In self-protection, Kentucky justifies physical force when you believe it necessary against the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force. Deadly...
Reviewed by Will Luker, Founder of CCW Hub. USCCA Training Counselor, USCCA Certified Instructor, NRA Certified Instructor, Law Enforcement.
In self-protection, Kentucky justifies physical force when you believe it necessary against the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force. Deadly force requires a belief it is necessary against death, serious physical injury, kidnapping, sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat, or a felony involving force. Wanton or reckless belief, or degree of force, forfeits it in a wantonness or recklessness prosecution. Retreat is not required where you may lawfully be and are not breaking the law.
Kentucky's justification statutes are written around a person who uses force, not around a document in your wallet. They cover force used for yourself, for a third person, and for property you or another possesses. Under KRS 503.020, justification as defined in KRS Chapter 503 is a defense in any prosecution for an offense. Under KRS 503.050(1), the use of physical force upon another person is justifiable when the defendant believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by the other person. What the defendant believed is the question the statute asks, and it is not the last word. Under KRS 503.120(1), the justification is unavailable in a prosecution for an offense for which wantonness or recklessness suffices to establish culpability when the defendant was wanton or reckless in believing the use of any force, or the degree of force used, to be necessary, or in acquiring or failing to acquire any knowledge or belief material to the justifiability of his use of force. Under KRS 503.050(3), any evidence presented by the defendant to establish the existence of a prior act or acts of domestic violence and abuse as defined in KRS 403.720 by the person against whom the defendant is charged with employing physical force is admissible under that section.
The same chapter reaches force used for someone else. Under KRS 503.070(2), a person may use deadly force to protect a third person against imminent death, serious physical injury, kidnapping, sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat, or another felony involving the use of force, and only if, under the circumstances as they actually exist, the person he seeks to protect would himself have been justified under KRS 503.050 and KRS 503.060 in using that protection.
Property is covered separately. Under KRS 503.080(1), physical force is justifiable when the defendant believes it is immediately necessary to prevent criminal trespass, robbery, burglary, another felony involving force, theft, criminal mischief, trespassory taking of movable property, or, under specified conditions, unlawful camping, in property he or another possesses.
Deadly physical force under KRS 503.050(2) is justifiable only when the defendant believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious physical injury, kidnapping, sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat, or a felony involving the use of force. That limit in KRS 503.050(2) reaches the listed harms and the circumstances permitted by KRS 503.055, and nothing else.
Being justified against the attacker is not the end of your exposure. Under KRS 503.120(2), a defendant who is justified in using force but who wantonly or recklessly injures or creates a risk of injury to innocent persons loses the justification in a prosecution for an offense involving wantonness or recklessness toward those innocent persons. A round that misses is the case that provision is written for.
Standing your ground away from home has its own wording. Under KRS 503.055(3), a person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he has a right to be has no duty to retreat and may stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another. The same subsection also reaches force used to prevent the commission of a felony involving the use of force. The self-protection section says it flatly: under KRS 503.050(4), a person does not have a duty to retreat prior to the use of deadly physical force.
At home and in a vehicle the statute moves the question. Under KRS 503.055(1), a person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm. The presumption runs where the other person was unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from one of them. It applies only if the person using defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred, under KRS 503.055(1)(b). Under KRS 503.055(4), a person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence. The protected places are:
Deadly force for property is narrower. Under KRS 503.080(2), deadly physical force is justifiable under that section only when the defendant believes the other person is doing one of the things it lists. Those situations are:
Every situation on that list concerns a dwelling or a building in the defendant's possession, so nothing in it covers the theft of movable property.
Under KRS 503.085(1), a person who uses force as permitted in KRS 503.050, KRS 503.055, KRS 503.070, and KRS 503.080 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom the force was used is a peace officer who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and who identified himself in accordance with any applicable law, or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a peace officer. In that subsection, criminal prosecution includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
Under KRS 503.085(2), a law enforcement agency may use standard procedures to investigate the use of force, but it may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful. Under KRS 503.085(3), the court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff, if the court finds that the defendant is immune. That award presupposes a plaintiff who has already sued and a court that has already ruled.
What the other person was doing does not loosen these limits. Under KRS 503.100(3), the limitations imposed on the justifiable use of force in self-protection by KRS 503.050 and KRS 503.060, for the protection of others by KRS 503.070, for the protection of property by KRS 503.080, and for effecting an arrest or preventing an escape by KRS 503.090 apply notwithstanding the criminality of the conduct against which such force is used.
The same chapter sets out three bars that remove the justification outright. Force is not justifiable when the defendant is resisting an arrest by a peace officer recognized to be acting under color of official authority and using no more force than reasonably necessary, even if the arrest is unlawful, under KRS 503.060(1). Under KRS 503.060(2), force is not justifiable if the defendant, intending to cause death or serious physical injury, provokes the use of physical force by the other person. Under KRS 503.060(3)(a) and KRS 503.060(3)(b), an initial aggressor is barred unless his initial physical force was nondeadly and the force returned by the other is such that he believes himself to be in imminent danger of death or serious physical injury, or he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his intent to do so and the latter nevertheless continues or threatens the use of unlawful physical force.
One more limit sits outside the self-protection sections. Under KRS 503.030(2), when the defendant believes conduct that would otherwise be an offense is necessary to avoid a greater injury but is wanton or reckless in holding that belief, or is wanton or reckless in bringing about the situation requiring the conduct, that justification is unavailable in a prosecution for any offense for which wantonness or recklessness suffices to establish culpability.
The home and vehicle presumption also drops out in the situations that statute lists:
| Situation | What the statute allows | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Ordinary physical force in self-protection | Justifiable when the defendant believes it is necessary against the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force | KRS 503.050(1) |
| Deadly force in self-protection | Only when the defendant believes it is necessary against death, serious physical injury, kidnapping, sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat, or a felony involving force | KRS 503.050(2) |
| Defense of a third person | Deadly force against those same harms, and only if the person protected would have been justified under the circumstances as they actually exist | KRS 503.070(2) |
| Defense of property | Physical force the defendant believes immediately necessary to prevent the listed property crimes | KRS 503.080(1) |
| Deadly force over property | Only when the defendant believes the other person is dispossessing him of his dwelling, committing a burglary, robbery, or forcible felony of it, or committing arson | KRS 503.080(2) |
| Retreat | No duty to retreat where the person is not engaged in unlawful activity and has a right to be, and reasonably believes force is necessary | KRS 503.055(3) |
| Dwelling, residence, occupied vehicle | Presumed reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm, for force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm | KRS 503.055(1) |
| Reckless belief, or reckless risk to bystanders | The justification is unavailable in a prosecution for a wantonness or recklessness offense | KRS 503.120 |
| Aftermath | Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action, unless the force was used against a peace officer on official duties who identified himself or was known to be an officer | KRS 503.085(1) |
Kentucky's justification rules turn on the circumstances of the encounter, and they read the same whether or not you carry under a license to carry concealed deadly weapon (CCDW license). What the license adds here is instruction. A firearms safety course offered or approved by the Department of Criminal Justice Training must include information on and a copy of the laws relating to the use of force set out in KRS Chapter 503. That is the same body of law this page describes, so a class is where the elements, the presumption at home and in a vehicle, and the bars on the justification get worked through before you need them.
Not if you are somewhere you have a right to be and are not engaged in an unlawful activity, and you reasonably believe force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or another. The self-protection section states that a person does not have a duty to retreat prior to the use of deadly physical force. If you started the encounter, withdrawal is the way back: an initial aggressor is barred unless his initial physical force was nondeadly and the force returned is such that he believes himself to be in imminent danger of death or serious physical injury, or he withdraws and effectively communicates that intent and the other person nevertheless continues or threatens unlawful force.
Only when you believe the other person is doing one of the things KRS 503.080(2) lists. Those are attempted dispossession of your dwelling otherwise than under a claim of right, a burglary, robbery, or other felony involving force of that dwelling, or arson of a dwelling or other building in your possession. Nothing on that list covers the theft of movable property. Non-deadly physical force has a wider list of triggering crimes.
The presumption of reasonable fear applies to a dwelling, a residence, and an occupied vehicle. It runs where the other person was unlawfully and forcibly entering or had entered one of those places, or had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will. It applies only if you knew or had reason to believe that the unlawful and forcible entry or act was occurring or had occurred. It is also lost in the situations listed above, including where the person using defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity.
A defendant who is justified in using force against another but who wantonly or recklessly injures or creates a risk of injury to innocent persons loses the justification in a prosecution for an offense involving wantonness or recklessness toward those innocent persons. Being right about the attacker does not answer for the people behind him.
You can be named in a lawsuit, and immunity is what ends it. A person who uses force as permitted by those statutes is justified and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action, unless the force was used against a peace officer acting in the performance of official duties who identified himself as the law requires, or whom the person using force knew or reasonably should have known was a peace officer. If the court finds the defendant immune, it shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred in defense of the civil action.
An agency may use standard procedures to investigate, but it may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful. The immunity is worded to cover the arrest itself: criminal prosecution there includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
An initial aggressor loses the justification unless his initial physical force was nondeadly and the force returned by the other is such that he believes himself to be in imminent danger of death or serious physical injury, or he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates his intent to do so and the other person nevertheless continues or threatens the use of unlawful physical force. Separately, force is not justifiable if you provoked the other person's use of physical force while intending to cause death or serious physical injury.
It does not apply if the other person is a lawful resident or has a right to be there and no protective or no-contact order is in place, if the person sought to be removed is a child, grandchild, or ward, if the person using force is engaged in or furthering unlawful activity, or if the other person is a peace officer entering in the performance of official duties who identified himself or was known to be an officer.
This page covers one part of our Kentucky concealed carry guide.
Read the complete Kentucky guideBrowse local instructors offering state-approved training in your area. Book online, complete your training, and get one step closer to your concealed carry permit.