Re: 5.56 HomeDefense Ammo Suggestions
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: smokshwn</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DaveAgain</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> JJ, I get where you are coming from, but all 50 states have a pretty narrow definition of lethal force justification. Using lethal force on a perp moving <span style="text-decoration: underline">away</span> from the threat window will not hold up in virutally any argument. As far as I know, this applies to LE as well. Obviously, MIL application would be subject to ROE. I'm breaking Graham's Rule #1 by even commenting, but I have had personal experience in dealing with a DA in a self defense shooting situation. My argument for the use of lethal force stood and he dropped the case. However, had the perp been a few feet outside of the threat window, things probably would have gone the other way. It really came down to a few degrees of angle. </div></div>
You might want to be careful making blanket statements. As far I can tell what you know of lethal force statutes is not much (giggle, there's a joke there).
Many mention nothing about the direction the bad guy needs to be moving rather they generally hinge on the acts the bad guy has committed and could potentially commit and how that victim percieves those acts as a threat.
For instance if I awake in the middle of the night to a bad guy in my living room. Said bad guy fires a shot at me and misses while fleeing out the front door. I shoot bad guy in the back running across my front lawn. Legal in Utah, as it is legal to apply lethal force to a perpetrator of a forcible felony in an effort to prevent escape or commission of further forcible felonies.
</div></div>
My "blanket" statement is based on what Ayoob teaches and testifies to as an expert witness:
<span style="font-style: italic">"The criteria of justifiable homicide: ability, opportunity, and jeopardy.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Ability</span>: the opponent posses the power to kill or cripple. This power may come in the form of a weapon (gun, knife, club, etc.) or through disparity of force. Disparity of force can be legally established in various ways.
force of numbers: you versus a gang
able-bodied versus the disabled: you on crutches, your attacker is able-bodied. Note that if you become disabled in the course of a previously equal encounter, this criteria can suddenly become applicable
male versus female: the courts view this as an issue of cultural predispositioning, and of the average size and upper body strength of men versus women. The specifics of the size of the man versus that of the woman are not typically relevant (if Woody Allen attacks a 200 pound female weight lifter, the female can use deadly force against him). Every state in the US views lethal force as a legitimate defense against rape.
A digression: Per Department of Justice statistics, in the average year, 79% of the attackers in successful rapes are unarmed. With 14% of successful rapes, the attackers are armed only with contact weapons (knife, club, rope, etc.). Only in 7% of successful rapes are attackers armed with firearms.
physical size and strength: no clear legal standard for when this disparity exists, more of a case-by-case matter. For the closest thing to a commonly accepted legal standard, see Juste David Myers in the John Peters book Defensive Flashlight Techniques.
The other person is known to you to be a highly trained fighter
<span style="font-weight: bold">Opportunity</span>: capable of immediately employing the power to kill or cripple. Two components: distance and obstacles. Range typically not a factor with guns, but is with contact weapons. An unarmed home intruder who attempts to take away your weapon fulfills this criteria, even before he succeeds in taking your weapon away. Research done by Sgt. Dennis Tueller found that the average person can close 21 feet in 1.5 seconds. That is, an attacker armed with a knife who is seven yards away can be literally at your throat before you can draw and fire two rounds.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Jeopardy</span>: acting in such a manner that a reasonable and prudent person would conclude he intended to kill or cripple." </span>
If you are comfortable with trying out your state's laws by shooting somebody in the back as they are fleeing, then have at it. What little I know will probably keep me out of jail
I'm done so this can get back on topic.