The UCMJ defines self defense as the use of force to protect yourself or others from immediate harm. For self-defense to be justified, an individual must believe that using force is both necessary and objectively rational under the circumstances.

In addition to situational awareness and de-escalation techniques, effective self defense training includes combatives. Here you will learn how to fight back using knees, strikes, and kicking.

Imminent Threat

When someone attacks you and you reasonably believe your life is in danger, it can be legal to defend yourself with deadly force. However, you must first prove that the attacker was attempting to attack you and that you were under threat of imminent death or serious bodily harm. The imminence factor is the primary factor that triggers a right to self defense. You must also show that your reaction was reasonable.

It is up to a judge or jury to decide what constitutes an imminent danger. It depends on what you are going through.

How close to you have to be to an actual threat for it to be considered imminent. It would be imminent if Big Bill were to walk up to your home and say “I’m kicking your teeth in” if he was less than 20 feet away. It is not considered an imminent threat if the attacker is half a mile from you because you can call the police or run away.

Legal systems generally do not recognize a right to preemptively strike someone based upon anticipated threats. The courts will instead carefully examine both the immediate nature and your defensive reaction in order to ensure that they are aligned.

A verbal or physical threat can be a direct threat. The latter is particularly dangerous, as it can escalate a potentially fatal situation. For instance, if a person is approaching you aggressively at night in a deserted area, making movements with their hands that suggest they might be reaching for a weapon or making threatening words, it is likely considered a direct threat and a cause for your right to self defense. It is important to understand the difference between a direct threat and an indirect one because the law can have different consequences. Indirect acts such as throwing an object at you, which would not qualify as a direct attack, still could justify your use of deadly force. A direct, unprovoked knife attack, for example is not justified.

Reasonable Fear Of Harm And Death

For you to justify using physical force in defense against an attacker, there must be a reasonable fear that your attacker will kill or cause serious injury. The threat must be imminent. This means it is likely to occur soon. For example, if someone has a knife to your throat and you believe they intend to kill you or cause severe bodily injury, it is likely that you will have a reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury. You can therefore use deadly force in self defense to protect yourself.

The level of physical force you use must also be reasonable. It cannot be too little or too much. If you slap someone on the face to scare them and they run, this is not considered reasonable. It is reasonable to shoot someone dead if they are attacking you and you have a gun. You had a good reason to fear that your life was in danger and the level of force you used was proportional to the threat.

It is important that you can think ahead when you are in a self-defense situation. You should also consider the possible consequences of your actions. If you don’t, you may end up getting charged with assault or another crime. You can avoid this by talking to a criminal lawyer who will help you formulate a strategy against the charge.

You can only defend yourself with force for as long as the threat continues. This is the duration element. If someone attacks you, and then stops assaulting you, but continues to put you in harm’s way, you can still use the same amount of force as you did at the time of your initial attack.

The reasonableness of your fear is determined objectively, meaning that a jury decides whether the perceived aggressor was actually about to attack you in a way that would justify the use of physical force by a reasonable person in the same situation. It does not matter if you believe the alleged attacker was not attempting to harm you, or if he was trying to assist you.

Duty To Retreat

The duty to withdraw is a concept which requires that a person first attempt to deescalate the situation or flee from danger before resorting force in self-defense. Some jurisdictions, like Colorado, have laws that establish a duty of retreat, while other jurisdictions, like New York, have caselaw precedent that makes the state “stand your ground”. New York doesn’t have a “stand your ground” law, but its self defense laws still require that someone use deadly force to defend themselves before trying to escape.

However, within your home (under Castle Doctrine), you are not required to retreat if someone is invading your space illegally. You can use deadly force when you are in the public domain to protect yourself against an immediate threat such as arson or burglary or murder or manslaughter.

In order to prove your claim of self defense, you will need to show that the amount of force you used in the circumstances was reasonable. If you are convicted of the criminal charge, you could face significant prison time or fines.

The concept of the duty to withdraw can be tricky. Many people may think that it would be unreasonable for an attacker to expect a victim to take steps backward or away from danger, especially if the victim is already in a position of being attacked.

You should know how your jurisdiction defines duty to retreat. Also, you should compare that with the standard that your jurisdiction has set for what kind of force is reasonable under the circumstances.

Proportional Force

Proportionality means that the force used must be reasonable in intensity, duration, and magnitude compared to an perceived or demonstrated hostile action. Unfortunately, deadly force is often used to cause injury or even death of the attacker. This is not the intention. If you can prove that the force used was not more than necessary to stop an aggressor, then you are protected from criminal prosecution.

For example, if someone is slapping you and you fear they may kill you with double action otf knives, you could reasonably defend yourself with lethal force. You cannot, however, retaliate with an equal level of threat. This level of violence can be considered disproportionate. You should disengage your opponent or let them know that a fight is not a good idea.

This proportionality rule is tricky for military personnel deployed abroad. They must take into account not only the local social facts but also the international law and law of war. Some states have laws requiring military units to try to avoid using deadly force unless they are unable to escape. Some states have “stand your grounds” laws which allow a military unit to respond immediately to a threat regardless of their location.

Proportionality becomes more important if the law of war or international law requires a credible military response. This is where most ROE fail. They confuse proportionality when completing a mission with proportionality in self defense, and they unnecessarily hinder a commander’s ability to engage an opponent decisively.

The principle of proportionality is important to understand, especially when preparing for a real-life self defense situation. It can help you think more critically about whether a potential attacker has a weapon, and it may help you determine what force you need to neutralize the threat. Understanding this concept will allow you to make better decisions when you are preparing for your deployment. Always be mindful of the safety and well-being of your comrades.