We have an "issue" here. I recall hearing years ago that a man with a knife is considered deadly and you can shoot him if he's within 10', or maybe it was 20'. Anyone know for sure? I'm in AZ, if that makes a difference.
Thanks for any input you have!
2007-07-02 12:21:52 · 15 answers · asked by Dez 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
The shooter has to convince a jury that he or she was in fear for their life. Simple. However that shooter had better have some training or prior knowledge that a knife wielding man poses a very serious risk of death or critical injury from well over 21 feet. That's the old magic number by the way, 21 feet.
Seriously, have a friend stand 21 feet away and charge at you full speed. They will be on you damn fast. Faster than you'll be drawing a concealed handgun and firing accurately. Even when you hit the assailant, they'll still be a very dangerous threat for sometime after the rounds penetrate major organs. Unless its a headshot he can still plant that knife in your arteries and major organs easily.
Bottom line. If you've been trained (reading an article in a magazine counts) and you can articulate your fear of death or critical injury, you can get away with it.
Be damned sure I'd shoot a person menacingly wielding a knife, when that person makes the very slightest move in my direction. 21,31, 41 feet away. Of course I've had alot of training and can articulate my fears to the Grand Jury.
2007-07-02 15:29:59 · answer #1 · answered by California Street Cop 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
A person with a knife is a significant threat from 18-21 feet away. I assure you, if you are holding a knife 21 feet away from me, and I am aiming my weapon at you and telling you to drop the knife, you better do it. If you don't comply, you will be shot and possibly killed. Tests have shown that a person at 21 feet can still cover the distance efficiently, even after being shot, and still pose a threat. Unlike the movies, when you are shot, you don't automatically fall down. It may take several seconds for your body to react depending on the placement of the round. So when I shoot you at 21 feet, I must remember to still find adequate coverage because you are still a threat. Hope this explains it a bit.
2007-07-02 21:24:51 · answer #2 · answered by spag 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is correct, however you can only shoot him if he approaches you and your life is in danger. You will have to have a gun carrying permit if you are in public with that gun as well. Also, if you are standing outside on the passenger side of the car and he is on the drivers side, you cant shoot him because there is an object between you two to keep you safe. So if you see a man with a knife standing 10' or even 20' away from you with a knife and isnt trying to stab you, you cant shoot him then you would be hauled off for murder.
2007-07-02 19:27:51 · answer #3 · answered by Brutus 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Like people said, it depends on whether or not there is any threat of harm. But 10 feet is a good amount of distance, so unless he is actually running toward you or about to throw the knife at you, you're going to have a really hard time convincing the judge that he was threatening you. In most states, there is a "duty to retreat" which means that you are responsible for retreating from danger (unless it's your own home) and you can only attack if retreat is infeasible. The burden of proof would be on you to show that you acted reasonably and that your action was necessary under the circumstances.
2007-07-02 19:40:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
An average person can be deadly at 21 ft with an unsheathed blade. And that is average not some knife throwing expert. This is considering a trained law enforcement officer with a holstered fire arm. A person can cover this amount of ground from a dead stop in 5 or 6 running strides. One must be able to draw a weapon from a retention holster(designed to make it difficult for someone to remove the weapon,) manipulate any safeties on the weapon and bring it to bear accuratly enough to not endanger innocent civilians. That being said if I see a knife in a supects hands, they see a gun in mine. I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6. Their is not much time in life or death situations.
2007-07-02 19:46:47 · answer #5 · answered by cutiessailor 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
It's not a matter of how far away he is. It's the matter of if you feel your life is being threaten by the man with the knife. If a man with a knife is 1 foot away from you and is just standing there doing nothing, you have no right to kill him. Now if you see a guy with a knife 20 feet away from you and he is running at you with the knife drawn, you pretty much have the right to kill him because your life is in danger.
2007-07-02 19:34:48 · answer #6 · answered by greatkid809 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
As a UK Police Officer I can answer this with regard to the British Police system and would assume in the US there is a similar answer.
In UK Common Law (which applies to everyone in the country) you are allowed to use "reasonable force" to protect life and property. This is always comes down to "What is reasonable???" as there is no written answer, it is an objective test for each person.
For example if someone came up to you on the street so you could see both their hands and in each was a balloon they were waving aggressively at you, it may be considered reasonable to push them away or punch them. Any stronger attack with a weapon I would say was not reasonable.
If someone came into your house uninvited in darkness and you saw the glint of something metal in their hand that you perceived to be a knife I would say it would be reasonable for you to attack them with a knife in order to guarantee the safety of you and your family. Were the glint to turn out to be a watch it would make no difference as at the time, with your perception I would continue to argue you acted reasonably.
In London a few years ago a man left a pub drunk carrying a table leg in a plastic bag. People in the pub phoned Police and stated the man had a gun on him. Armed Police stopped the an and he aggressively waved the table leg in their direction. The man was shot dead by Police and it was argued they acted reasonably considering all the circumstances.
I think anyone, hand on ther heart, understands what is or isn't reasonable and we as Police are no different. Were a male coming towards me with a knife and I was in posession of a firearm (which I'm not in the UK) I would strongly consider shooting him and would argue that to guarantee my life continuing I acted reasonably.
2007-07-02 20:37:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If he is close enough to stab you, he is too close to shoot. I don't know AZ law, but I doubt there is a set distance. I could sit next to you on a bus with a knife on my belt and not be a threat. On the other hand, if I start throwing knives from 50 ft, and come anywhere close, I would qualify as a threat.
2007-07-02 22:00:34 · answer #8 · answered by STEVEN F 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It has been proved in court that someone with a knife will get to you if he or she is within 21 feet of you. This is regardless if have a gun pointed at the dipshit or not. If you get charged at you are going to get stabbed or cut before you can pull the trigger. Not worth it. So if some fool has a knife and is threatening you, blast away.
2007-07-02 19:55:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The statute in my state says lethal force may be used when a person is in fear of great bodily harm or imminent death for themselves or another human being. It's always going to be a judgement call.
Common sense would dictate that no sane or rational person would bring a knife to a gunfight, but perhaps that's just my view.
2007-07-02 19:55:14 · answer #10 · answered by chuck_junior 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋