Seld Defense or Fighting

[Kung Fu Wang]

When someone attacks you, you block his punch/kick and move back, you then jump back in and attack him. Will you call this

- "self-defense" or "fighting"?
- proper reaction, or over reaction?

What's your opinion on this?

 

[hoshin1600]

My opinion is that the line between self defense and fighting would need a better description of context.

 

[Balrog]

If I attack someone, it's fighting. If I'm defending against an attack, it's self-defense.

 

[Langenschwert]

It depends on the law. In many jurisdictions, you can strike first and still claim self-defence. No 110 lb. person should have to wait for a 260 lb. bruiser to throw a punch before doing anything. With regards to levels of force, it is again subject to local laws. In many places, you can use enough force to stop the threat and no more. So if in your hypothetical situation above, your counterattack consists of one punch and the opponent runs away, then that's all you're allowed to do. You can't run after him, take him down and ground and pound him for 17 minutes. That's assault at the very least.

 

[FriedRice]

Also, the amount of damage inflicted can change how the story is told by your Attacker and how it will be perceived in court. Even with only one punch, but you're well trained and now his face is busted up, you could be in trouble. Or even a light punch but he trips over the curb or was drunk....and falls backwards and cracks his head open and becomes a vegetable or even dies; then you could really be in trouble if there aren't any witnesses nor surveillance videos to help your case.

And if they find out that you're trained in Martial Arts, that's even worse for you. Even if your skills are only from a Groupon deal or something, their lawyers are going to make it seem like you're Chuck Norris, in court. In civilized society, it's usually best to just walk or even run away. Get all of your fighting fix, in a gym.

 

[marques]

Self-defence, reasonable force, proper reaction.
Fighting, excessive force, over-reaction.

The distinction... is complicated. Once again, and always about self-defence, is the context / situation that define what is reasonable or not. Or a good lawyer.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

When you walk on the street, you saw a guy is attacking a girl. You throw a punch and knock him out. Is that "self-defense" or "fight"?

My question is, "How do you know that you will be able to save that girl without knocking that guy out?"

 

[marques]

When you walk on the street, you saw a guy is attacking a girl. You throw a punch and knock him out. Is that "self-defense" or "fight"?
My question is, "How do you know that you will be able to save that girl without knocking that guy out?"

Self-defence is complicated. Violence is complicated. Humans are complicated. :]
I think is self-defence, even if Rory Miller said that I'm not a cop, so I should do nothing or to justify my intervention!!

And "If in doubt, knock him out." And articulate a good verbal defense, just in case.

 

[Tez3]

When you walk on the street, you saw a guy is attacking a girl. You throw a punch and knock him out. Is that "self-defense" or "fight"?

My question is, "How do you know that you will be able to save that girl without knocking that guy out?"

In the UK you are allowed to use reasonable force to protect others, there's also nothing that says you can't throw the punch.
UK law on self defence. Self Defence Legal Guidance The Crown Prosecution Service

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I just want to point out that "self-defense" also include "attacking". The concern is, when you attack, you don't want to throw a punch at your opponent's head, he shakes his head, punches back at you, knocks you down, and kills you.

So how many pound of force are you going to throw at your opponent's head? 10 lb, 50 lb, 100lb, or ...

 

[marques]

I just want to point out that "self-defense" also include "attacking".

Even kill people is included. But more force, more explanations required. No force (or no proofs) and there is no discussion.
Just retaliations.

 

[Tez3]

Even kill people is included. But more force, more explanations required. No force (or no proofs) and there is no discussion.
Just retaliations.

Don't forget that in Scotland, more proof is needed to prosecute than in England because you have the 'not proven' verdict.


'To attack' isn't really correct in cases of self defence, you are still defending yourself even if you strike first. You do what is necessary at the time but

 

[qianfeng]

I just want to point out that "self-defense" also include "attacking". The concern is, when you attack, you don't want to throw a punch at your opponent's head, he shakes his head, punches back at you, knocks you down, and kills you.

So how many pound of force are you going to throw at your opponent's head? 10 lb, 50 lb, 100lb, or ...

GASP wha.. what if I only knew aikido .......

 

[jks9199]

When you walk on the street, you saw a guy is attacking a girl. You throw a punch and knock him out. Is that "self-defense" or "fight"?

My question is, "How do you know that you will be able to save that girl without knocking that guy out?"

You're committing an assault in the defense of another. You take on the status of that apparent victim you're defending -- so I hope that she was truly a victim.

 

[FriedRice]

I just want to point out that "self-defense" also include "attacking". The concern is, when you attack, you don't want to throw a punch at your opponent's head, he shakes his head, punches back at you, knocks you down, and kills you.

So how many pound of force are you going to throw at your opponent's head? 10 lb, 50 lb, 100lb, or ...

There are too many what ifs. I think it comes down to training and experience in combat. The more fights you have, the more confident and more risks you can take instead of going all out every single time, and risk killing someone unintentionally. Not everything is going to be about kill or be killed, and it rarely is.

 

[Paul_D]

Also, the amount of damage inflicted can change how the story is told by your Attacker and how it will be perceived in court. Even with only one punch, but you're well trained and now his face is busted up, you could be in trouble. Or even a light punch but he trips over the curb or was drunk....and falls backwards and cracks his head open and becomes a vegetable or even dies; then you could really be in trouble if there aren't any witnesses nor surveillance videos to help your case.

Obviously I am looking at this from the perspective of UK law, which is different, but it matters not whether one punch gives him a cut lip, or causes him to fall unconscious to the ground and fractures his skull resulting in death.

The CPS are going to have a very difficult time proving that with only one punch you used unreasonable force, and as UK law also specifically states that it will be recognised that a person defending himself cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of his defensive action, I doubt they would even bother taking the case to court.

 

[FriedRice]

Obviously I am looking at this from the perspective of UK law, which is different, but it matters not whether one punch gives him a cut lip, or causes him to fall unconscious to the ground and fractures his skull resulting in death.

The CPS are going to have a very difficult time proving that with only one punch you used unreasonable force, and as UK law also specifically states that it will be recognised that a person defending himself cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of his defensive action, I doubt they would even bother taking the case to court.

Obviously, I wasn't even talking to you.

 

[jks9199]

Obviously, I wasn't even talking to you.

Funny thing about a forum... Lots of people read and respond to what you write. Might just be worth keeping that in mind as you type...

But, speaking for general principles of law in the US, I"m going to agree with Paul_D. The law generally recognizes that a fight is a chaotic situation, and most people aren't going to be able to precisely control every punch. But I'll disagree a little, too... You can find yourself charged with manslaughter or worse depending on the specifics of an incident. Your role in instigating the fight will be a factor, as will the reasonably foreseeable outcomes due to a disparity of force. If you're a trained figher, you're likely to be held to a different standard -- as will a big, strong 20 year old who gets in a fight with a 55 year old using a walker...

 

[jks9199]

When someone attacks you, you block his punch/kick and move back, you then jump back in and attack him. Will you call this

- "self-defense" or "fighting"?
- proper reaction, or over reaction?

What's your opinion on this?

A lot depends on the specifics. You can justify using the force necessary to allow yourself to safely get out of trouble. If you block the punch, wait 10 seconds, then jump the guy as he runs away? Not self defense. Block the punch, and nearly simultaneously respond with your own attack -- probably okay, unless the original assailant has been somehow incapacitated by the original block or is clearly and obviously trying to surrender. This stuff isn't hard, but it can be complicated -- and just depends a whole lot on specific circumstances. I've mentioned disparity of force in another post; that adds a whole nother level of complexity...

 

[Sapphire]

One factor that has been touched upon is the context of the situation.

Are you at work, arguing with a coworker because he arrived to work ten minutes late, obviously drunk, and he begins flailing at you? Or did a stranger just rape your wife?

Do you know what the difference is? In one situation, you care if you go to jail or not.