Defensive Carry banner

Legal aspects of shooting unarmed man in public restroom - long

13K views 200 replies 47 participants last post by  ctsketch 
#1 · (Edited)
I am involved in a discussion on another (non-gun) forum about the Dont Ask, Dont Tell policy. I do not want a political discussion...only legal pertaining to gun use.

I also want a civil discussion and not bring it down to the low-brow level. If this is not appropriate for this forum, I'll understand if the mods delete this. I am not trolling.

In the discussion, "BB' claims that he is within his rights to use deadly force...shoot a man....in a public restroom that is using a urinal and has (necessarily) revealed 'himself' to BB.

BB says he rarely ever uses public restroom or locker rooms and if he does, uses stalls or private showers. He says that it is deviant behavior to expose yourself in public, period...one would wonder why public restrooms and locker rooms/showers are legal at all then?....but this is his stance.


He says that such 'exposure' in the restroom would make him extremely uncomfortable and he would see it as a threat. Note: in this scenario, the other man would not be armed in any way.

I asked him why, if the other man was not armed, he just did not leave the premises. He claimed he could feel trapped if the man was between him and the door.

I pointed out that he could still use less-than-lethal force to 'escape' and that he had NO GROUNDS to use lethal force.

When I brought up laws regarding use of lethal force, he claimed that the laws also support use of lethal force in the face of sexual assault.

He claims that he could convince a jury that he felt the assault was imminent...because the jury "would never hear the dead victim's side" (*sigh*).

He also claims that something called 'agoraphobia" (an extreme fear of public places) could be used to justify his reactions. (I pointed out that if he had been clinically diagnosed with this...he'd need to to use it in defense....he mostly likely should not be carrying a gun, period. And might even not be legally carrying according to mental health restrictions).

I would like opinions on this, esp if our lawyers can contribute. This person has a major issue and I'd like to see him at least better educated on this....he sounds possibly like a danger to the community...and would certainly be a black mark on cc. I will send him a link to the discussion.

I can also provide a link to the other discussion, if not appropriate here, you can pm me for it. http://forums.myspace.com/t/4787219.aspx?fuseaction=forums.viewthread&PageIndex=13
It starts on page 13, I'm Lursa. Mods can remove if they feel it's wrong.


Thanks in advance for your comments.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
I have some questions first...
BB is male?
We are talking about in a Men's room?
The man in question revealed himself in what way?
*Flasher?
*With intent to commit sexual assault?

I'm sorry I just have to undoubtedly confirm these questions.
 
#4 ·
I have some questions first...
BB is male?
We are talking about in a Men's room?
The man in question revealed himself in what way?
*Flasher?
*With intent to commit sexual assault?
BB is a male, in a public men's restroom.

The other man was using the urinal in a normal fashion...no different exposure than that. Not a flasher, no intent except to urinate.


BB also said that he would shoot anyone that undressed in front of him, like in a locker room. (I mentioned that I have used women's restrooms...not in a stall....to change my clothes and seen other women do so...and that it is not deviant behavior).
 
#5 ·
BB also said that he would shoot anyone that undressed in front of him, like in a locker room. (I mentioned that I have used women's restrooms...not in a stall....to change my clothes and seen other women do so...and that it is not deviant behavior).
I'm not one to rat anyone out...but I think its time for some intervention...was he joking? (even then its not funny)
 
#8 ·
I dont believe he's joking or trolling. He's a regular poster on that forum. I did point out that his posts could be used against him in court if he ever does shoot anyone. He doesnt seem concerned about that. He is firm in his position.
 
#6 ·
In the thread, BB also claimed that when he was flashed by a woman (exposed her breasts), he convinced her to get in his car, called 911, and had her arrested. (I know...the number of legal issues here are ridiculous).
 
#60 ·
BB sounds like a troll. I would hope that there are not idiots out there that think this way! If he is for real than I hope that at least the state he lives in has safeguards in place to keep him from purchasing an kind of weapon. In fact I hope his only means of communication is a computer, because he should not be allowed to pick up sharp objects like pens or pencils.
There is no telling what he might do. Suppose some woman bends over to pick up a paper she dropped in the office, and BB sees her do this possible revealing more clevage or leg than he can tolerate. He might attack her with said pen and kill her because he felt threatened.

All iin all I stand by my first opinion, he's a Troll.
 
#9 ·
I'm going to need a retainer before I get into this one.

I accept credit cards, or you can pay me in ammo. I like NATO 9mm & 5.56mm (SS109 or the new open tip match with the copper shank they just started issuing. Some sort of Federal Trophy Bonded adaption...).

Sorry people. This one is pay for play.
 
#10 ·
I don't really have much to contribute to this thread at this time, except to say that BB sounds like a full fledged idiot that I want to stay far away from.

It sounds to me like BB needs to be locked away in a cell somewhere, and if he pursues this course of action may very well be, justifiably so IMHO.

Biker
 
#148 ·
^^^^^^^^YEP^^^^^^^^^

This needs to be national news, his picture on the back of something,,, OJ cartons or the like,
He needs to do society a favor, and wear only tee shirts that have two bold BB"S on the front and back, so everyone in the country can steer clear of this misfit .
What a maroon.


Martin Luther King, Jr.:
Cowardice asks the question, 'Is it safe?' Expediency asks the question, 'Is it politic?' Vanity asks the question, 'Is it popular?' But, conscience asks the question, 'Is it right?' And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because one's conscience tells one that it is right.
 
#12 ·
Seriously folks, just clarifying the laws for this guy might be helpful. He feels that I am 'no legal source' of information....altho I was only interpreting published laws on the matter. (And he was posting copied statutes). Maybe other explanations...of the laws, not his behavior issues...would be helpful.
 
#13 ·
Okay... assuming he isn't a troll or joking. I would say the obvious... he is clinically out of his mind.

He is not within his legal right to use deadly force because another man is using the facilities.

:ziplip: Biting my lip right now.... starting to draw blood.... :ziplip:
 
#17 ·
Okay... assuming he isn't a troll or joking. I would say the obvious... he is clinically out of his mind.

He is not within his legal right to use deadly force because another man is using the facilities.
:yup: Agreed. BB sounds like a very dangerous and unstable person.
Whether or not he truly believes that he would be justified in the described scenarios is probably irrelevant. Sounds like he's looking for a way to kill someone. :dead: BB scares me.
 
#14 ·
Ummmmmmmmmmmmm.....wow he had a woman arrested for flashing and would shoot a man for undressing in front of him and the man at the urinal is going to sexual assault him.
I am really at a loss for words. Whether he is a regular poster or not this guy is nutty. I can think of no legal justification for anything close to deadly force. This guy has some real issues with men and women apparently. At least he did not shoot the woman for flashing.
 
#33 ·
Your relevant opinion is valued, and I dont mind joking around but this thread could easily turn into a flamefest and the defendent isnt even here to defend himself. (I see no defense really, but...)
 
#22 ·
I am a lawyer, this is not a legal opinion, but it is fact: BB is a sick SOB who not only should not be carrying, he should be institutionalized. He feels threatened by ANYONE less than fully dressed? Called 911 when a girl flashed her boobs? Sick, sick, SICK!!! I'm not sure an adult with a problem this deep-seated is curable, but he needs help, and is a public safety hazard.

Okay, rant now concluded, I'd add this: Justification for the use of deadly force is based upon a "reasonable person" standard. I.e., would a reasonable person, confronted with the "threat," be in imminent fear of his life or that of someone else, or fear that a "laundry list" crime like sexual assault or robbery was about to be committed? BB is clearly anything but reasonable. His subjective "feeling" of being threatened by the appearance of all or part of a naked human body is never legal justification for the use of deadly force if a reasonable person would not have felt so threatened. A reasonable person is not in fear of his life just because someone undresses or urinates near him. I'd sure hate to meet the Grand Jury who would think otherwise!
 
#25 ·
Okay, rant now concluded, I'd add this: Justification for the use of deadly force is based upon a "reasonable person" standard. I.e., would a reasonable person, confronted with the "threat," be in imminent fear of his life or that of someone else, or fear that a "laundry list" crime like sexual assault or robbery was about to be committed? BB is clearly anything but reasonable. His subjective "feeling" of being threatened by the appearance of all or part of a naked human body is never legal justification for the use of deadly force if a reasonable person would not have felt so threatened. A reasonable person is not in fear of his life just because someone undresses or urinates near him. I'd sure hate to meet the Grand Jury who would think otherwise!
Thanks John. He did insist that a jury, using the 'reasonable' standard would side with him, esp since the victim was unable to dispute it (since he'd be dead).
 
#24 ·
As an LEO, I would arrest this guy in a second. His ONLY recourse would be to lie until his face fell off - if he EVER mentioned that the only "crime" the other guy committed was using a public urinal, he'd be spending a long, long time being exposed to a lot more than a casual unzipping in his local penitentiary...

Now that his comments are public record for time immemorial (thanks, interwebs!), I think his goose is cooked should any scenario even remotely approaching this one take place, and this nut job actually does hurt/kill somebody.
 
#41 ·
As a law enforcement officer, you obviously know criminal justice. I assume you were atleast went to college and not just an academy program.

Never once did I say I would shoot people for using urinals, I suggested if someone came toward me with their genitals out.

As I also have a criminal justice degree I understand I have a right to defend my life in case of fear of death, and sexual assault. You can read Michigan's Statute on the self defense law.

SELF-DEFENSE ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 309 of 2006


780.972 Use of deadly force by individual not engaged in commission of crime; conditions.
Sec. 2.

(1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:

(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.

(b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or herself or of another individual.

(2) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent unlawful use of force by another individual.



History: 2006, Act 309, Eff. Oct. 1, 2006

You may also know that in criminal defense one may plead mental condition. Just because an arrest has been made doesn't mean an elected official such as a country prosecutor will charge someone with a crime they can't commit. First off there is no intent, I avoid public restrooms to begin with.

So tell me where I am legally wrong please.

imminent sexual assault as according to legal definition. http://www.law.uc.edu/current/experiences/publications/docs/Simon.pdf

Reasonable is subject-able. It doesn't mean how a normal person would react. Consider first from the states POV that there is agraphobia
A fear of sexual abuse. If a reasonable minded person suffers from this fear and is faced with a person walking overtly toward them undressed and not asking for help. You are suggesting they don't have a right to defend themselves?

Are you suggesting that the penis has to be inside a body before there is imminent sexual assult about to happen?

And yes I did call the police on a hooker who flashed me. I want the streets cleaned and trash out of my neighborhood.
 
#26 ·
Big applause for Mitchel and Biker; you guys just gave me my chuckle for the day.

As for the OP's question. There are a couple of things you could do to straighten the guy out as far as legal use of force goes.

1) Print out the statutes on use of deadly force which exist in your state.

2) Give the general explanation of ability, opportunity, jeopardy, (and I like to include "intent.") If he is at all rational he will realize that he isn't looking at the situation in a particularly rational way.

3) "BB says he rarely ever uses public restroom or locker rooms and if he does, uses stalls or private showers."

He may well have several issues here. If he isn't just being a troll and a jerk, he would help himself with a trip to a clinical psychologist to discuss his inappropriate fears.

4) "He also claims that something called 'agoraphobia" (an extreme fear of public places) could be used to justify his reactions."

The insanity defense might mitigate the punishment he receives but in today's environment even if (somehow) he got an acquittal based on this claim, he would spend the rest of his life in an institution. Think for example, John Hinckley.
 
#44 ·
As I discussed already on the other forum. I did call my states court review board, a country asst district attorney, and the states AG office and went over the scenario with them. I went over the states statute on deadly force and asked them what they thought. They asked if there was intent, and malice. I said of course not. Being bare of both, where is the crime?

Are you suggesting that a verbal threat of rape has to occur before one has the right to defend themselves? I'm reading my sixth edition criminal law principles and cases book and it disagree's with you completely.

You may read it out of my bookif you wish. Alibris: 10133334227

The suggested action taken to protect mylself from sexual assault has neither mens, or actus- reus.

Now show me where I can not defend myself against someone sexually assulting me. Please.
 
#28 ·
I'd stay away from him and his posting. If you answer his post or get involved in the thread, if he does shoot someone, you could be involved.

Sounds like the guy is a full fledged homophobe without much reason to be so.
 
#31 ·
Lord I hope not. Esp. since I was actively discouraging him.

That's why I'd like to find a way to convince him his actions could indeed land him in jail for life.
 
#30 ·
Hopyard;1634266 1) Print out the statutes on use of deadly force which exist in your state. 2) Give the general explanation of ability said:
Thanks Hopyard.

More specifically, he was the one posting copies of gun laws...it was how they were interpreted that I tried to explain. He felt that he was legitimately justified, under the law, the way he interpreted them and what a jury would find as 'reasonable.'

He disregarded my interpretations, including those of intent, ability, and jeopardy, as completely non-valid because I'm not a lawyer.

I also pointed out that all gun owners are obligated to know the laws and that ignorance is no defense. And that all state gun laws are online and that gunowners are not required to have legal degrees to own guns.
 
#32 ·
I'm an LEO, and you can tell him from me that, should that scenario ever play out, he's going to be seeing a lot more male nudity (in the prison showers) than he ever counted on...
 
#35 ·
Please tell me this guy doesn't live in Utah. I don't want to be anywhere near this nutjob...

His self-proclaimed fanatical puritanism and agoraphobia would work against him, not for him were there a situation where he used deadly force to "defend himself". If he already knows he's liable to have this completely UNREASONABLE reaction to someone going about their own private business in a public facility, he needs to be proactive and not put himself in a situation where a deadly encounter would take place. It is highly probable that you'll see some wang in a public men's room (can't say that I ever have tho... I'm too busy minding my own business?) or locker room. He needs to avoid those locations at all costs, or at least disarm before entering.

BB, if you're reading this thread, you are not a reasonable person. You do not have a reasonable reaction to normal, everyday occurrences. A jury of reasonable people WILL NOT side with you. You need help, man. Please do the rest of us a favor and hang up the hogleg until you get your issues resolved.
 
#36 ·
Please tell me this guy doesn't live in Utah. I don't want to be anywhere near this nutjob...

His self-proclaimed fanatical puritanism and agoraphobia would work against him, not for him were there a situation where he used deadly force to "defend himself". If he already knows he's liable to have this completely UNREASONABLE reaction to someone going about their own private business in a public facility, he needs to be proactive and not put himself in a situation where a deadly encounter would take place. It is highly probable that you'll see some wang in a public men's room (can't say that I ever have tho... I'm too busy minding my own business?) or locker room. He needs to avoid those locations at all costs, or at least disarm before entering.

BB, if you're reading this thread, you are not a reasonable person. You do not have a reasonable reaction to normal, everyday occurrences. A jury of reasonable people WILL NOT side with you. You need help, man. Please do the rest of us a favor and hang up the hogleg until you get your issues resolved.

To be honest, in the original discussion, he says that he does avoid such places as much as possible. I asked about in grade and high school gym/sports...and he said he did then too.
 
#38 ·
I would seriously suggest that you recommend he consult with an attorney regarding his legal theory. That way he can hear it straight from the horses mouth.

If he is opposed to that, I'd consider him a nut job and quit posting in that thread on the forum.

If he's opposed to giving his theory a try on a real trial attorney, then he's either not serious about it or as I already said, a nut job.

My opinion is just like yours and everyone else's here... He has no legal standing for shooting an unarmed man in a public restroom based only information he has presented.

Unless the "flasher" made other overt movements as to commit a personal attack on his person, he has no grounds just to shoot him down. A rape defense will not work until the man actually does something more than just show him his genitalia.

I will say that Hopyard has a point. He does almost sound like a homicidal maniac trying out his theory on others before he looks for a victim to execute in a bathroom. "BB" has a point... it will be his word against a dead guy with his pants down. He may be looking for good opinions so he can figure out what lies to tell after the fact.
 
#39 ·
I'm actually surprised that this thread has stayed pretty doggone decent.
While in the process of reading the entry OP I would have bet my last wooden Moderator Nickel that I'd have been closing this thread by post....#s 4 or 5. :biggrin2:
Kudos.
 
#42 ·
Ladies and gentlemen of Defensive Carry, I introduce you to "BB" ^^^^^
 
#46 ·
Thanks. I did Google it and got nothing. But your link worked.

From one source: It should be noted that evidence supports that both real sexual abuse and also false accusations of sexual abuse are prevalent.

Agraphobia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
#48 ·
I invite everyone to read the context of the conversation. I do not believe she has been accurate. She portrays I would shoot someone for using the bathroom. Which isn;t the case.

I said I avoid using stand up urinals. I use booths. If some man exposed himself to me in a restroom booth he has to go out of his way to make that action happen. I have not ever in my entire life used a stand up urinal. There would not even be the possibility that he could have accidental exposed himself to me. Believe you me if there is another mans penis anywhere around me it will have to be by force. I wouldn't put myself into a situation where it would or could likely happen. I'm not suggesting that I would shoot a man in a bathroom who happens to have a seizure while taking a break. I wouldn't rationalize this as a sexual attempt. However if some man did come toward me with his genitals out I wouldn't give him the chance to get any closer.


There isn't a reasonable situation where any male would be stripping down near me.

You can try to give me 1000 possible situations where somehow it could possibly happen and no, it wouldn't, because I overtly avoid those situations.

If a males penis is in my view it is because they made it happen. I have a right to defend myself against a sexual assault. According to my state statute I do not have to retreat. I have the right to stand my ground.

I am open to discussion. I will be back tomorrow to read your reply.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top