Increasing Personal Risk to Decrease Public Risk

This is a discussion on Increasing Personal Risk to Decrease Public Risk within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by mcp1810 I would call his bluff. Odds are if he is trying to take you away from all those witnesses what is ...

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 90

Thread: Increasing Personal Risk to Decrease Public Risk

  1. #31
    Senior Member Array DUNDEM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Posts
    509
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    I would call his bluff.
    Odds are if he is trying to take you away from all those witnesses what is going to happen there is not going to be any better than what resistance will earn you.
    Make a big loud stinking scene so you have the store surveillence video (if they have any) and a hundred eye witnesses.

    Agreed. This is the better move, to get shot in front of people than on the road side or some alley.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Ex Member Array EB31's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    539
    Quote Originally Posted by DUNDEM View Post
    Agreed. This is the better move, to get shot in front of people than on the road side or some alley.
    Eye witnesses won't matter to me if I'm dead. I'll stick to trying to avoid beind shot altogether. lol If I'm going to gamble with my own life...then my money is on the physical fight I'm going to put up in order to survive. I'm not going to just stand there and yell and scream making a scene. I'm fighting until there's no fight left in me or no enemy left to fight. I'm just a mean sob that grew up on the streets, never learned to fight fair and went on to study years of martial arts coupled with training courtesy of Uncle Sam..backed with enough real life experiences to last several lifetimes. If in a scenerio described in this thread, and I feel cornered, my money is on me. All day.

    Sometimes, in certain situations, it's not about the tools you have at your disposal or even you training and ability to use them. Sometimes, there's those rare occassions, when it just boils down to the verosity...the insane ferociousness that you are willing to fight with.

    I've typed about this before....who here is willing to literally bite through the jugular of another human being in order to survive? Could you stick your finger into a BG's eye socket and rupture or pop out his eye?

    Guns are a great tool to have to balance out the odds in todays society. Knives are great defensive weapons to have as well. But what about those moments when, as in this scenerio, you have a BG looming over your shoulder and you might not be able to get to your gun or knife? Do you have it in you to put it all on the line and fight for your life?

    Just something else to think about...other "How/when could I get to my gun?".

  4. #33
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    EB31,
    If you read the OP carefully you will notice that no weapon has been displayed and you have not been physically attacked. With the low situational awareness of everyone else in the area as described by Lima, what is the first thing you think they are going to say to the police when they show up? This guy whispered to you that he has a gun. What if he doesn't? Assuming it stops short of you biting his jugular, it will be your word against his as to what was said. If all the police have is your statement including what he actually said, and his statement saying he just asked you why you chose *that* brand of dryer sheet and you attacked him, what are they going to go on? The first violent act the sheep see is you attacking him. The video (assuming it works) shows him quietly walk up to you and say something, and then you assaulting him.
    I could be wrong, but I don't think you would be going home for a while.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  5. #34
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    This could happen in any number of situations where a weapon is not displayed, but threats are made and defensive actions result. It is then going to come down to the credibility of the parties involved, based on a number of things. I think that any assumptions are premature.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  6. #35
    Ex Member Array EB31's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    539
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    EB31,
    If you read the OP carefully you will notice that no weapon has been displayed and you have not been physically attacked. With the low situational awareness of everyone else in the area as described by Lima, what is the first thing you think they are going to say to the police when they show up? This guy whispered to you that he has a gun. What if he doesn't? Assuming it stops short of you biting his jugular, it will be your word against his as to what was said. If all the police have is your statement including what he actually said, and his statement saying he just asked you why you chose *that* brand of dryer sheet and you attacked him, what are they going to go on? The first violent act the sheep see is you attacking him. The video (assuming it works) shows him quietly walk up to you and say something, and then you assaulting him.
    I could be wrong, but I don't think you would be going home for a while.

    It has to be a personal assessment of the situation. Do you feel the threat is real?

    If some stranger....I've never seen before....is standing behind me, in my personal space threatening me with a gun? I have to say my assessment would and should be that the threat is real and react accordingly.

    I'd rather lose 5-7 years for overreacting to a threat then to lose my life for underreacting.

    As it's been said many times, we each have to know ourselves and be prepared to live with any and all consequences that come with our actions.

  7. #36
    Member Array JB-Norcal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northern Kalifornia
    Posts
    61
    Just say "Um, I done speak the english, thank you very much" and smile.

  8. #37
    Senior Moderator
    Array limatunes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    4,247
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    EB31,
    If you read the OP carefully you will notice that no weapon has been displayed and you have not been physically attacked. With the low situational awareness of everyone else in the area as described by Lima, what is the first thing you think they are going to say to the police when they show up? This guy whispered to you that he has a gun. What if he doesn't? Assuming it stops short of you biting his jugular, it will be your word against his as to what was said. If all the police have is your statement including what he actually said, and his statement saying he just asked you why you chose *that* brand of dryer sheet and you attacked him, what are they going to go on? The first violent act the sheep see is you attacking him. The video (assuming it works) shows him quietly walk up to you and say something, and then you assaulting him.
    I could be wrong, but I don't think you would be going home for a while.
    I'm sure this is different from state to state, and someone, PLEASE correct me if I am wrong, but isn't just the threat of a weapon justify the use of self defense based on your BELIEF of personal harm?

    If someone walks up to me and says, "I have a gun pointed at you under my coat" and even if he doesn't he has threatened my life and I have no other reason but to believe that he is telling the truth.

    Yes, when then police arrive it WILL come down to credibility. If you tell the police he said he had a weapon and he says he just asked which way the pharmacy was, they are going to have to investigate which one of us is telling the truth? Is it going to be the house-wife and mother with nothing worse than a speeding ticket on her record with no history of violence with character witnesses up the wazoo that will testify I wouldn't hurt a fly? Or is it going to be the creep with (most-likely) some kind of a criminal record perhaps even a warrant or two out for his arrest who's own grandmother wants nothing to do with him?

    People who do these kinds of things don't just go from choir boy to armed assault not unless they are SUPER desperate. They usually have some kind of run-ins with the law that allow the credibility scale to be tipped ever so slightly in your own favor.

  9. #38
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,047
    Quote Originally Posted by limatunes View Post
    I'm sure this is different from state to state, and someone, PLEASE correct me if I am wrong, but isn't just the threat of a weapon justify the use of self defense based on your BELIEF of personal harm?
    Yes and no, in states where the statute is worded in such a way that the citizen has the responsibility to determine the reasonable level of response that he/she deems is necessary based on what the person knows or believes is true at the time.

    In Oregon, for example, the basic use of force law (ORS 161.209) says that a person is justified in using physical force in self-defense or defense of another from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force, and the person may use a degree of force which the person reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose.

    The fly in the ointment is that the "reasonable man" standard essentially means others get to have 20:20 hindsight and evaluate what they think you did, and it is THEIR evaluation that counts ... not yours. In this sense, in such states, it most definitely is NOT simply your "belief of personal harm" that dictates legal justification for use of force or deadly force.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  10. #39
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    There is a certain risk related to the "reasonable man" protocol, but I think that it would be minimal in a situation such as presented here. I think that most people approached by a strange male who stated that he had a hidden weapon and would kill you if you did not do as told, would believe the individuals statments and take the threat as real. That belief would therefor recognize defensive action as reasonable and justified. The same might not be true in other circumstances.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  11. #40
    Distinguished Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    1,991
    Sounds like an action movie - ugly bad guy with gun nods in a direction as if to say, "I have to shoot you over there". Hero always starts in that direction. But after a couple of karate chops or improbable uses of high pressure lines or chandaliers, gets away.
    My first, natural, honest response is probably a glance at the bg with a perplexed smile ("Are you kidding?").

    A drawn, concealed gun, inches or less from my flesh, is not a gunfight. My drawing is not an option. Also not an option is leaving under the bg's threat.
    Applicable is the motto, "if he's close enough to touch me, he's too close to get away". The scenario assumes the bg is not a professional assasin "touching me" with a stilletto. In any event, make noise.
    When he's in control of a lethal weapon on the ground - then the ground is all that is behind my target.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  12. #41
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    Quote Originally Posted by limatunes View Post
    I'm sure this is different from state to state, and someone, PLEASE correct me if I am wrong, but isn't just the threat of a weapon justify the use of self defense based on your BELIEF of personal harm?
    But if that belief was reasonable is going to be determined more likely at a trial than in the managers office of a grocery store.
    If someone walks up to me and says, "I have a gun pointed at you under my coat" and even if he doesn't he has threatened my life and I have no other reason but to believe that he is telling the truth.
    No argument there.
    Yes, when then police arrive it WILL come down to credibility. If you tell the police he said he had a weapon and he says he just asked which way the pharmacy was, they are going to have to investigate which one of us is telling the truth?
    And if he says he just propositioned you...
    Is it going to be the house-wife and mother with nothing worse than a speeding ticket on her record with no history of violence with character witnesses up the wazoo that will testify I wouldn't hurt a fly? Or is it going to be the creep with (most-likely) some kind of a criminal record perhaps even a warrant or two out for his arrest who's own grandmother wants nothing to do with him?
    I think you are making some dangerous assumptions here. First not everyone here necessarily has such a spotless record. Second, investigators on the scene are not going to be calling all of your character witnesses. That is for your attorney to do at your trial. Third, at one time or another every dirt bag out there was a first time offender. Your BG in this scenario might not necessarily have a record at this point. Or, if he is a documented offender he could say he simply asked you what time it was, and you, recognizing him as the recently released serial rapist that was featured on the news, over reacted and assaulted him.
    People who do these kinds of things don't just go from choir boy to armed assault not unless they are SUPER desperate. They usually have some kind of run-ins with the law that allow the credibility scale to be tipped ever so slightly in your own favor.
    You are right, but this again assumes that our victim in this scenario has not had legal issues of their own. But also staying with your theory of escalating violence on the bad guys part why would they be attempting this in the environment you described in the OP? Why is this person going in to witness rich highly populated well lit area with possible video surveillence instead of cutting a window screen and slipping into a bedroom window at two in the morning?

    I am not saying that one should not physically resist. But in the scenario you described in the original post I see a big down side to immediately attacking with overwhelming force. When the officers arrive on the scene they are going to be questioning you (Do we follow the "Don't talk to police" policy so frequently advocated on this forum?), the bad guy (assuming he is alive and concious) and the other shoppers and employees. They are also going to look at or at least ask for any video the store has.
    What are they going to hear from those witnesses? What will the video show? What if it turns out that despite your reasonable belief the bad guy has no weapon on him? Don't forget that bit about how everyone is supposed to have equal protection under the law.

    If the officers show up on the scene of a shooting, with dozens of witnesses, and the shooter says "He threatened me and I was in fear of my life." but no one else heard any threats, or saw any violent act other than the shooting, do you really think you will be home for dinner? Are they just going to believe you because of no or minimal criminal history or will they maybe assume like we see posted in so many threads here that there is more here than meets the eye?
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  13. #42
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    While anything is possible, it is good to keep some perspective on reality. The rarity of something as described in the OP happening to someone, is only surpassed by the even greater rarity that someone would try such without a weapon.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  14. #43
    Distinguished Member Array Jason Storm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,211
    I would pretend to comply with him/her for a few seconds. But if I act and his actions end up killing an innocent bystander, that's going to be his undoing. I would rather worry about my life and take a risk with him/her hitting a bystander than having him/her take me to a secluded area or a vehicle where he/she can execute me w/ very little or no chance of anyone knowing.

  15. #44
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Guantes View Post
    While anything is possible, it is good to keep some perspective on reality. The rarity of something as described in the OP happening to someone, is only surpassed by the even greater rarity that someone would try such without a weapon.
    Well now that all depends. What is our bad guy's objective? If he is a rapist, his behavior as described in the OP fits the profile of a sadistic/ritualistic rapist most closely. They are very rare and their prefered weapon is actually a knife. Also, they frequently have no criminal or mental health history to speak of. So that sort of complicates things for dealing with the police in the immediate aftermath of our incident. Also close but more frequently encountered is the Power Reassurance or "gentleman rapist" They frequently rely on the threat of a weapon but rarely have one. If they injure their victim is usually an accident.
    I am sure there are just plain killers that might use the approach described in the OP but I am not familar with their profiles. The only ones I have read did not use the threat of violence to gain compliance from their victims in public places, but enticed their victims to come with them and sought to win their confidence or sympathy while in public. The threats and actual violence didn't occur until the victims had been secured.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  16. #45
    VIP Member Array MitchellCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    I don't post here anymore...Sorry
    Posts
    2,333
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    The fly in the ointment is that the "reasonable man" standard essentially means others get to have 20:20 hindsight and evaluate what they think you did, and it is THEIR evaluation that counts ... not yours. In this sense, in such states, it most definitely is NOT simply your "belief of personal harm" that dictates legal justification for use of force or deadly force.
    As a general rule the "reasonable man" standard is not geared toward hindsight, but what would the reasonable man, in your situation, knowing/feeling/believing what you did at that moment do.

    That is a double edged sword in that it generally prohibits Monday morning quarterbacking - but also many times prohibits a jury from knowing any factors about the assailant's past that were not known to the defender at the time of his actions

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Intervene at your own risk
    By tiwee in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: November 14th, 2009, 05:38 PM
  2. Seriously, how much risk is there?
    By Sticks in forum Reloading
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: September 7th, 2008, 07:10 PM
  3. Risk it?
    By Railslider in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 5th, 2008, 06:48 PM
  4. I Wonder If I Should Risk This?
    By QKShooter in forum Related Gear & Equipment
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: June 11th, 2006, 10:50 PM
  5. Your personal perceived risk rating?
    By P95Carry in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: June 9th, 2005, 08:28 AM

Search tags for this page

difference personal risk and public risk
,
personal risk and public risk
,
personal risk v.s public risk
,

personal risk versus public risk

,

personal risk vs public risk

Click on a term to search for related topics.