Knife and self defense law question?

This is definitely one of those "check your state statutes" questions. However, as a victim defending himself, there are many layers of protection. The police may release you and not charge you with a crime. Failing that, a prosecutor may turn down your case, fearing publicity in your favor, or that it will be difficult to sway a jury. Failing that, if the crime is indictable, and your state requires indictments to secure a charge against you, you have to survive a grand jury where most of them have to think that you committed some crime. Failing that, there's the (petit) jury - of which *all* must be convinced of your guilt - not just one or a few or most.... ALL of them must agree. Failing that, there are appeals and deals.

The law does not expect you to fight fair, it only expects you to use no more force than is reasonable stop the attack. If a purse snatcher takes a purse containing nitroglycerine or asthma (heart or breathing medications which can help a condition caused by a purse snatching), is that a life-threatening event that might warrant shooting in the back? I'd say so. If it were me, I might take that risk and shoot or stab. If an unarmed assailant tried to kidnap a child, would I use lethal force? Yes - anyone has a right to use lethal force *while a felony is being committed and the victim has a reasonably fear of safety". So go ahead and stab away in this case, but when the perp stops the felony and runs away, you must also stop (or safely subdue the perp).

As to your specific question, you say you draw the knife after "surviving an initial attack". If the perp hasn't demonstrated a willingness to stop or to run away, you'd have rights to stab him in most municipalities - assuming, of course, you were not the initial aggressor. You therefore have rights to brandish the knife (threaten to use it). However, your rights to possess the knife to begin with is usually controlled; you might not be charged for brandishing the knife, or attacking the assailant, but, you could still be charged with a possession-based crime. That is what happened to Bernard Goetz in New York City several years back: 4 perps brandished a screwdriver and demanded his wallet; Goetz, in fear of his safety, shot the perps, who survived. This is a case where Goetz was saved by the various layers of protection I mentioned earlier: the police arrested him (he turned himself in later); the prosecutor tried to charge him with attempted murder and other offenses; and a jury cleared him of all but one charge, that of weapons possession.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Goetz

I do not think that will go over well in most courtrooms.

Look at a firearm instead of a knife. Rule in firearm is do not point a firearm at anything unless you intend on destroying it or killing it. Therefore the law has this thing called brandishing. Many people will pull out a firearm hoping to scare off an attacker. This is not lawful. The person doing this is often ignorant of the law. They believe they are doing something good. They hope to stop the attack and they did it without causing harm. The law sees it differently. It you take it out you better intend on using it. But if the attacker retreats you are not to use it.

I believe the same or similar will apply to a knife. I don't think this has ever come up in class. I will have to speak to some of the officers to see how correct I am.

I'm not a law expert, but my general view is that if an incident like the one you mentioned happens, and they find out you train in any kind of martial art, you will be looked down upon just like you said. Unless you are lucky enough to have an eye witness, or have a security camera recording.

As far as if you should carry a weapon for self defense goes, I personally don't. I don't because having a weapon doesn't always make the situation better. A weapon could help me defend myself better, or it could create an escalation that makes it more difficult. "Don't bring a knife to a gun show," is a saying that comes to mind. That saying may make it seem like I think guns are a better weapon for self defense, but I'm not trying to say that, guns have their own problems too.

I know that a lot of weapon carriers say that even if you are blamed for the incident because you had a weapon, at least you are alive, so there's that too.

sorry i got here a bit late for this.

let me put it this way, a good friend of mine was attached by 6 people. 3 armed with knives he received some minor cuts during this assault. and put 4 of the 6 in the hospital, killing two of his attackers, he spent 2 or 3 years in court proving it was self defense. and he was unarmed against six. the reason i know this is true is because it was in the news papers at the time as well, back in the late 70's or around there.

now re-examine your question do you think an unarmed person vs you being armed is going to look good in your favor.

To feel secure you should master the self defense and because of this you will need this program right here https://tr.im/2AV5m , the Patriot Self Defense program

All of the practices and actions are identified by mcdougal in an easy to understand language. In addition, the live presentations in the videos explain every relocate a detailed fashion, which makes it easier to learn the practices and practice them so if you intend to feel safe and obtain self-confidence then this system is really a must.

fsdsfsf