Originally posted by BrianT
View Post
I say that because I am sure that someone will say 21 feet or something similar to that. I think training is starting to take a different look at that and say that it is potentially a deadly force situation. I think some officers were getting into the mindset that a person with an edged weapon and less than 21 feet away it was time for deadly force.
So is a person who begins advancing at 26 feet not justified while a person who simply turns at 18 feet justified? Instead of thinking along the lines of feet, think a totality of the circumstances which requires the use of deadly force.
Sorry to get all preachy.
Comment