This is a discussion on Justification to use OC? within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Whats generally accepted as the justification to use OC? As a photographer I routinely carry a very expensive camera into public. Now suppose someone tried ...
Array
Whats generally accepted as the justification to use OC? As a photographer I routinely carry a very expensive camera into public. Now suppose someone tried to take it by force, that is they grab the camera and are now tugging on it by the strap. Would I be justified to use spray solely to prevent my camera from being stolen?
I know nobody here is a lawyer, and I accept that nothing that follows is legal advice.
MA2, USN
When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state". Love your country, but never trust its government.
-- Robert A. Heinlein.
Array
It will depend on your state. In mine I can do just that use it to protect myself or property. And I don't see why not you are in fear that they might harm you which is just cause for OC Spray and I don't mean lethal force I mean less lethal.
Live in yellow or die in white.
Array
You wouldn't just kick his butt?
I guess it would depend on your state law.
There is something about firing 4,200 thirty millimeter rounds/min that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
Array
I have 1 or 2 D3's and a few lenses with me when I'm downtown with clients and I don't have an assistant with me every time (for those not familiar, that equates to anywhere from $7,000 to about $15,000 of equipment that would be very easy to take). I carry my handgun every waking minute, but like the idea of less than lethal. I've been carrying spray as much as possible, especially downtown. I get bums every single time that get persistent, but wouldn't spray them, just tell them to go away.
For me, if one of those bums won't back off after repeatedly being told, he's getting sprayed. I had 4 come at me one time. 2 from each side of the street. The only thing where they would end up was me and 2 clients, no businesses. It could have very easily turned into a disparity of force. Had it been one of them, I probably would have went for the pepper spray first.
I am friends with a couple cops and detectives. My understanding, or at least their understanding here in Corpus Christi, Texas is that if someone starts a fight with me (with NO physical instigation on my part) I can defend myself with pepper spray.
P.S. Nice to see another photographer on here!
Proven combat techniques may not be flashy and may require a bit more physical effort on the part of the shooter. Further, they may not win competition matches, but they will help ensure your survival in a shooting or gunfight on the street. ~Paul Howe
Array
I'm fairly sure that grabbing my camera (only a mere D700 :P ) would put me in a state of fear for my personal safety. I just wanted to bounce the idea off you guys also.
MA2, USN
When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state". Love your country, but never trust its government.
-- Robert A. Heinlein.
Array
As long as you can articulate that you are in mere physical danger and have a strong fear that your are about to killed by all means spray away.Originally Posted by Laser Sailor
One more step and it's on!
A person trying to steal your camera off of your body by force, without the use of a weapon is called strong armed robbery. One would think you would be justified to use OC spray to prevent a strong armed robbery.
-Bark'n
Semper Fi
"The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."
Array
When I carry my camera, I have it around my neck. If someone was trying to take it, they would be yanking my neck so I wouldn't even be looking for the spray if you get my drift.
Glock: G22 .40 S&W Smith and Wesson: Model 437 .38 Spl, and Sigma SW9VE 9mm
Array
I am not a lawyer nor am I a many-years gun carrier, but a newbie. So take this with the necessary grain of salt.
Would a strong armed robbery not be the equivalent of a forcible felony? It is my understanding that at least in Florida and quite possibly in many states, use of deadly force is considered justified if it is in response to the commission of a forcible felony that is in progress or has just been committed. E.g., if someone broke into your house whether they hvae a weapon or not, a forcible felony is in progress and as a result you are justified in the use of deadly force to protect yourself.
Robbery, correct me if I am wrong, is a felony. Not a misdemeanor. Strong-arm robbery involves the use of force, which makes me think it is a "forcible felony". The rules for judicious use of deadly force seemingly would apply.
Which, by extrapolation, would tend to indicate to me that use of less-than-lethal force would of course also apply.
Anyone with actual knowledge about whether or not a strong armed robbery is considered a forcible felony please pipe in. Also, anyone with knowledge of how non-deadly force gets ajudicated...as I'm sure it's a nasty beast with differential rules and not something which follows rationality and common sense in its actual laws.
People who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like.
- Abraham Lincoln
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
- Winston Churchill
Array
In Texas you can shoot to defend your property, but shooting or taking some one's life over a insured idem seem hard to live with the rest of your life to me.
That said someone trying to steal a camera from around your neck could also run a knife into you to speed up the process while attempting to cut the strap.
Second person with SA might be a real help as your attention is on your work and the camera.
I am grateful you posted this as it is a new area of consideration for me.
NOT LIVING IN FEAR, JUST READY!!!
Array
Robbery= Felony in NY anyways.
One more step and it's on!
Array
In MI, one can stand your ground and meet force with force when one reasonably believes there is danger of bodily harm. No use of force allowable to prevent loss of property. If, however, you merely try to hold onto your gear and the attempted theft becomes violent then one could reasonably fear for their safety. Somewhere I read that there is no requirement to wait for an assailant to attack first, as long as you "reasonably fear" for you are in imminent danger of great bodily harm. That was in reference to not having to wait for someone else to shoot first, but I would think would apply to OC or hand to hand defense as well Although clearly, witness will be reporting who threw the first punch and it'll be easier to prove your point if you wait for the bad guy to draw first blood...if you live long enough to worry about court.
Spend few minutes learning about my journey from Zero to Athlete in this mini documentary!
Then check out my blog! www.BodyByMcDonalds.com
Cupcake - 100 pound loser, adventurer, Ironman Triathlete.
Array
Strong Arm Robbery is a felony in Delaware. Spray them, if you can reach the OC before you can reach your weapon.
Array
depends on the state of course, but I think in most of them if someone is trying to rip something off your body, it can probably be claimed that you are in fear of your life (which I would be!). It is a different situation if you have your camera on the bench next to you and someone grabs it and runs and you chase them down and OC them.
Georg BüchnerWo die Notwehr aufhört, fängt der Mord an
(Murder begins where self-defense ends)
Array
i dont identify it as a different story at all...if someone steals something from you you are not bound to stand and watch them run away with it...you may reclaim your property with non-lethal force...you arent going to jail for running someone down and using oc spray on them to retrieve your property...run em down and shoot em and youre looking for trouble...
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
