Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

deadly force

Read a random definition: writ of ejectment

A quick definition of deadly force:

Deadly force is when someone uses force that can cause serious injury or death. This term is important in criminal law because it determines whether someone can be convicted or defended. In some cases, like in Texas, a person can use deadly force if they believe it's necessary to protect themselves from someone who is using deadly force, kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery. However, using deadly force is only allowed in specific situations, and it can be disputed whether an action qualifies as deadly force or not.

A more thorough explanation:

Definition: Deadly force is a type of force that can cause death or serious injury. It is often used in criminal law and can be a key factor in determining whether someone is guilty or not guilty of a crime.

For example, in Texas, a person can use deadly force against another person if they believe that the other person is about to use deadly force, kidnap, murder, sexually assault, rob, or commit aggravated robbery. However, they cannot use deadly force in response to anything other than deadly force.

It is important to note that the use of deadly force is only legal in certain circumstances, and determining whether a particular action qualifies as deadly force can be a matter of debate. For instance, in the case of Jarret v. Town of Yarmouth, the court ruled that releasing a police dog on a suspect does not count as deadly force and therefore does not need to be justified by the strict standards of legal deadly force.

Overall, deadly force is a serious matter that should only be used in situations where it is absolutely necessary to protect oneself or others from harm.

deadlocked jury | deadly weapon

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
i've been away for a while what were the most recent waves? any this week?
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.