Should A Fist Be Considered A Deadly Weapon?

[Xue Sheng]

In Colorado, a bicycle is specifically defined as a vehicle so DUI laws apply. There is also a specific law against riding an animal while intoxicated, so although it's not actually a DUI, you can effectively get a DUI while riding a horse.

The same should apply to fists. They're not deadly weapons in the legal sense, and there are abundant laws already addressing the issue of striking with various body parts.

In NYS a bike is a vehicle until the rider's feet touch the ground...then the rider magically becomes a pedestrian and the bike is no longer a vehicle.

 

[K-man]

If you are into precedents.

In 19th century France, a closed fist was considered a deadly weapon and thus combatants would kick or strike each other with an open-palmed slap, possibly influencing the French martial art Savate.

I wonder then, if you walk around with your hands in your pockets, could you be charged with carrying a concealed weapon? :ultracool

 

[K-man]

Then I found this.

Boxers are required to register their hands as "lethal weapons." = Not true. Research has failed to reveal any statutory, regulatory or other requirement that boxers -- or anyone skilled in martial arts -- "register" their hands or any other body part as "lethal weapons" in the U.S., UKoGBaNI, Canada, or any other common law nation. However, a criminal defendant's experience in boxing, karate, or other forms of hand-to-hand combat may be relevant to determining various legal issues. First, in the United States at least, the question of whether hands (or other body parts) of a boxer, martial artist or any other person even qualifies as a "deadly" or "lethal" weapon depends largely upon how "deadly weapon," "lethal weapon," or "deadly force" is defined (usually by statute, which is then interpreted by the courts). _See,_ _e.g.,_ Vitauts M. Gulbis, "Parts of the Human Body, Other Than Feet, as Deadly or Dangerous Weapons for Purposes of Statutes Aggravating Offenses Such as Assault and Robbery," 8 A.L.R.4th 1268 (1981 and supplements); Christpher Vaeth, "Kicking as Aggravated Assault, or Assault With Dangerous or Deadly Weapon," 19 A.L.R.5th 823 (1995 and supplements). Most statutes have been interpreted to require an object external to the human body before a "deadly weapon" element can be met. For example, in _Minnesota v. Bastin_, 572 N.W.2d 281 (Minn. 1997), the Minnesota Supreme Court overruled the trial court's conclusion that the left fist of the defendant, a former licensed professional prize fighter, was a "deadly weapon." Some courts in the United States have concluded, however, that a criminal defendant's experience in boxing or martial arts should be considered when deciding whether s/he possessed a required intent to cause harm. For instance, in _Trujillo v. State_, 750 P.2d 1334 (Wyo. 1988), the Wyoming Supreme Court found that there was sufficient evidence to support the defendant's conviction for aggravated assault after he punched someone in the head. His history as a trained boxer was one bit of evidence supporting the jury's findings on his mental state. Likewise, in _In the Matter of the Welfare of D.S.F._, 416 N.W.2d 772 (Minn. App. 1988), the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that there was sufficient evidence to conclude that the actions of the defendant, who had "substantial experience in karate," were sufficient to demonstrate his knowledge that he was hitting the victim with sufficient force to break the victim's jaw. Similarly, a criminal defendant's boxing or martial arts experience may be relevant to determining the validity of a self-defense claim. For instance, in _Idaho v. Babbit_, 120 Idaho 337, 815 P.2d 1077 (Idaho App. 1991), the defendant shot the victim and claimed self-defense. The trial court admitted evidence regarding the defendant's past training and experience as a boxer, concluding that it was relevant to a determination of whether the defendant truly believed it was necessary to shoot the victim in order to protect himself and others. The Idaho Court of Appeals affirmed. Documented: A criminal defendant's experience in boxing or the martial arts may be relevant to deciding whether the elements of a criminal offense have been proven.

i can only attribute this work to a guy called "Kickballs" on another forum. :asian:

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Then I found this.


i can only attribute this work to a guy called "Kickballs" on another forum. :asian:

I agree with everything Mister Kickballs said.

 

[Grasshopper22]

Yeah I would consider a fist a dangerous weapon. One hard punch to the temple and you could be dead.

 

[K-man]

Yeah I would consider a fist a dangerous weapon. One hard punch to the temple and you could be dead.

So, would you also consider hands as deadly weapons because even an untrained person could choke or strangle someone?

 

[Kong Soo Do]

One of the things I've taught my students, particularly in DT classes is that death has occurred from being hit in the head with a closed fist even when gloves and head gear are worn. Additionally, death or great bodily harm can occur from a clenched fist strike to the head (or open hand for that matter) and the person goes to the ground and strikes their head.

Attacker/victim factors need to be taken into consideration on a case-by-case basis.

 

[chinto]

in my state a charge of "2nd degree assault" normally is used when a weapon is used and crippling if not killing was intended. But that charge does not REQUIRE a weapon be used, and they show an indifference to the value of life. its good for a minimum sentence of 10 years in prison. ( and NO you do not get minimum security prison for that, more likely Maximum security.. very hard time I understand.)