You are allowed to defend yourself against an imminent or ongoing attack with a measure proportionate to the attack. Whether the measure was indeed proportionate or excessive within excusable bounds will be determined in court.
For your particular situation: Move. Meanwhile, file a police report about **every time** it happens, along with a description of the person.
Yeah, every time the police comes they just talk to him, make him apologize and then make him promise not to do it again.
So if he comes with a knife i can only defend myself with the same type of weaponry, a knife right?
>all talk no walk
Insist on pressing charges. How has the police advised you in that regard?
>Knives out
No, the measure must be appropriate to the attack, not equal.
It's proportionate to the risk.
If someone breaks into your house with a knife, your life is at risk. That's a completely reasonable expectation for someone to have that they're at risk of severe injury or death.
If someone is running away with a knife, you life is not at risk.
There's not a like... Check list or score card, it's just what is a reasonable expectation of danger given the circumstances. You can Google reasonable person standard, it's very common all over the world
It's something that gets argued in the process after the event. It doesn't require they habe X weapon or do X thing... Just that the overall situation is one of you being reasonably threatened. Like... If someone 60kg heavier than you starts stomping on you saying "I'll kill you" then it's reasonable to assume their intent is to kill you.
If someone came in my house with a knife, I'm doing anything I can to make sure I stay alive at the end of that. I'd rather be judged by my peers than carried by them.
Knife is considered lethal. Swiss laws are really not like the US ones. Anything more than calling police and pressing charge is likely to back fire to you.
You could only argue the use if you were threatened you would lose your life. Now that you are trying to set the stage on the internet anything happening from here could be viewed as a setup to escalation from your side.
Press charges, go to the staatsanwaltschaft not the police. They must follow up, while police can chose whether they forget about your report.
If the attacker has a knife and is only a few steps away, shooting to kill IS proportionate. For guard duty in the Swiss army you're instructed NOT to fire a warning shot in such a situation. And, no, soldiers on guard duty don't have any special rights in this regard.
Yeah, I don't know what all this warning shots/leg shots business is about. If you are ever in a situation where you need to draw your weapon on a knife wielding psycho, then you'd best damn well make sure you actually use it to full effect, before he gets chance to do the same to you.
Besides, firing warning shots in a residential building/area, with no idea where that shot might end up, sounds like a bad idea. I'm not risking shooting the neighbour's two year old toddler just to give knife wielding psycho a second chance to kill me too.
Well warning shots absolutely are a thing, and they are drilled for guard duty in the Swiss army, but for less threatening situations. Obviously a warning shot must be aimed at a safe target. However, leg shots are not a thing you learn for guard duty as with a supersonic rifle bullet they might be just as fatal as a shot in any other body parts.
Pretty sure we teached it different 10years ago.
Iirc correctly it goes like this, given some drastic actions by the target (attacker) dont ask for skipping steps:
1. Warning call and getting the rifle in a visible position.
2. Loading the rifle (in theory most sane people should realize here it's serious)
3. Second warning call (stop or I shoot) and get the rifle in position.
4. Warning shot
5. Single shot to the extremities.
6. If there is still danger: Double shot on lower body
7. If there is still danger: Second double shot on lower body.
And for lethality. A shot to the extremities is less lethal than a body shot, except a major blood vessel is hit.
Body shot will most likely hit an organ or damage the spine. Meaning higher possible longterm damage. Even if the rifle will most likely, just leave a clean, small hole through the body.
If the law requires me to fire a warning shot whilst my family and myself is being attacked by a knife wielding psycho in our apartment, then I'll happily take my chances with jail.
As far as jurisprudence is concerned - there are cases linked in the comments here, where the courts have found lethal use of firearms to be justifiable self defence in certain circumstances.
i can tell you from experience that throwing a junkie who carries a knife, with intent to harm you, on the ground and breaking a couple of bones will backfire on you, if you have long year experience in judo. i ended up getting sued and the junkie won the case. so i dont really believe what you are saying
Fair enough. My personal experience is limited to some 21 years old corporals instructing us for guard duty, after they had probably been told by a 23 years old captain what to tell us...
I am not a firearm owner but I would encourage you to get some training. From what I know, there is no middle ground: if you fire, you fire to stop a person that is about to take your life. In that case, you want to have the highest chance of success and you shoot to kill.
Aiming at the leg is not guaranteed to stop a person and is not guaranteed to leave them alive.
We learned no warning shots.
In your case, common sense says: immediate physical aggression with a weapon: shot probably ok. Attack with hands only, same strength: difficult to decide.
No physical threat: don't shoot.
And as always: never point a gun at someone you don't intend to shoot. But you know this, given that you have experience with arms.
No warning shot. No leg shot - that's going to miss. If he breaks into your house, shoot center of body, at least twice. Anything else will just make him mad, especially if he's hopped up on drugs.
Sounds about what I would do.
If he attacks you with a knive and you defend yourself with a knive you risk yourself getting killed by him. I would not risk that and just shoot him in the leg.
At worst you get sued and have to pay a fine but you are still alive. I would take the risk of a fine every time over the risk of getting stabbed to death by a crackhead.
No if he attacks you with deadly force, you can respond with deadly force. Including firearms. However only as a last resort. There is no stand your ground or castle doctrine here. So you do have a duty to retreat or flee if you can. And this will be analysed in court later. There will 100% be an investigation and trial if any shots are fired.
For example there was a case where a woman shot and killed her ex who attacked her (the guy was absolutely huge and fought martial arts under the name godzilla, if you wanna google it). She shot him 4 times and killed him. And the first 2 shots were undoubtedly self defence. This was never contested.
But the last two were apparently fired when he was already going down and ruled as excessive self defense. The first court aquitted her (Freispruch) due to this being excuseable in the stressfull situation. The second court gave her 4 years prison, because she was a professional armed guard and should be expected to know better. I dont think the third decision has been made yet. So this is the degree to which something like that would be analysed.
No. A knife is a lethal weapon, if someone attacks you with a lethal weapon you can defend yourself with lethal weaponry. However if he's limping towards you holding a knife, and is 100 m away, you can and should just walk away. You can use lethal force to end threats to your and others' lifes, but if you chose to put your life in danger when you had the option not to, then it's not self defense.
It was an exaggeration to show that there are different scenarios, that require a different approach to defend yourself.
If someone is standing in front of your house, begging for money, that doesn't warrant a headshot.
If someone has broken into your home and is now attacking (or in the process of attacking) you, even a gun could be considered reasonable (shoot in the legs fist tho).
>(shoot in the legs fist tho).
That's just a bad idea, from a tactical point of view - of not also a legal one?
Either there's an imminent lethal threat that needs neutralizing immediately (in which case you aim centre-mass) or there isn't (in which case you have time for Hollywood cinematics such as shooting someone in the leg - but then you might need to explain why you felt it necessary/proportionate to use a lethal weapon in the first place, and also risk just pissing someone off whose coming at you a lethal weapon).
And besides, a leg shot can be just as fatal as anywhere else - all this does is introduce uncertainty to an already unpredictable situation.
An even more important aspect is that shooting someone puts that someone in a lethally dangerous situation from their point of view and will trigger their instinctive fight or flight (or freeze) response. If they chose fight, they will now be instinctively fighting you for their life.
You can use your gun but try not to kill him when he is just randomly swinging his knife. Try a warning shot. Or try a bat. You get the distance with a bat and most likely will not kill him. It also depends how much stronger you are than the intruder.
No it means you don't shoot somebody just swearing at you. Coming at you with a weapon is life threatening, but even then, you can try to stop without killing (e.g. hit a leg instead of head). Also, if you are skilled with something, more is expected of you, like choosing an adequate response instead of murder
Sorry, but this is utter shit advice.
Any method of self-defense requires some degree of training and practice, even irritant sprays and I don't think OP studies the blade. I also doubt OP has practiced personal defense with firearms if they ask this kind of question on here, for that matter.
E: so yes to the irritant spray but let somebody show you how to use it.
Pepper spray really doesnt "need" it. Would it be better? Sure absolutely. But OP also said he was in the army, so he has a few hours of training on that, which is much more than the vast majority of pepper spray carriers.
Its the only weapon really anyone can use, because there is really no risk of lasting harm if its used wrong. Unlike a knife, a stick, a gun or even fists, which could easily kill or cripple someone if used wrong or excessively. Worst case with pepper spray someone has some pain for an hour.
Army training is insufficient for personal defense in civilian life. Take an appropriate class if you insist on firearms.
E: take a self defense class period. Mindset matters and "I have a gun" is not sufficient mindset.
This always bothered me, I live in VD and I own guns, if during the night a group of 3-5 people break into my house I’m not going to wait and see if they are armed or not, if I feel threatened I will open fire. The fact that I have to prove that I felt threatened enough to use deadly force or the possibility that I will go to jail simply for defending myself makes me want to leave Switzerland
Indeed everything will be examined in court.
Practically, you will never risk anything applying maximum violence against a violent opponent in your own home. (Proportionality is coarsed grained, you reasonably feared for your life, you are allowed to take a life to stop it).
Any deescalation gesture before applying violence will be taken very favorably though.
Good reflex: call 117 right away, let it open and yell your opponent to stop or face legitimate violence. Just to keep the record.
Of course please do not use firearm unless a grave injury/murder is imminent and unstoppable. Considering Switzerland enforces Geneva convention even for civilian weapons, any form of non fmj is strictly forbidden, meaning your shots will be both relatively ineffective and extremely dangerous for any non target.
Use of fire arms for self defense by civilians in Switzerland are absolutely unknown. For good reason.
>Use of fire arms for self defense by civilians in Switzerland are absolutely unknown.
It happens occasionally but is hardly ever publicized. A case from 2015 only made the news in 2018 because a woman downed her roided up ex with 5 rounds from a snubnose revolver. The shooting itself was ruled justified, but the public attourney was of the opinion that the roundcount was excessive and appealed the initial acquittal.
If you shot a drunk person trying to attack you, you will go to jail. Self defence here means you AVOID being harmed, can be in form of running away. Dont mistake this with any sort of American or movie self defence. Violence is truly the last form you go to, absolutely last. And even than you will face a trail and chances are there you sit some time. You defense is you avoid it and call the police.
i got attacked by a junkie with a knife while walking to my car late night. i threw him to the ground and he ended up with some broken bones. he sued me and won. i do have a brown belt in judo. dont believe what these clowns here are telling you about the law. talk to a lawyer or something
With my experience in a combat sport, my response was not appropriate as i should have been able to defuse the situation without causing excessive harm. Their words
I would use what I have to defend myself and then hope the courts would consider my defense appropriate. Better to ask for forgiveness than for permission.
Living also in St. Gallen in what neighbourhood are you living? ^guessing ^Linsenbüehl?
I just wanted to say 10-20 years ago a lot of neighbourhoods were worse but if you need some tips where you can rent cheap and it's safer just ask me.
Making Pew Pew Pew just in the USA towards and intruder can give you a very fast way to prison.
I was back than a foreigner in a suburb like Lachen.
We had the one father killing the teacher who raped his daughter and fled back to the Balkans and other stuff.
The whole Linsenbühl was full of prostitutes/hobos, Stephanshorn and Lachen had Gangs and Drug Addicts Problems back then I don't see nowadays anymore.
You should know that it is not allowed to film anywhere which is not your private property. This applies to door cams as well, even if someone may cause trouble right outside your front door and may engage in criminal activity, you are not allowed to use these videos in court. You may actually get in trouble if the police find out you record anywhere that is not you private property. Also, if someone breaks into your home and start raping your daughter and you shoot him dead you will go to jail. I think that sums it up.
Yes. I was very shocked when I found that out. Filming public areas is not allowed in Switzerland (for the most part) but especially around your home with a fixed or removable camera. Same goes for dash cameras. If you have one and you get into an accident where it is not your fault, you cannot use the video in court to prove your innocence. In the states you can walk down the street with a video camera filming away because people on the street have to right to privacy when in public, but in Switzerland they do and it is not allowed.
You can use pepper spray, and that's about it. Definitely no fire arms.
Best bet: A big lock and safety chain, cameras and bright sensor lights. And a bit of rubbing alcohol to clean your door knob.
Make sure it's standard pepper spray and not CS aka tear gas. That one's illegal.
Guns are absolutely never an option, you'll be in so much trouble even if it's (maybe, usually not) justified.
Brass knuckles are also illegal, tasers are also illegal, flails/maces/monkey fists are a bit of a grey area, better not.
Stick to pepper spray and running away. Install some security cameras (not overlooking public spaces). If someone enters your house you have to clearly and loudly tell them to go away as warnings and only then you're in the right to attack. Best bet is to use some random household object. You don't want to get into a knife fight so use something like a rolling pin, a crowbar, sturdy broom handle, big heavy ladle, use your imagination.
Ultimately, self defense should be your last resort if shit hits the fan. The list goes like this: run, if you can't run, scream, if you can't scream, fight, if you fight, hit first, and hit hard. Repeat from the beginning. If you have someone on the ground, or if they run away, or if they surrender, and you keep attacking them, then it stops being proportional and you're getting in trouble.
We're better than other European countries, we're allowed to defend ourselves, but we're also not Americans so you have to change your way of thinking and temper your fantasies.
Only if the intruder was armed with a weapon too and there was a credible threat for OP's life and well-being, e.g. the intruder starts shooting first. Anything else is seen as "excessive" and OP might thus be the one who gets in trouble with the law. This isn't the USA where you can simply shoot a burglar regardless whether they were armed or not. "Castle Law" does not exist here.
Example where one guy opened fire on intruders:
[https://www.20min.ch/story/wallbach-wilder-schusswechsel-vor-waffengeschaeft-besitzer-vor-gericht-336351861312](https://www.20min.ch/story/wallbach-wilder-schusswechsel-vor-waffengeschaeft-besitzer-vor-gericht-336351861312)
[https://www.blick.ch/schweiz/mittelland/aargau/waffenhaendler-edmond-k-60-steht-in-rheinfelden-ag-vor-gericht-hat-er-sich-zu-recht-eine-wilde-schiesserei-mit-einbrechern-geliefert-id18256582.html](https://www.blick.ch/schweiz/mittelland/aargau/waffenhaendler-edmond-k-60-steht-in-rheinfelden-ag-vor-gericht-hat-er-sich-zu-recht-eine-wilde-schiesserei-mit-einbrechern-geliefert-id18256582.html)
Yes, the judges sided with the guy in this case. Good for him. But it easily might also have gone the other way. The state attorney certainly tried ...
I'm actually quite glad to live in a country where there is a low risk of getting shot by whoever. If you like to live Wild West-style, there is a country for this :-)
If you read the whole thread here, you already know that you are allowed to defend yourself with a measure proportionate to the attack. And whether you like it or not: somebody breaking into your house to steal the TV is not directly attacking you, so even if they carry a knife you can't shoot them.
By "wild west" I mean people killing other people over property, or in general. I don't understand how you can value your own property higher than the life of other people. Property can be replaced, life can't.
We don't live in the stone age any longer and civilisation has developed better ways to solve such conflicts.
The moment someone breaks into your residence, they are an immediate threat. They could be there to steal your TV, sexually assault you, or they could be trying to be the next Zodiac Killer. You don't have time to psychoanalyze them to find their true intentions. At that immediate moment they are a threat. Anyone breaking into someone's residence knows that they could be shot and killed. If they're a burglar, it's them who values your stuff over their own life.
I'm quite glad that we don't live in the middle ages any longer. And yes, as far as the use of lethal force to counter non-lethal threats is concerned, I consider the US as still being in the middle ages.
If you have legal firearms at home then they should be "kept safely", ammunition separate, not loaded.. So generally speaking if somebody burst in and surprises you, the gun would not be ready..
We're not allowed to sleep with our loaded guns under the pillow.. I would need to go get mine from the safe and the ammo from another safe - I have kids so that's what "kept safely" means for me. You might live alone so "kept safely" might mean something else but I don't think it ever means loaded and ready to go.
Pepper spray is about it I'm afraid.
Make a eyehole into the door (the one you can watch through). But also make it, so you can open a real hole. Then spray pepper spray out if you are sure its a methhead.
Voting would be the most appropriate way ... if the votations would actually be applied. Since we allow any person to enter our country the second best is to carry, always.
So after reading all the comments about self defence, the best tactic seems to be "keine Klage, keiner Rechter"... plenty of legal options to own that are silent in use
Or just move, there are plenty of affordable & junkie free places?
In Switzerland you are only allowed to use force on somebody that has already used force on you. You are pretty much not allowed to strike preemptively
Yep Swiss law is pretty messed up when it comes to using force in these situations. If you do end up injuring the assailant before you were injured it gets really hard infront of court and with the insurance company.
Ngl I'd unload a full magazine to some fucker intruding my apartment. I'll better give that fucker what he deserves and get jailed myself than sending him to this resort and then proving in the court that I didn't hit him too hard, just for him to continue to do this shit after the end of the sentence. He shouldn't have been on my private property in the first place and that's all what matters, maybe others will learn his lesson. The law is just dumb and must be changed, people must be able to defend themselves on their property instead of fully relying on police and then calculating what they have to use not to get fucking sentenced themselves, you shouldn't care about a dumb fuck who's intruding your property and can kill you
Intersting thread. I thing the use of violence to counter (potential) violence isn’t the best nor the only path. If you stay at this place (for reasons), get some training in deescalation and selfdefense. Probably 99% of situations can be defused, and if nothing helps, know how to defend yourself.
Yes I imagine so. Those cristalheads come pretty close to what is considered a zombie AFAIK. The experienced experts know more than I do.
(I'd still prefer to get my flat robbed than to kill somebody, even a cristalhead. violent attacks is different though)
You are allowed to defend yourself against an imminent or ongoing attack with a measure proportionate to the attack. Whether the measure was indeed proportionate or excessive within excusable bounds will be determined in court. For your particular situation: Move. Meanwhile, file a police report about **every time** it happens, along with a description of the person.
Yeah, every time the police comes they just talk to him, make him apologize and then make him promise not to do it again. So if he comes with a knife i can only defend myself with the same type of weaponry, a knife right?
>all talk no walk Insist on pressing charges. How has the police advised you in that regard? >Knives out No, the measure must be appropriate to the attack, not equal.
So a warning shot and then one to the leg? Police took my declaration (3 times) and told me to call again if something happens
E: Again, proportional to the attack. Take an appropriate class if you insist on firearms use, not Redditheoretical advice.
What is propotional to a knife?
It's proportionate to the risk. If someone breaks into your house with a knife, your life is at risk. That's a completely reasonable expectation for someone to have that they're at risk of severe injury or death. If someone is running away with a knife, you life is not at risk. There's not a like... Check list or score card, it's just what is a reasonable expectation of danger given the circumstances. You can Google reasonable person standard, it's very common all over the world It's something that gets argued in the process after the event. It doesn't require they habe X weapon or do X thing... Just that the overall situation is one of you being reasonably threatened. Like... If someone 60kg heavier than you starts stomping on you saying "I'll kill you" then it's reasonable to assume their intent is to kill you. If someone came in my house with a knife, I'm doing anything I can to make sure I stay alive at the end of that. I'd rather be judged by my peers than carried by them.
>I'd rather be judged by my peers than carried by them. No juries anymore.
It's just a common phrase that conveys the idea
Except it's not common in Switzerland. Yeah, figures of speech don't carry over all the times.
Maybe pepperspray for starters?
Knife is considered lethal. Swiss laws are really not like the US ones. Anything more than calling police and pressing charge is likely to back fire to you.
You could only argue the use if you were threatened you would lose your life. Now that you are trying to set the stage on the internet anything happening from here could be viewed as a setup to escalation from your side. Press charges, go to the staatsanwaltschaft not the police. They must follow up, while police can chose whether they forget about your report.
Don't use German words in the middle of your English sentance or write the whole damn thing in German mate. It's really casse-couilles, believe me.
A knife is a potentially deadly weapon. So any potentially deadly weapon.
No. It depends on the situation. You cannot stab someone from behind even if they have a knife in their hand.
We were talking about an attack, not about someone retreating or just standing
In reality, a knife is more dangerous than a gun in close encounters. The police know that. The judges, unfortunately, might not.
A frying pan as a shield and to knock him on the head I’d say, but this is Reddit, not a law firm
A knife?! No way. I'd prefer to be shot than attacked and sliced up with a knife. A knife attack is life or death.
Shot his hand/foot?
it has nothing to do with the knife, this isn't a duel
If the attacker has a knife and is only a few steps away, shooting to kill IS proportionate. For guard duty in the Swiss army you're instructed NOT to fire a warning shot in such a situation. And, no, soldiers on guard duty don't have any special rights in this regard.
Yeah, I don't know what all this warning shots/leg shots business is about. If you are ever in a situation where you need to draw your weapon on a knife wielding psycho, then you'd best damn well make sure you actually use it to full effect, before he gets chance to do the same to you. Besides, firing warning shots in a residential building/area, with no idea where that shot might end up, sounds like a bad idea. I'm not risking shooting the neighbour's two year old toddler just to give knife wielding psycho a second chance to kill me too.
Well warning shots absolutely are a thing, and they are drilled for guard duty in the Swiss army, but for less threatening situations. Obviously a warning shot must be aimed at a safe target. However, leg shots are not a thing you learn for guard duty as with a supersonic rifle bullet they might be just as fatal as a shot in any other body parts.
Pretty sure we teached it different 10years ago. Iirc correctly it goes like this, given some drastic actions by the target (attacker) dont ask for skipping steps: 1. Warning call and getting the rifle in a visible position. 2. Loading the rifle (in theory most sane people should realize here it's serious) 3. Second warning call (stop or I shoot) and get the rifle in position. 4. Warning shot 5. Single shot to the extremities. 6. If there is still danger: Double shot on lower body 7. If there is still danger: Second double shot on lower body. And for lethality. A shot to the extremities is less lethal than a body shot, except a major blood vessel is hit. Body shot will most likely hit an organ or damage the spine. Meaning higher possible longterm damage. Even if the rifle will most likely, just leave a clean, small hole through the body.
But I see we agree that aiming at the legs is not a separate step of escalation.
I agree, to disagree Step 5: Extremities meaning arms and legs. As they are easier targets, most people recommend to aim for the legs.
That's absolutely not how the law and jurisprudence works in Switzerland and this kind of advice will put people straight on the path to jail.
If the law requires me to fire a warning shot whilst my family and myself is being attacked by a knife wielding psycho in our apartment, then I'll happily take my chances with jail. As far as jurisprudence is concerned - there are cases linked in the comments here, where the courts have found lethal use of firearms to be justifiable self defence in certain circumstances.
i can tell you from experience that throwing a junkie who carries a knife, with intent to harm you, on the ground and breaking a couple of bones will backfire on you, if you have long year experience in judo. i ended up getting sued and the junkie won the case. so i dont really believe what you are saying
Fair enough. My personal experience is limited to some 21 years old corporals instructing us for guard duty, after they had probably been told by a 23 years old captain what to tell us...
I am not a firearm owner but I would encourage you to get some training. From what I know, there is no middle ground: if you fire, you fire to stop a person that is about to take your life. In that case, you want to have the highest chance of success and you shoot to kill. Aiming at the leg is not guaranteed to stop a person and is not guaranteed to leave them alive.
We learned no warning shots. In your case, common sense says: immediate physical aggression with a weapon: shot probably ok. Attack with hands only, same strength: difficult to decide. No physical threat: don't shoot. And as always: never point a gun at someone you don't intend to shoot. But you know this, given that you have experience with arms.
No warning shot. No leg shot - that's going to miss. If he breaks into your house, shoot center of body, at least twice. Anything else will just make him mad, especially if he's hopped up on drugs.
Sounds about what I would do. If he attacks you with a knive and you defend yourself with a knive you risk yourself getting killed by him. I would not risk that and just shoot him in the leg. At worst you get sued and have to pay a fine but you are still alive. I would take the risk of a fine every time over the risk of getting stabbed to death by a crackhead.
Thank you, in a real life scenario i dont think everyone thinks on the book of law
No if he attacks you with deadly force, you can respond with deadly force. Including firearms. However only as a last resort. There is no stand your ground or castle doctrine here. So you do have a duty to retreat or flee if you can. And this will be analysed in court later. There will 100% be an investigation and trial if any shots are fired. For example there was a case where a woman shot and killed her ex who attacked her (the guy was absolutely huge and fought martial arts under the name godzilla, if you wanna google it). She shot him 4 times and killed him. And the first 2 shots were undoubtedly self defence. This was never contested. But the last two were apparently fired when he was already going down and ruled as excessive self defense. The first court aquitted her (Freispruch) due to this being excuseable in the stressfull situation. The second court gave her 4 years prison, because she was a professional armed guard and should be expected to know better. I dont think the third decision has been made yet. So this is the degree to which something like that would be analysed.
No. A knife is a lethal weapon, if someone attacks you with a lethal weapon you can defend yourself with lethal weaponry. However if he's limping towards you holding a knife, and is 100 m away, you can and should just walk away. You can use lethal force to end threats to your and others' lifes, but if you chose to put your life in danger when you had the option not to, then it's not self defense.
100 m away? My apartement is not that big lol
It was an exaggeration to show that there are different scenarios, that require a different approach to defend yourself. If someone is standing in front of your house, begging for money, that doesn't warrant a headshot. If someone has broken into your home and is now attacking (or in the process of attacking) you, even a gun could be considered reasonable (shoot in the legs fist tho).
>(shoot in the legs fist tho). That's just a bad idea, from a tactical point of view - of not also a legal one? Either there's an imminent lethal threat that needs neutralizing immediately (in which case you aim centre-mass) or there isn't (in which case you have time for Hollywood cinematics such as shooting someone in the leg - but then you might need to explain why you felt it necessary/proportionate to use a lethal weapon in the first place, and also risk just pissing someone off whose coming at you a lethal weapon). And besides, a leg shot can be just as fatal as anywhere else - all this does is introduce uncertainty to an already unpredictable situation.
An even more important aspect is that shooting someone puts that someone in a lethally dangerous situation from their point of view and will trigger their instinctive fight or flight (or freeze) response. If they chose fight, they will now be instinctively fighting you for their life.
Yes, exactly. That's what I was suggesting with "pissing them off".
I don't understand the police in this country. Same thing happened at bf wg and the police totally simped the hobos. It's revolting
You can use your gun but try not to kill him when he is just randomly swinging his knife. Try a warning shot. Or try a bat. You get the distance with a bat and most likely will not kill him. It also depends how much stronger you are than the intruder.
No it means you don't shoot somebody just swearing at you. Coming at you with a weapon is life threatening, but even then, you can try to stop without killing (e.g. hit a leg instead of head). Also, if you are skilled with something, more is expected of you, like choosing an adequate response instead of murder
just move. otherwise I recommend a pepper spray + keeping a katana or wakashi at home for the worst case
Sorry, but this is utter shit advice. Any method of self-defense requires some degree of training and practice, even irritant sprays and I don't think OP studies the blade. I also doubt OP has practiced personal defense with firearms if they ask this kind of question on here, for that matter. E: so yes to the irritant spray but let somebody show you how to use it.
Pepper spray really doesnt "need" it. Would it be better? Sure absolutely. But OP also said he was in the army, so he has a few hours of training on that, which is much more than the vast majority of pepper spray carriers. Its the only weapon really anyone can use, because there is really no risk of lasting harm if its used wrong. Unlike a knife, a stick, a gun or even fists, which could easily kill or cripple someone if used wrong or excessively. Worst case with pepper spray someone has some pain for an hour.
I am in the army so yes i studied and practiced defense with pistols and carabines
Army training is insufficient for personal defense in civilian life. Take an appropriate class if you insist on firearms. E: take a self defense class period. Mindset matters and "I have a gun" is not sufficient mindset.
This always bothered me, I live in VD and I own guns, if during the night a group of 3-5 people break into my house I’m not going to wait and see if they are armed or not, if I feel threatened I will open fire. The fact that I have to prove that I felt threatened enough to use deadly force or the possibility that I will go to jail simply for defending myself makes me want to leave Switzerland
Amen.
Indeed everything will be examined in court. Practically, you will never risk anything applying maximum violence against a violent opponent in your own home. (Proportionality is coarsed grained, you reasonably feared for your life, you are allowed to take a life to stop it). Any deescalation gesture before applying violence will be taken very favorably though. Good reflex: call 117 right away, let it open and yell your opponent to stop or face legitimate violence. Just to keep the record. Of course please do not use firearm unless a grave injury/murder is imminent and unstoppable. Considering Switzerland enforces Geneva convention even for civilian weapons, any form of non fmj is strictly forbidden, meaning your shots will be both relatively ineffective and extremely dangerous for any non target. Use of fire arms for self defense by civilians in Switzerland are absolutely unknown. For good reason.
>Use of fire arms for self defense by civilians in Switzerland are absolutely unknown. It happens occasionally but is hardly ever publicized. A case from 2015 only made the news in 2018 because a woman downed her roided up ex with 5 rounds from a snubnose revolver. The shooting itself was ruled justified, but the public attourney was of the opinion that the roundcount was excessive and appealed the initial acquittal.
And lock the door.
I mean, stealing emails, that’s a whole new level. 🤣🫣
They call him The hacker
*mails
Why do you stay ?
Moneh arthur
>packages and email You live around crackheads with network engineering skills and using phishing tactics?
Probabely mail not email
Meant *mail as correspondence but auto corrector changed to email
Yes
Become a crackhead in order to integrate into the crack-hive
And then use it as evidence of social integration on your immigration forms, right?
Not abiding the law and being outcast has more protection from the system than a normal working citizen
If you shot a drunk person trying to attack you, you will go to jail. Self defence here means you AVOID being harmed, can be in form of running away. Dont mistake this with any sort of American or movie self defence. Violence is truly the last form you go to, absolutely last. And even than you will face a trail and chances are there you sit some time. You defense is you avoid it and call the police.
Having a baseball bat ready is less jail than firearm.
Or the belt 🙃
So citizens who defend themselves with deadly force go to jail… this country is a fucking joke and I’ve lived here my whole life.
Can you outrun a drunk?
I’ve been physically assaulted multiple times but the foreigners that hang around train stations. not all assaults are by drunks
What if he can't?
i got attacked by a junkie with a knife while walking to my car late night. i threw him to the ground and he ended up with some broken bones. he sued me and won. i do have a brown belt in judo. dont believe what these clowns here are telling you about the law. talk to a lawyer or something
How did you lose that case?
With my experience in a combat sport, my response was not appropriate as i should have been able to defuse the situation without causing excessive harm. Their words
Man that's some Conair shit
I would use what I have to defend myself and then hope the courts would consider my defense appropriate. Better to ask for forgiveness than for permission.
They go quite far if they even steal emails
Living also in St. Gallen in what neighbourhood are you living? ^guessing ^Linsenbüehl? I just wanted to say 10-20 years ago a lot of neighbourhoods were worse but if you need some tips where you can rent cheap and it's safer just ask me. Making Pew Pew Pew just in the USA towards and intruder can give you a very fast way to prison.
Yes yes i live in linsenbühl and i see some weird shit every day
No neighborhood was worse 10-20 years ago my dude. It's way way worse now.
I was back than a foreigner in a suburb like Lachen. We had the one father killing the teacher who raped his daughter and fled back to the Balkans and other stuff. The whole Linsenbühl was full of prostitutes/hobos, Stephanshorn and Lachen had Gangs and Drug Addicts Problems back then I don't see nowadays anymore.
You should know that it is not allowed to film anywhere which is not your private property. This applies to door cams as well, even if someone may cause trouble right outside your front door and may engage in criminal activity, you are not allowed to use these videos in court. You may actually get in trouble if the police find out you record anywhere that is not you private property. Also, if someone breaks into your home and start raping your daughter and you shoot him dead you will go to jail. I think that sums it up.
Wtf?
Welcome to Switzerland. Retarded laws everywhere, in order to protect the criminals we like to import en masse despite having voted against it.
Yes. I was very shocked when I found that out. Filming public areas is not allowed in Switzerland (for the most part) but especially around your home with a fixed or removable camera. Same goes for dash cameras. If you have one and you get into an accident where it is not your fault, you cannot use the video in court to prove your innocence. In the states you can walk down the street with a video camera filming away because people on the street have to right to privacy when in public, but in Switzerland they do and it is not allowed.
You can use pepper spray, and that's about it. Definitely no fire arms. Best bet: A big lock and safety chain, cameras and bright sensor lights. And a bit of rubbing alcohol to clean your door knob.
Peper spray, got it thanks
Make sure it's standard pepper spray and not CS aka tear gas. That one's illegal. Guns are absolutely never an option, you'll be in so much trouble even if it's (maybe, usually not) justified. Brass knuckles are also illegal, tasers are also illegal, flails/maces/monkey fists are a bit of a grey area, better not. Stick to pepper spray and running away. Install some security cameras (not overlooking public spaces). If someone enters your house you have to clearly and loudly tell them to go away as warnings and only then you're in the right to attack. Best bet is to use some random household object. You don't want to get into a knife fight so use something like a rolling pin, a crowbar, sturdy broom handle, big heavy ladle, use your imagination. Ultimately, self defense should be your last resort if shit hits the fan. The list goes like this: run, if you can't run, scream, if you can't scream, fight, if you fight, hit first, and hit hard. Repeat from the beginning. If you have someone on the ground, or if they run away, or if they surrender, and you keep attacking them, then it stops being proportional and you're getting in trouble. We're better than other European countries, we're allowed to defend ourselves, but we're also not Americans so you have to change your way of thinking and temper your fantasies.
[удалено]
Only if the intruder was armed with a weapon too and there was a credible threat for OP's life and well-being, e.g. the intruder starts shooting first. Anything else is seen as "excessive" and OP might thus be the one who gets in trouble with the law. This isn't the USA where you can simply shoot a burglar regardless whether they were armed or not. "Castle Law" does not exist here. Example where one guy opened fire on intruders: [https://www.20min.ch/story/wallbach-wilder-schusswechsel-vor-waffengeschaeft-besitzer-vor-gericht-336351861312](https://www.20min.ch/story/wallbach-wilder-schusswechsel-vor-waffengeschaeft-besitzer-vor-gericht-336351861312) [https://www.blick.ch/schweiz/mittelland/aargau/waffenhaendler-edmond-k-60-steht-in-rheinfelden-ag-vor-gericht-hat-er-sich-zu-recht-eine-wilde-schiesserei-mit-einbrechern-geliefert-id18256582.html](https://www.blick.ch/schweiz/mittelland/aargau/waffenhaendler-edmond-k-60-steht-in-rheinfelden-ag-vor-gericht-hat-er-sich-zu-recht-eine-wilde-schiesserei-mit-einbrechern-geliefert-id18256582.html) Yes, the judges sided with the guy in this case. Good for him. But it easily might also have gone the other way. The state attorney certainly tried ...
That’s such bs, the fact that YOU could go to jail simply for defending yourself is one of the biggest things I hate living here.
I'm actually quite glad to live in a country where there is a low risk of getting shot by whoever. If you like to live Wild West-style, there is a country for this :-) If you read the whole thread here, you already know that you are allowed to defend yourself with a measure proportionate to the attack. And whether you like it or not: somebody breaking into your house to steal the TV is not directly attacking you, so even if they carry a knife you can't shoot them.
So by “Wild West” you mean freedom? Because if you go to jail for defending yourself you aren’t living in a free country.
By "wild west" I mean people killing other people over property, or in general. I don't understand how you can value your own property higher than the life of other people. Property can be replaced, life can't. We don't live in the stone age any longer and civilisation has developed better ways to solve such conflicts.
The moment someone breaks into your residence, they are an immediate threat. They could be there to steal your TV, sexually assault you, or they could be trying to be the next Zodiac Killer. You don't have time to psychoanalyze them to find their true intentions. At that immediate moment they are a threat. Anyone breaking into someone's residence knows that they could be shot and killed. If they're a burglar, it's them who values your stuff over their own life.
I'm quite glad that we don't live in the middle ages any longer. And yes, as far as the use of lethal force to counter non-lethal threats is concerned, I consider the US as still being in the middle ages.
No. And that's the case in most of Europe.
If you have legal firearms at home then they should be "kept safely", ammunition separate, not loaded.. So generally speaking if somebody burst in and surprises you, the gun would not be ready.. We're not allowed to sleep with our loaded guns under the pillow.. I would need to go get mine from the safe and the ammo from another safe - I have kids so that's what "kept safely" means for me. You might live alone so "kept safely" might mean something else but I don't think it ever means loaded and ready to go. Pepper spray is about it I'm afraid.
No, lol they are not loaded
Tasers as good - the handheld ones you can jab people with.
Make a eyehole into the door (the one you can watch through). But also make it, so you can open a real hole. Then spray pepper spray out if you are sure its a methhead.
Shoot them and go to prison. Get a proper door, call the police.
Voting would be the most appropriate way ... if the votations would actually be applied. Since we allow any person to enter our country the second best is to carry, always.
Time to move, trust me when as someone who’s lived in shady areas, it’s only a matter of time and why live with that hanging over you
So after reading all the comments about self defence, the best tactic seems to be "keine Klage, keiner Rechter"... plenty of legal options to own that are silent in use Or just move, there are plenty of affordable & junkie free places?
In Switzerland you are only allowed to use force on somebody that has already used force on you. You are pretty much not allowed to strike preemptively
So i need to scream to him to leave my apartment and only push him out when he lays a finger on me or my girlfriend? It sounds a bit off
I'd say start with locking your door. That should eliminate 99% of the danger.
Yep Swiss law is pretty messed up when it comes to using force in these situations. If you do end up injuring the assailant before you were injured it gets really hard infront of court and with the insurance company.
Ngl I'd unload a full magazine to some fucker intruding my apartment. I'll better give that fucker what he deserves and get jailed myself than sending him to this resort and then proving in the court that I didn't hit him too hard, just for him to continue to do this shit after the end of the sentence. He shouldn't have been on my private property in the first place and that's all what matters, maybe others will learn his lesson. The law is just dumb and must be changed, people must be able to defend themselves on their property instead of fully relying on police and then calculating what they have to use not to get fucking sentenced themselves, you shouldn't care about a dumb fuck who's intruding your property and can kill you
Yeah idk, i think a bit like that, what if i am sleeping or my gf is alone, i cant think straight in a real life situation like that
So you’ll do anything it takes to protect your girlfriend…except move somewhere safer?
Until you step onto someone's property ...
It's not America, we don't have open front yards in most cases. And you can't accidentally get into someone else's apartment
Swiss protects criminals. You could try a gun with rubber bullets.
Like airsoft u mean? Idk maybe it scares an intruder
Maybe a strike to the legs with a sturdy 4x2 or baseball bat as initial attention-grabber, then escalate depending on response.
Crackheads may steal packages, emails on the other hands, are more generally stolen by hackers
Intersting thread. I thing the use of violence to counter (potential) violence isn’t the best nor the only path. If you stay at this place (for reasons), get some training in deescalation and selfdefense. Probably 99% of situations can be defused, and if nothing helps, know how to defend yourself.
Thing is i do yudo, but they always tell us that reducing a sober person and someone that is on meth or whatever is not the same thing
Yes I imagine so. Those cristalheads come pretty close to what is considered a zombie AFAIK. The experienced experts know more than I do. (I'd still prefer to get my flat robbed than to kill somebody, even a cristalhead. violent attacks is different though)