FL: Stun Gun is a deadly weapon.

[Alamo]

Sometimes, per the Pasco County sheriff and DA.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...0190718-iwmfg2wunfcufoirqdivnr7vw4-story.html
https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/...ng-taser-to-stun-driver-in-road-rage-incident
https://www.wfla.com/news/pasco-county/pasco-man-arrested-after-taser-rampage/
https://lawofselfdefense.com/stun-gun-used-offensively-charged-as-deadly-weapon/

[ALLEGEDLY]23 yo male runs stop sign, non-fatal crash ensues. People get out of cars. 23yo male calls his sister, she arrives on scene. At some point heated words exchanged. 23yo male stuns another male on chest and arm.[/ALLEGEDLY]

[ALLEGEDLY]Stunee and other witnesses say 23yo male instigated trouble, chased people with stun gun. Stunner ran away, people chased him claiming he was trying to escape the scene.[/ALLEGEDLY]

[ALLEGEDLY]Stunner (23yo male) says he got scared of people yelling at him and sister and they chased him down the street, he was defending himself[/ALLEGEDLY]

There is some video of him being chased. Also another part of video of him stunning some guy in the chest. Stunnee appeared to me to be bigger stronger (allegedly).

Police arrested 23yo stunner for aggravated battery with a deadly weapon.

Stun gun as a deadly weapon is the interesting part for me.



Can a single tool be "not deadly weapon" if used in defense, but "deadly weapon" if used on offense?

Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[Mongo59]

1. It depends on who it is.

2. It is Florida...

 

[Tactically Fat]

Almost any less-lethal methods of defense (or offense) can lead to SBI, including death.

 

[HoughMade]

A court will ultimately make the decision if it is or isn't, but Florida cases indicate that the standard is "capability to produce death or great bodily harm". There are several cases where what a "deadly weapon" is was at issue the following were found to be "deadly weapons" under the circumstances: car, bicycle (thrown), baseball-sized rock, spear gun, shoe, unloaded gun when used as a bludgeon, stick (if big enough), BB gun...

 

[Alamo]

A court will ultimately make the decision if it is or isn't, but Florida cases indicate that the standard is "capability to produce death or great bodily harm". There are several cases where what a "deadly weapon" is was at issue the following were found to be "deadly weapons" under the circumstances: car, bicycle (thrown), baseball-sized rock, spear gun, shoe, unloaded gun when used as a bludgeon, stick (if big enough), BB gun...

Not just Florida, and I know that any common object can legally be a "deadly weapon" if it is used to inflict serious bodily injury or death. But I don't see that this is an analogous situation.

If I use a ball bat to hit a home run I'm a hero, and the bat was not a deadly weapon, because the manner in which I used the bat was peaceful and did not threaten SBI or death to anyone...barring that the ball hits the head of someone in the stands.

However, if I use it to crush someone's skull, I may be a felon or a self-defender, depending on whether the crushee was a guy walking down the street or some dude breaking into my house at 3AM. But either way the bat was a deadly weapon, because it was used to inflict SBI or death. The manner in which I used the bat was exactly the same either way - I bashed his noggin. Whether I am charged or not depends on whether I had justification to do so. Same if I use a handgun to shoot someone -- that's deadly force, the only question is whether it was justified or not.

But in this case, the manner in which he used the stun gun was exactly the same whether he was defending or attacking -- he pressed it against the skin and ZAP. The DA or police are apparently saying that justification, or lack there of, changes the manner in which the stun gun is used and whether it can inflict SBI or death (because, I assume the police will argue that THEIR use of even more powerful stun guns is non-lethal). This seems like nonsense -- and dangerous territory. (Granted you could use a stun gun like a rock and bash the someone's head in, but that changes the manner in which it was used.)

I think that kind of logic might go where the cops won't like.

p.s. This is much like the legal dancing that goes around punching. If I punch someone and he hits his head on the ground and dies, suddenly my punch was deadly force (not an accidental consequence of non-lethal self-defense). But if I shoot/stab someone who is just about to punch me...

p.p.s. Furthering the analogy to punching...note that apparently the stunnee was not seriously injured in anyway (shoot, in the video it doesn't even look like it affected him). So there was not even a consequence of the stun gun's use (like falling down and hitting his head) to leverage it to deadly force.

 

[Alamo]

Almost any less-lethal methods of defense (or offense) can lead to SBI, including death.

Exactly. They can lead to SBI or death, but by design, less-lethal methods are not deadly force in themselves or when used correctly. Up to now, I don't think civilian stun guns have been considered to be deadly force like handguns are, when used as designed and they don't produce SBI or death. In this case, the use of a stun gun was charged as a deadly weapon even though as far as I can tell from the stories and video there was no SBI or death.

 

[rhino]

Unless someone uses a stun gun to clobber someone in the head or the person runs away in fear and falls and dies from the fall, I'm not seeing how a stun gun could possible be construed as a "deadly weapon." There is no "stun" involved. It stings a little and that sting goes away immediately after the stun gun is taken away or turned off. I've had a wide variety of them used on me (or by me on myself) and it feels like a hard pinch. It hurts the worst on side chub when you're not expecting some thick-necked ginger from Baltimore to surprise you from behind during dinner and really give it to you in the side fat. Don't stun my side chub, bro!

Stun guns are not Tasers. Stun guns are not "less lethal," they are just annoying.

 

[chezuki]

Unless someone uses a stun gun to clobber someone in the head or the person runs away in fear and falls and dies from the fall, I'm not seeing how a stun gun could possible be construed as a "deadly weapon." There is no "stun" involved. It stings a little and that sting goes away immediately after the stun gun is taken away or turned off. I've had a wide variety of them used on me (or by me on myself) and it feels like a hard pinch. It hurts the worst on side chub when you're not expecting some thick-necked ginger from Baltimore to surprise you from behind during dinner and really give it to you in the side fat. Don't stun my side chub, bro!

Stun guns are not Tasers. Stun guns are not "less lethal," they are just annoying.

I approve of this message.