When is Self-Defense, Self-Defense?

Blog Article/Post Caveat (Read First Please: Click the Link)

There is a huge disconnect in the martial arts communities as to the study and application of self-defense. So, first lets do this:

Self-defense is defined as "the defense of one's person or interests, especially through the use of physical force, which is permitted in certain cases as an answer to a charge of violent crime."

This is true and one of the worst and egregious mistakes made is the definition does not address that self-defense is also a legal term. When you look up the legal use/term then things get a bit foggy. 

Self-Defense as a legal term is defined as, 

"the use of reasonable force to protect oneself or members of the family from bodily harm from the attack of an aggressor, if the defender has reason to believe he/she/they is/are in danger. Self-defense is a common defense by a person accused of assault, battery or homicide. The force used in self-defense may be sufficient for protection from apparent harm (not just an empty verbal threat) or to halt any danger from attack, but cannot be an excuse to continue the attack or use excessive force. Examples: an unarmed man punches Allen Alibi, who hits the attacker with a baseball bat. That is legitimate self-defense, but Alibi cannot chase after the attacker and shoot him or beat him senseless. If the attacker has a gun or a butcher knife and is verbally threatening, Alibi is probably warranted in shooting him. Basically, appropriate self-defense is judged on all the circumstances. Reasonable force can also be used to protect property from theft or destruction. Self-defense cannot include killing or great bodily harm to defend property, unless personal danger is also involved, as is the case in most burglaries, muggings or vandalism."

OR/AND

"Self-defense is defined as the right to prevent suffering force or violence through the use of a sufficient level of counteracting force or violence. This definition is simple enough on its face, but it raises many questions when applied to actual situations.

For instance, what is a sufficient level of force or violence when defending oneself? What goes beyond that level? What if the intended victim provoked the attack? Do victims have to retreat from the violence if possible? What happens when victims reasonably perceive a threat even if the threat doesn’t actually exist? What about when the victim’s apprehension is subjectively genuine, but objectively unreasonable?

As you can see, self-defense law is more complicated than it first appears. In order to handle the myriad situations where self-defense arises, states have developed rules to determine when self-defense is allowed and how much force a victim can use to protect themselves. As mentioned, the exact rules differ between states, but the considerations are largely the same."

It is the set of rules, laws and mandates of society toward to use of violence in the name of self-defense often referred to as self-defense skills. If one takes time to view the many sites on the legal meaning of the term self-defense, i.e., this is an overview site (https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-law-basics/self-defense-overview.html), then you can read the various terms and requirements one must meet to remain in the legal self-defense square (see Marc MacYoung's site nononsenseselfdefense site on this one).

Simply ignoring these differences leads to a plethora of stuff that weakens, often destroys, one's self-defense claim and you can know this that the first responders, the police, know this and use it when investigating claims of self-defense. Just saying, "I was defending myself" puts you square in the middle of the crosshairs that say to the first responders, "This guy just admitted to breaking the law." EVERYTHING from that moment forward means you have an uphill battle all the way through the legal system. 

One point, I readily admit that due to the ongoing strong effort of the violence professions there is shift in the wind toward conveying this type of understanding to all those who would teach and claim to teach self-defense, especially in the karate communities. Reality is belief; Belief is Reality!

Keeping such things straight such as what, when, where, how and justification of self-defense is a balancing act that few spend more than a modicum of effort and focus on during training and practice simply because the majority rules. Don't take my word for it because as one violence professional states adamantly when asked such questions, "IT DEPENDS!"

For reference and sources and professionals go here: Bibliography (Click the link)

Note: why do I go to soooo much trouble in my efforts through this media? It's because every single one of those who don's the gi and enters the dojo is a brother or sister and the welfare of the karate family/community means a great deal to me so my efforts are to contribute to there already considerable effort in training, practice, application and understanding of this facet that is self-protection with marital skills in self-defense. Thanks!