Self Defense - The Act of Protecting One's Self

Self defense is the act of protecting one's self againstChanging the above example slightly, suppose that Al
physical force or the immediate threat of force. It canpulls out a water pistol, and begins shooting it into the
justify conduct which would otherwise give rise tocrowd. Bob honestly believes that the water pistol is
criminal or civil liability. It can operate as a defense tofilled with poison, and anybody who is sprayed with it
virtually any criminal or civil wrong which involves thewill die, but he has no reasonable basis for this belief -
use or threat of physical force, such as assault,he's just paranoid. Acting on this belief, he shoots and
battery, and homicide.kills Al. If Bob is charged with murder, he will be able to
To successfully argue self defense in a trial forargue imperfect self defense, and if he proves the
homicide, the defendant must show that he or shefacts as stated above, he will not be convicted of
acted with a genuine belief that they were in dangerfirst-degree murder, but of voluntary manslaughter.
of death or severe bodily harm, that their conduct wasTo successfully prove self defense, one must also
necessary to prevent that harm, and that a reasonableshow that the amount of force they used was
person in the same situation would have had the samereasonable. Lethal force is only reasonable when the
belief, and acted in a similar manner.actor is threatened with death or severe bodily harm. If
There are 2 basic types of self defense in a murderlesser harm is threatened, less force is justified. So, if
trial: perfect and imperfect. Self defense is perfectAl runs toward Bob screaming that he's going to beat
when the actor truly believed that they were in dangerBob up, but there is no indication that he is going to try
of death or grave bodily harm and that belief wasto kill Bob, Bob may only repel Al's attack with the
reasonable. This requires the court to look at theminimum amount of force necessary to protect
defendant's mental state (did they honestly believe thathimself, and no more. In such a case, Bob would
they were in danger?) and the surroundingprobably not be justified in shooting Al, but he would be
circumstances (given the facts, was that beliefjustified in using pepper spray to incapacitate him while
reasonable?).he escapes, or using some other non-lethal force to
For example, suppose Al pulls out a gun and beginsdefend himself.
firing into a crowd. Bob, who happened to be in the lineIn many states, a person must first attempt to escape
of fire, pulls out his own gun and shoots Al, killing him.the danger before resorting to physical force. This
Bob has acted in perfect self defense: he trulyadds another requirement for a successful showing of
believed that he was threatened with death or severeself defense: escape was impossible. Some states,
bodily harm, and that belief was reasonable under thehowever, allow a person to stand his or her ground.
circumstances (he was being shot at, after all). If BobIn the majority of states that require a person to first
were charged with murder, and he successfullyattempt to escape, there is an exception for a person
proved the above facts, he would be completelywho is attacked in his or her own home. Known as the
exonerated."castle doctrine" (based on the idea that one's home is
Imperfect self defense is when a person acts with anhis castle, and he should not be required to retreat
honest belief that they are in immediate danger offrom it, rather than defend it). However, the other rules
death or severe bodily injury, but, given the facts, thatassociated with self defense are basically the same
belief was not reasonable. This does not completelywhen it occurs in the actor's own home: there must be
exonerate the defendant, but if it is shown, it canan honest and reasonable belief about a threat of
reduce first-degree murder to voluntary manslaughter,serious harm.
a less severe crime.