For those who feel that punching justifies deadly force...

[churchmouse]

I never would have thought that a thread posted specifically to warn about the dangers of posting certain things on the interwebs would simply provoke a majority of respondents to post those very things...

Yea...I know...think of it as a lite protest aginst those who would twist up what we post.

Or not.

 

[Tombs]

I look to get through life without causing harm to others, and expect others to do the same.

If you're running up on me aggressively and about to start a confrontation that, at that point, I reasonably believe will result in severe injury or death, you're going to get drawn down on.(No, it isn't that simple, there needs to be context) If you don't stop, it's obvious your intentions are now to murder me and you will receive that piece of lead.

The law reads, to me, that this is an acceptable situation. I think a lot of self defense shootings could have gone bloodless had this been done.
If you enter into a fight then decide to draw on someone, a firearm is not for you. If you're the type that argue "fair fights," I seriously don't think a firearm is a good idea for you.

For reference, even in AUSTRALIA of all places, this is how they handle self defense.

 

[Fargo]

Yea...I know...think of it as a lite protest aginst those who would twist up what we post.

Or not.

A more effective protest might be to actively support electing pro-self defense prosecuting attorneys... Just a thought.

Best,


Joe

 

[KG1]

A more effective protest might be to actively support electing pro-self defense prosecuting attorneys... Just a thought.

Best,


Joe

I agree 100% with this. There is so much wrangling and hand ringing going on about electing a POTUS but IMO it's these kind of elections that truly have an impact and should garner more emphasis come election time.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

A more effective protest might be to actively support electing pro-self defense prosecuting attorneys... Just a thought.

How dare you. You mean I now have to pay attention to non-Ron Paul elections? Surely you jest.

 

[churchmouse]

A more effective protest might be to actively support electing pro-self defense prosecuting attorneys... Just a thought.

Best,


Joe

So true. I am still waiting for one to raise up from the group and step forward.

 

[Prometheus]

Does anyone think it could also be situational?

Getting punched in a bar and shooting someone over an argument is one thing.

Walking out of the grocery store and some random assailant jumps out from behind a parked care and hits you? I see that as a completely different situation. How do you know what they want and what their goal is?

 

[LPMan59]

I never would have thought that a thread posted specifically to warn about the dangers of posting certain things on the interwebs would simply provoke a majority of respondents to post those very things...

[video=youtube;CMNry4PE93Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMNry4PE93Y[/video]

 

[Fargo]

Does anyone think it could also be situational?

Getting punched in a bar and shooting someone over an argument is one thing.

Walking out of the grocery store and some random assailant jumps out from behind a parked care and hits you? I see that as a completely different situation. How do you know what they want and what their goal is?

It absolutely is situational and incredibly fact specific. That is why I cringe at most every hypothetical where someone declares that they would blast away. They all end up lending themself to a much more expansive meaning than author originally intended; particularly when taken out of context.

There is a world of difference in saying:

1. I think the law would allow a person to shoot in that situation.

and

2. I would shoot someone in that situation.

The first is an opinion on the law, the second is a statement of intent.

You can find my personal opinions on all sorts of self-defense legal topics and I tend toward the opinion that self-defense should be very expansive. What you will be hard pressed to find is me saying anywhere that I would shoot anyone for anything.



Best,

Joe

 

[churchmouse]

It absolutely is situational and incredibly fact specific. That is why I cringe at most every hypothetical where someone declares that they would blast away. They all end up lending themself to a much more expansive meaning than author originally intended; particularly when taken out of context.

There is a world of difference in saying:

1. I think the law would allow a person to shoot in that situation.

and

2. I would shoot someone in that situation.

The first is an opinion on the law, the second is a statement of intent.

You can find my personal opinions on all sorts of self-defense legal topics and I tend toward the opinion that self-defense should be very expansive. What you will be hard pressed to find is me saying anywhere that I would shoot anyone for anything.



Best,

Joe

Sad days. Opinions are used against you. Opinions are just that...opinions and they do not physically hurt anyone. Might hurt your feelings but will not draw blood.

Funny thing about all of this......opinions/plans/intentions change very quickly when you actually get punched square in the nose by someone that knows how to do it. First flash of purple behind your eyes and anything you posted on line is no longer relevant.

I fully see your intent with this thread. It is wise to use your head before posting but wow, would this place get bland real quick if we did.

 

[Fargo]

Sad days. Opinions are used against you. Opinions are just that...opinions and they do not physically hurt anyone. Might hurt your feelings but will not draw blood.

Funny thing about all of this......opinions/plans/intentions change very quickly when you actually get punched square in the nose by someone that knows how to do it. First flash of purple behind your eyes and anything you posted on line is no longer relevant.

I fully see your intent with this thread. It is wise to use your head before posting but wow, would this place get bland real quick if we did.

Opinions are not really the problem here. Statements that a person will/would shoot someone are not really opinions, they are more statements of intent.

Statements of intent scream to be used against you.

Best,

Joe

 

[churchmouse]

Opinions are not really the problem here. Statements that a person will/would shoot someone are not really opinions, they are more statements of intent.

Statements of intent scream to be used against you.

Best,

Joe

I see your point. In this I do appreciate your putting this into legal speak.

To say I "Will" shoot someone in a given situation is a statement of fact/intent. In that situation my response would be to defend myself. The situation would be totally defensive in my mind but how the system would see it would depend on a lot of things.

 

[henktermaat]

A kick or a blow to the head can be fatal.

read:
http://www.gunnuts.net/2013/07/22/t...579789_514374_189239157910963#f27f9772eaee318

 

[Prometheus]

Speaking of my point about being accosted in a parking lot...
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=581992838499289&set=vb.192083407540934&type=2&theater

Yeah, try telling these people sticking with your fists was a good idea.

Every situation is unique but to say you can't or shouldn't ever shoot someone who just hit you is beyond ridiculous. It could be flat out suicidal.

 

[hoosierdaddy1976]

I would shoot anyone for anything.



Best,

Joe

think i found me a new sig line.

 

[Bigtanker]

I agree. I witnessed this fight while I was in highschool. The kid that passed away started the fight. A single blow to the temple.

Toledo Blade - Google News Archive Search

 

[templar223]

It's all about articulation, my friend.

 

[Paul30]

I am a good person who would never harm anyone out of vengeance or anger. You don't shoot someone because they just did something, you shoot them to stop their actions if those actions are perceived by you to end in bodily harm or death. This perception of bodily harm or death is something that would have to be accepted by a jury of your peers. In a court of law after the fact, a jury must believe a reasonable person under the same circumstances would have done the same thing. If a person is a boxer who has had many fights a jury might find it hard to believe he shot someone to prevent a fight. On the other hand a person with a prior brain injury from an auto wreck who was told by their doctor to avoid anything that would jar or jerk your brain including roller coasters, sports, etc. If the doctor warned a patient not to receive any more head injuries or you could end up a vegetable or dead would be a totally different situation. The key is a jury must be able to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that you believed you would sustain serious bodily harm or death if you had not drawn or fired a weapon. As far as a single prosecutor charging someone with the choice to use a weapon to prevent someone from assaulting them doesn't really fly with me. A prosecutor can charge anyone with anything, getting a jury to convict you is a completely different matter. As far as me making decisions based on what I think a prosecutor might or might not do I don't worry about it. I am a good man, and would only use a weapon if I truly believed it was my only way to prevent serious bodily harm or death. Since those are my core motives, it will likely be a reaction than a well thought out process. I will diffuse the situation or prevent it from escalating any way I possibly can, but if I am convinced that all options are exhausted and they are going to assault me, I can't afford to take a chance if it will end in my serious injury or death. I will likely draw and give them a chance to back off, if they continue with the attack I will do whatever I have to do to protect myself from serious bodily harm or death.

I would like to correct an old phrase. Many times I have heard people say "Don't pull a gun unless you Intend to use it!" This implies if you draw a gun your are obligated to fire it. You can draw a gun and give them the option to back down if the situation allows. Therefore I prefer the phrase "Don't pull a gun unless you are PREPARED to use it.

Yes, I get the idea of the thread. Don't permanently document something that could get you convicted of a crime by posting it online. With some of the trials I have watched lately, that could be posting that you got out of bed this morning.

 

[Miles42]

I am to old to run and refuse to be a victim. Any one that decides it is ok to punch a 70 year old is fair game for a gun shot.

 

[UncleMike]

"Never pick a fight with an old man." Since he's too old to fight he'll just shoot you."
Since I've become an old man I live by this saying.
Those who don't believe it won't live to be an old man. (Or woman)