I was in a situation recently where I had to use a walking cane to defend myself against an assault in my own apartment. Although I used restraint and did not assault this man, he has decided to file private charges against me for 'Forcible Confinement' and 'Assault with a weapon'. These charges had to be made privately, since the police think this man is lying.
To my surprise, I have discovered that this is a common tactic amongst muggers, abusers, psychopaths, and bullies in general. If you respond to their physical assault by using force yourself, they are likely to call the police and have you charged as the one that started the fight. Both sides will claim 'self-defence'. If you are unaware of your rights, or inarticulate before the police or a judge, you might find yourself in trouble.
There is a fine line seperating 'self-defence' from 'assault'. Under Canadian law, every citizen has the right to defend themselves, even if they use a weapon to do so. As a martial artist, you will be held to a greater degree of responsiblity that the average citizen...since you are more in control of how much damage you can inflict.
An excellent book that I received in the mail about this is 'Canadian Law & Self-Defence' by Ted Truscott. I was quite impressed with Ted Truscott's video on 'Raising Canes', which is self defence with a walking cane. This book goes on to explain justified use of force under Canadian law, when the use of force is appropriate, rights to citizen's arrest, as well as the weapons that are restricted and permitted to carry under Canada's laws.
Although the laws are different in Canada than they are in the United States, American readers might also find the book useful as far as legal procedures, rationale, etc. For example, Canadian law states that you may use enough force against an aggressor to stop them. You may not use excessive force, such as to 'punish' your assailant or to 'make sure he doesn't do it to someone else'. This would be seen by a jury as 'indulging' in violence.
While in American law, you may use force, including deadly force (a gun) to prevent a burglar from breaking into your house, but you CANNOT use a gun to shoot a burglar leaving your house with your property, regardless of the value. This means if you shoot a burglar for stealing your $50,000 diamond necklace, you will be charged with MURDER.
Check out more at pacificcoast.net/~ttruscott/
To my surprise, I have discovered that this is a common tactic amongst muggers, abusers, psychopaths, and bullies in general. If you respond to their physical assault by using force yourself, they are likely to call the police and have you charged as the one that started the fight. Both sides will claim 'self-defence'. If you are unaware of your rights, or inarticulate before the police or a judge, you might find yourself in trouble.
There is a fine line seperating 'self-defence' from 'assault'. Under Canadian law, every citizen has the right to defend themselves, even if they use a weapon to do so. As a martial artist, you will be held to a greater degree of responsiblity that the average citizen...since you are more in control of how much damage you can inflict.
An excellent book that I received in the mail about this is 'Canadian Law & Self-Defence' by Ted Truscott. I was quite impressed with Ted Truscott's video on 'Raising Canes', which is self defence with a walking cane. This book goes on to explain justified use of force under Canadian law, when the use of force is appropriate, rights to citizen's arrest, as well as the weapons that are restricted and permitted to carry under Canada's laws.
Although the laws are different in Canada than they are in the United States, American readers might also find the book useful as far as legal procedures, rationale, etc. For example, Canadian law states that you may use enough force against an aggressor to stop them. You may not use excessive force, such as to 'punish' your assailant or to 'make sure he doesn't do it to someone else'. This would be seen by a jury as 'indulging' in violence.
While in American law, you may use force, including deadly force (a gun) to prevent a burglar from breaking into your house, but you CANNOT use a gun to shoot a burglar leaving your house with your property, regardless of the value. This means if you shoot a burglar for stealing your $50,000 diamond necklace, you will be charged with MURDER.
Check out more at pacificcoast.net/~ttruscott/
-
Re: Martial Arts, Self-Defence and the Law
Thu, March 15, 2007 - 11:38 PMThanks, this is no small bit of advice, since we do not encounter violence daily. We may WANT to inflict justifiable damage, but part of being a martial artist is the ability to have have clarity under duress. Well done. -
-
Re: Martial Arts, Self-Defence and the Law
Fri, March 16, 2007 - 11:38 AMThank you. Actually, you are legally permitted to use force in self-defence in order to STOP a situation from getting worse. For example, if someone approaches you in a threatening manner your best course of action is to face them squarely, and tell them in a calm, clear voice "Stop. Keep your distance from me. I don't want to fight you, but I am prepared to defend myself." Be sure to say this as loudly and as clearly as possible, so any witnesses in the area will be able to testify later that you not the aggressor and were actually trying to prevent the fight.
Acting in a submissive/ frightened manner will encourage an attack, and so will acting in an aggressive/ challenging manner. Being calm and assertive however, is your best chance to avoid an attack.
If the person does not heed your warning and comes any closer to you than six feet, you should use an uppercut to the jaw in order to knock them out cold. When you have to justify your actions in court, you should tell them that this uppercut was necessary in order to prevent the situation from escalating. You should leave the situation as soon as possible, and then be the first one to call the police.
This is an excellent website with some excellent advice by the retired street fighter Marc 'Animal' MacYoung. This gives important tips on how a situation of violent crime is 'set-up' before it actually happens, so that you can recognize and avoid the situation before it happens.
www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/
-
-
Re: Martial Arts, Self-Defence and the Law
Sat, June 30, 2007 - 1:09 PMThis is a very salient area. Local laws vary so widely as to jurisdiction that the wisest course is to check your local and state laws concerning the use of force. Actually striking someone with a cane or other implement is generally frowned upon unless your assailant is in possession of a weapon. Of course one's general physical stature will come into play; i e. a seventy year old person is likely to be given more leeway that a 20 year old.
The fact is that in a truly self defense situation legalities are an after thought. The first order of business is survival.
Being charged in a criminal action is a major inconvenience. One comes into the world of bail bondsmen and attorneys and one realizes that they have entered another domain of existence; an expensive domain at that. Then there may be impending civil actions to deal with: more expense!
Outside of playing the role of a good victim, one should gather a good set of "street smarts". Being in a position to where the use of violence means that you have messed up somewhere along the line. The focus and the highest form of martial art is AVOIDING VIOLENCE.
If one reaches the point to where violence simply cannot be avoided; any legal action taken in the matter is simply icing on the cake to having survived the situation.
As most laws have taken a decided bent towards protecting the criminal in lieu of the law abiding; an interesting area presents itself when one is wrongfully criminally charged: jailed for self defense. A good reading of the life of Gandhi and anything else on non-violent civil disobedience might be considered worthwhile. After all, it would seem that you will have a lot of time on your hands sitting in a jail cell. One might consider the wisdom of making your incarceration as inconvenient as possible.
Of course if you "John Wayne" it and go out hoping for a fight or confrontation then all bets are off.
-
Re: Martial Arts, Self-Defence and the Law
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 4:53 PMI can't stress enough that this is a very serious topic and well worth studying. The very best resource bar none is Massad Ayoob's LFI-1 "Judicious Use of Deadly Force". It's a bit gun-centric in the examples. But it is forty hours of incredible instruction on the legal and ethical parameters of the use of force, especially deadly force. You'll get the unvarnished Word from one of the best in the business who has run many successful defense teams for regular citizens who used force in self protection. You'll learn more than most lawyers know on the subject. And if you're inclined to take the completion course you will get an excellent introduction into the practical use of handguns as tools of self defense. I can't stress enough just how important this class is. -
-
Re: Martial Arts, Self-Defence and the Law
Fri, October 12, 2007 - 1:19 AMVery interesting. Thanks for this Todd.
-
