawyer. You can kill in self-defense, but some people would argue that after you took the gun from him, your danger had ended. Like I said, get a good lawyer.
2006-07-07 12:03:51 · answer #5 · answered by natex14 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Self-defense but I am not sure...you might want to look this up. There were some recent laws passed in the state of Florida allowing a person to carry a weapon (licensed of course) and discharge the weapon if you felt that you were threatened in any way (even if the other person is un-armed).
2006-07-07 12:03:27 · answer #6 · answered by Meg...Out of Hybernation 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that you would get in trouble for that because he is defenseless now, but if he physically attacked you and tried to choke you or something like that even though you have the gun, you could probably argue that it was self-defense, and in that case you may not get in trouble. ...but I don't know! It's a guess. :)
2006-07-07 12:24:17 · answer #7 · answered by aanstalokaniskiodov_nikolai 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
self defense is based on using just enough force to protect yourself...however..if the gun went off in the struggle for it , and the bullet hits the attacker...then thats self defense....
once you have the gun, supposedly you have the upper hand and no need to kill in,order to protect yourself...
2006-07-07 12:03:32 · answer #8 · answered by badjanssen 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you were in fear for your life and during the struggle the attacker was killed that is one thing.
To kill after you have the upper hand and in control makes you the bad guy.
2006-07-07 12:03:34 · answer #9 · answered by Ron K 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you are charged since the person has dropped the GUN
2006-07-07 12:19:03 · answer #10 · answered by aliajao 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on your STATE's laws.
If he's inside your home and he's still threatening your life (eg. with another weapon) you may be OK shooting him.
You cannot go grabbing armed peoples' guns and shooting them just because.
2006-07-07 12:04:12 · answer #11 · answered by Funchy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋