I dont know if tis is off topic, but somehow its not, its a strange situation Cause here in Canada, you cant use karate moves or boxing on the street, only in the school, if you attak someone with those moves it can be considered a criminal attack with a weapon.

In the US they let you use guns, is the law different or the same about empty hand combat? Or is there any place I can check the laws about attacks in the US?.

If I attacked someone, and used a jab and they know I took boxing lessons, my punishement will be bigger then if I just jumped on someone and punched him without ever taking boxing class.

Usualy people never take notice of that, but its a fact.

Well in the united states, state law varies. Battery, assualt, etc. does not fall under US CODE and is thereby addressed by the state.

However generally if you were not the primary aggressor (self defense scenario) and did not use excessive force. You would be legally in good shape.

Also having a spotless criminal record gives you the benefit of the doubt in these situations.

I suppose if you jumped or attacked someone without just cause and had experiance in a form of martial arts, boxing, etc. A good prosecutor could use that against you to get a conviction. I would.

Ok thx.

Maybe its because of my english, but theres a paragraph I did not understood, if Im beeng attacked and use exesive force for defense I can also have trouble with the law? Thats what you said right?

Yeh thats what I said that people dont take notice of that, and as you said a good prosecutor can use that against the attacker.

I'm a perfect example of the excessive force thing. I got into a fight and ended up getting sued. I didn't get prosecuted criminally, but got sued for the medical bills. Self defense stops the second the attacker stops attacking you. If someone walked up to you and punched you in the face, then backed up and said he didn't want to fight, you can't legally touch him. If you do then you are guilty of battery. It's fucked up, but that's the way it works. Self defense is just that, defense. There's no provision in the law for you to get even with the guy that attacks you. It cost me over $10,000 to learn that lesson.

If you defend yourself theres no problem. I know the fists of boxers can be considerd deadly weapons because of the injections to toughen them up.

Ok thanks for that now I get it, I agree its totaly stupid.

This reminds me of a childhood story, when some dude jumped on me I just pushed him off somehow, then he bent over hiding his face with his arms, asking not to hurt him.

Wehn I walked away he jumped on me again and I started running after him, he was running away by screaming No No and to leave him alone, then when I walked away he was getting closer.

So I guess it can happen in our adult life, you punch someone back. He acts like Rlpinca said, and its suppose to be over, but the dude does it again and stops, again and stops, but I guess after repeating to much, if you get back on him, I hope it wont be considered battery.

Hmm I dunno its not something to be realy discussed about, it can happen different ways, it will depend from peoples approach to those actions.

Fighting isn't about skill anymore. It's about who can afford the better lawyer.

Pretty much everything is about who can get a better lawyer or who has the most money, of course if you got more money youll get a better lawyer.

No if they go all don't hurt me dont hurt me youre well withing your rights to incapacitate them, however you aren't supposed to use deadly force at that time.

Guess again. All you are legally allowed to do(in regards to self defense) is get them to either let go of you or stop hitting you. Anything after that is battery or assault. Once they stop becoming a threat, you're supposed to walk away. That can be interpreted in different ways(see expensive lawyer remark).

i've heard from many sources(some credible) that if you are a black belt in a martial art you have to tell someone that wants to fight you this or you can be guilty of assault with a deadly weapon. in some ways this seems to make sense and in others its absurd. first off, if some one wants to beat me up and i tell them i'm a black belt in jujitsu(for example) they will assume i'm bluffing. but at the same time i've known some people that are black belts that can kill people bare handed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rlpinca:
All you are legally allowed to do(in regards to self defense) is get them to either let go of you or stop hitting you. Anything after that is battery or assault. Once they stop becoming a threat, you're supposed to walk away.

---

You watered my eyes with this story. I wish there was some way you could get this message out to more Totse readers.

Nox

That's sounds a little too far out there.

Most people can kill someone with their bare hands if they get pissed off enough without having any kind of training. It's just a matter of not holding back. Most people won't put very much effort into a fight, everyone has the potential to kill though. That's why you shouldn't worry about honor and dignity, the other guy might actually want to kill you, you never know.

Ok I know what to do next time heh,

Yeh man jiu Jitsu is a deadly art, or was, now its more sport like. But I read a little history and the fights were really realistic in the ring. SOme poeple eneded up blind or without a crotch after the fight.

BTW thats how Judo was made after Kano Jigoro decided to make the\another art
less violent and with logical and theorical explanations to every move, and to be the less harmless possible, thats how Judo was created, latter on Kawaishi developed the art the same way Kano did. Also the "spiritual" teaching of Judo were oriented towards the occident(dunno if thats how you say it in english), they were forwarded into a capitalist and industrial Japan. Those were the day when Japan was getting a lot of influence from Europeens etc..

Just a little history from Mack


But yes what rlpinca said is right, we cant agree more.

If you ever need a good lawyer, get one with a degree in acting and law.

you serious about that? Ill take notice of that.

I dunno, if you need a trial lawyer, get a good actor.

If you need plea down something, get an ass kisser who isn't afraid to stand his position(is that possible?).

Hey, Im no lawyer so don't take advice from me. But always get a lawyer who will bullshit the judge, jury, and prosecutor, but not you. Sometimes, lawyers will stab you in the back and conspire will the prosecutor. Never, never settle for a public defender because they are tools for the system.

Man thx a lot, thats good info here.

If u use a weapon and kill the person in self defence i dont think it will be still considered as self defence. even if he did attack u first,
For the shit ill get from someone surviving my attack id prefer killing him.

MAck, Dans quelle partie de Mtl vis-tu?

quote:

---

If u use a weapon and kill the person in self defence i dont think it will be still considered as self defence.

---

That's really a accurate intrepration of self defense. You were right to begin with.

If I have the means, intent and ability to cause serious bodily harm or death to you or a third party and you come back delivering lethal force, you are defending yourself and well within your rights.

A firearm is a last resort. Most provictim states acknowledge that here in the US, although some don't which is sad.

Intent, ability and oppertunity i meant to say...

I want to harm you, rob you, rape you, kill you, etc.

I am bigger and stronger than you, I have a weapon, etc.

I have cornered you in a alleyway and you have no where to run, I am less than 15 feet from you with a knife, or have broken into your home, etc.

With those aspects present, if you do have to use lethal force to defend yourself you are generally in the clear.

Just ensure you live in a provictim state.

quote:

---

Originally posted by I Love Poop:
Just ensure you live in a provictim state.

---

provictim or not, if someone gives me shit in my home then ill give them lead. id rather be in jail or running than dead.

in your home You can Do whatever. But who becomes the victim after you kill them?

quote:

---

Originally posted by kingenrage:
If u use a weapon and kill the person in self defence i dont think it will be still considered as self defence. even if he did attack u first,
For the shit ill get from someone surviving my attack id prefer killing him.

MAck, Dans quelle partie de Mtl vis-tu?

---

Jhabitais a LAsalle, maintnat jhabite a Chateauguay.

quote:

---

in your home You can Do whatever. But who becomes the victim after you kill them?

---

Not true, some states like new jersey require that you retreat from your own home before using lethal force.

Shitty huh?

You're the victim, even after you shoot the intruder.

A few years ago i had to use a knife in an attempted mugging in calgary, and i got the charges dropped on self defence. The thing that saved my ass is i was backing up the whole time and telling them to back off as i cut them. You must prove that you thought your life was in danger and show that you tried to get away. Those 2 stupid fucks had a punctured lung, severed rib, and numerous cuts to the face. I came out lucky without a scratch

Yeh I know, always make it look like you tried to prevent it but had no other way out. And of course know your laws.

Hmm some dude told me about a book on how to work with these things and how to work them out in court but at the ame time how to screw up and damage the other dude a lot and how to get out of it heh, Ill ask him again, maybe Ill show you guys the link to the book if I find it, could be an really intresting book.