A recent event in Prince George’s County, Maryland, where a Lyft driver defended herself against a carjacker using pepper spray and a knife, highlights the notion that weapons for self-defense are not limited to firearms.
So, what happens legally when someone uses something other than a gun for self-defense, like in this Maryland case? We sought insights from Massad Ayoob, the president of the Second Amendment Foundation, who has extensive experience as a law enforcement officer, firearm instructor, and expert on the use of force.
“It’s somewhat a cultural issue, and it harkens back to the 18th and 19th centuries,” Ayoob explained. “Historically, pistols were considered the choice of the civilized individual, while knives and clubs were associated with thugs. There’s still a hint of that today.”
An accused would-be carjacker is facing charges in Prince George’s County after a Lyft driver fought back, blasting her attacker with “bear spray” before pulling a knife on him.https://t.co/MoIxu7SmWL
— 7News DC (@7NewsDC) August 17, 2026
Ayoob went on to say, “If a carjacker poses a reasonable threat of deadly force, using a deadly weapon like a knife is entirely justified.”
In the incident on August 16, a 17-year-old attempted to carjack an older Lyft driver named Alice at knifepoint, as reported by WJLA, a local Washington, D.C., TV station. The driver pretended to comply but instead reached for a can of pepper spray gifted to her by her father and sprayed it directly in the carjacker’s face.
She then brandished a knife, leading the carjacker to flee, later apprehended by police, still under the effects of the pepper spray. Ayoob pointed out that this situation exhibited two instances of “disparity of force,” which he described as an advantage to one party. Even if one is seemingly unarmed, a continuous assault could result in severe harm, justifying a deadly force response for self-defense.
Ayoob mentioned, “The male involved is typically larger and stronger, and culturally there’s often a predisposition to violence.” He also remarked on the potential difference in their ages.
“He’s in the prime of his physical life, whereas she’s not, showcasing two elements of disparity of force,” he said. “That provides a strong defense for her actions.”
The Supreme Court, through various Second Amendment rulings, has clarified that “arms” encompass more than just guns; it also refers to “instruments that constitute bearable arms,” which includes knives, pepper spray, and more.
In earlier cases, the court acknowledged that the Second Amendment extends beyond firearms. Before guns became widely accessible, knives were often the weapon of choice for self-defense.
“In the medieval era, ‘[a]lmost everyone carried a knife or a dagger,’” noted Associate Justice Clarence Thomas in one ruling, referencing a book on weapons. “Knives were used in warfare by knights, but civilians also carried them for self-defense.”
“Just as the First Amendment safeguards modern communication forms, and the Fourth protects against contemporary searches, the Second Amendment extends to all instruments deemed bearable arms, including those not existing at the founding,” former Associate Justice Antonin Scalia stated in another ruling.
Ayoob emphasized that although there were advantageous factors for the armed citizen in this scenario, anyone acting in self-defense should be cautious.
“Anytime injuries or fatalities occur, there’s a possibility of bringing an armed civilian before a grand jury,” he cautioned.
