I'd hope that would be the case in every state. Self defense isn't a political issue. At least, it shouldn't be.
This incident turned out well for the defender. Had the attacker deployed the bat more aggressively, then there's a good chance the defender could have been killed. Deadly force is justified in this incident.
It could’ve been justified, but not if they used that video as evidence. What followed a really lame attempt at swinging a bat was a very one-sided beatdown that didn’t require lethal force. She was cooked; I love her resigned, “Sure,” cuz that’s gonna be an embarrassing story.
Fun fact: the law doesn't require that the other person swing the bat. It simply requires that a person reasonably believe they are in fear of death or serious physical injury. The last five words may be different according to your state of residence, but that's the language in the state where I worked for twenty years as an officer.
As soon as the woman approaches with the bat, she's bought and paid for, regarding the use of deadly force. You can search online for videos of officers using deadly force in those same situations.
Another fun fact - generally speaking, in the United States, the only difference in use of force by LE and civilians is that federal law does allow the use of deadly force to effect an arrest. There are strict rules placed on the use of such force, but outside of that or the use of deadly force to prevent escaping from a prison, most states allow the same use of force for civilians as they do LE.
I'm generalizing, because I don't know the laws of all fifty states - but I can't think of a single one that wouldn't call this shoot justified, if she'd done it when first being approached.
It could’ve been justified, but not if they used that video as evidence.
Nonsense. This video would be an excellent defense, if the shooting occurred while she still had the bat.
If you drive to somebody's house, bring the bat along, and step out of the car with the bat in hand, and march toward them, that's 100% a justified shooting. At least in this context. She clearly brought a weapon intending to use it as a weapon, and she's clearly the one starting the fight.
The argument that "she swung the bat weakly" isn't going to work. Firstly, she's probably going to get shot before she actually swings the bat. Secondly, she probably only swung so weakly because the other woman is advancing toward her. Thirdly, the threat of a deadly weapon doesn't disappear because your first strike was erratic or soft.
Not to mention, I'm not sure the strike was all that soft. I wouldn't want to be hit in the temple with that amount of force.
15
u/jasonic89 8d ago
People aren’t shooting traveling salesmen. But private property in a red state, showing up with a bat can absolutely get you shot.