Would you intervene with deadly force on a stranger's behalf?(poll added)

This is a discussion on Would you intervene with deadly force on a stranger's behalf?(poll added) within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Since the recent mass shootings happening around the country I have noticed on this board and others using the situation to champion the cause of ...

View Poll Results: Would you intervene with deadly force on a stranger's behalf?

Voters
150. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES

    116 77.33%
  • NO

    34 22.67%
Page 1 of 8 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 107
Like Tree69Likes

Thread: Would you intervene with deadly force on a stranger's behalf?(poll added)

  1. #1
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,044

    Would you intervene with deadly force on a stranger's behalf?(poll added)

    Since the recent mass shootings happening around the country I have noticed on this board and others using the situation to champion the cause of carrying a firearm. The general statement being used is "If there had been someone in the theater, school, spa or insert your own, they could have ended the massacre". "When business owner's allow gun carriers in there store it aids in the protection of all concerned".

    On the other side of that, again both on here and other forums, I have noticed many people posting that they would not come to the aid of a stranger or become involved in a situation that did not put themselves or there loved ones in danger and that is their right to do just that.

    It is an individuals choice whether or not to intervene in any given situation and since it is an individuals choice there is no right or wrong answer. As many have stated we are not the police, they carry to protect myself and my family.

    The option to do a poll does not want to seem to work for me at this moment so I will just ask this in a regular post. No hidden agenda's, no secret adding later on, does not make any difference if the victim is male, female, elderly, young, race, creed, color or religion last just a simple question. The person will be killed or seriously injured based on your intervention. Yes or No, not well it depends or if I had a clear shot and so on.


    Would you as a CC'er, OC'er gun carrying citizen intervene on the behalf of a stranger to prevent their death or serious physical injury?


    If a mod or someone can turn this into a poll for me it would be greatly appreciated. Two options Yes or No.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761
    By stating one can only say Yes of No I go with no comment.
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  4. #3
    Member Array RM686's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    36
    I posted this question on another forum with the addtional question of whether you would lose your firearm to the police as evidence, in the case of a shooting. The question from some legal types was yes and even if your were found innocent of no wrong doing you would still not get it back. Some of these replys were from policemen. So I then replied that you are taking a huge legal risk in intervening if not the cost in legal fees or loss of your freedom but are also out the cost of your firearm, which could be up to $1000.00. All I stated was I would think twice and probably not get involved.
    I receive so manny flame posts, from armchair cowboys along with a few insults, that I took the thread down since I was the one that posted it.
    Seems like yes or no may be a safe bet. Never knew this was such a hot topic.

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member
    Array accessbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,399
    I would probably find it hard to not intervene. But until I am in that situation I won't know for sure as I am not going to make a blanket statement that I will never do so. Just like recently, on a bus here in Portland, a bus driver got stabbed by a passenger several times and several passengers also. I would have probably pulled my gun and may have shot him. But I am actually glad I was not there. I would rather not have to use my M&P for anything other than target practice. But I will if necessary. But by necessary it doesn't mean that I will restrict myself from helping anyone other than family or friends. I just can't do that.
    tcox4freedom, tundra and lchamp like this.
    EDC - M&P Shield .40, Ruger P90, OR Ruger SR1911 CMD AND
    Ruger LCP in Desantis Pocket Holster (backup)
    Member - SAF, OFF,
    NRA Life Member

  6. #5
    Member Array NiceAsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    74
    How can you truthfully answer a Hypothetical Question? There are so many variables, and every situation is different.

    I would act differently if I was alone, as opposed to being with my wife and daughter. As a Father and a Husband, I will always look to protect my wife and daughter first.

    It would also depend if there was an immediate deadly threat. Someone yelling that they were going to "kill everyone" without actually having a weapon is not a reason to shoot.

    If I was in a situation, and I knew my family was safe, and there was an immediate threat to another person, like a robbery or "spree" shooting, and I thought I could stop it, then yes, I might. But still would have to be darn sure of the situation.

    Never take lightly the use of deadly force. No matter if you were completely in the right, your life will forever be changed. And even if you are cleared any charges, you may still face civil law suits.

    So, don't just arm yourself with your gun, arm yourself with knowledge of how, and when to use it, and what the consequences of your actions may be.

    rg

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,179
    If I'm in a situation where somebody out of the blue comes in with a drawn gun,clearly not an LEO,and either makes statements they will kill somebody/everybody I will very likely draw as soon as I get an opportunity and end the threat,being in Tx the following is why,other States maybe not.
    § 9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified in
    using force or deadly force against another to protect a third
    person if:
    (1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably
    believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31
    or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against
    the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes
    to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and
    (2) the actor reasonably believes that his
    intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.

    Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
    Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
    smolck and 1MoreGoodGuy like this.
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .

  8. #7
    Member Array NiceAsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    74
    161.209 Use of physical force in defense of a person. Except as provided in ORS 161.215 and 161.219, a person is justified in using physical force upon another person for self-defense or to defend a third person 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. [1971 c.743 §22]

    161.215 Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using physical force upon another person if:
    (1) With intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, the person provokes the use of unlawful physical force by that person; or
    (2) The person is the initial aggressor, except that the use of physical force upon another person under such circumstances is justifiable if the person withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person the intent to do so, but the latter nevertheless continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful physical force; or
    (3) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law. [1971 c.743 §24]

    161.219 Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person unless the person reasonably believes that the other person is:
    (1) Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or
    (2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; or
    (3) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person. [1971 c.743 §23]
    Thanks, thought I would look up Oregon law. Looks like if there is an imminent threat of physical force against a person, then you would be justified.

  9. #8
    Member
    Array discoboxer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    333
    Clearly it would be dependent on many variables.

    First priority is protecting my family. If they are not one of the variables, I believe I would act. I am not police, nor a vigilante, but I will not sit by watching innocent people get slaughtered. If a life is saved and a criminal is stopped, I could care less about the cost of the firearm taken for evidence.

    Understand that I believe in my firearm being a last option if no other options are available to exploit.
    minimalbrat, MrsHB and tundra like this.
    “There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
    ― Albert Einstein

  10. #9
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,044
    How can you truthfully answer a Hypothetical Question? There are so many variables, and every situation is different.


    I fully realize that there are many variables and each situation is different however IMO everyone should already have an answer before ever putting on a gun. Everyone of us can come up with a different variable to sway the verdict one way or the other. "If it was a child, or a woman, if all he had was a pipe" and so on. I purposely made the statement generic and limited the responses that could be given to hopefully eliminate some of the variables. You are correct knowledge is the key. Both knowledge of your state laws and knowledge of your equipment and ability.

    In no way do I take the issue of deadly force lightly as no one should and that is the purpose of the post. I know you cannot plan for every situation but generally speaking the more knowledge you have before and event occurs the better you are able make a decision when the time comes.

    By the way welcome to the forum.

    RM686 sorry you got the responses you did, I do not think that would happen here and if they did the responses would be directed at me. Yes your gun would most certainly be taken in as evidence until the investigation was complete. Once it was determined that no charges would be filed your firearm would be returned, the police have no say so in the matter. Should for whatever reason charges proceed then the weapon would be held until such proceedings were completed.

    In the overall picture you should not base your decision to intervene on the fact that you may lose your gun or future legal ramifications. The same thing could happen if you used the gun in defense of your own life. Many have quoted Col. Cooper in this matter. "The first battle is the one to survive, the second it the fight that comes after".

    Absolutely it is a hot topic. As I stated in the OP many are using the recent shooting as an example of a "call to arms" so to speak that if someone with a weapon had been at any one of the situations that person could have stopped it but if the general concensus is that they would not intervene on behalf of a stranger then it would not make any difference if the place had a dozen gun carriers.

    Duke as always great post backed up with statute. Come on Crowman not even an opinion?

    Accessbob. I hope no one wants to use their weapon for anything other than the range. It is a deeply personal decision as to what each of us would do in any given situation. I believe everyone has a certain cutoff limit and then they would intervene and as I said there is no right or wrong answer it is everyone's choice and I would hope no one here would criticize anyone's choice that is different from their own.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  11. #10
    Member Array GunByte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    95
    Probably not for many reasons. With a stranger you have no idea of the situation. He could be the one that started the fight, a criminal fleeing from an undercover LEO, etc.. The other major issue is that even if the shooting is deemed justified, your life as you know it will be ruined and your bank account will be drained leaving you with very large attorney fees to pay. I am not a cop and do not intend to act like one. I will call 911 and try to disrupt any violent encounter verbally but I am not about to ruin my life for a stranger that for all I know can be a drug dealer engaged in a beef with a client. My gun is a final option to save myself and my loved ones and that is it. So do not count on me to save your bacon. :)
    pir8fan and PatAz like this.

  12. #11
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,044
    Disco and GunByte you are both correct. Everyone has to make their own decision and the first step is thinking about, the who/what/when/where's and why and justifying it.

    Thanks for the responses.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  13. #12
    Member Array NiceAsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    74
    tacman605: Thanks for the Welcome, And thank you for starting a good discussion. You are correct, it is something that everyone that carries should consider.

  14. #13
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,044
    Here is the law from my home State of Arkansas.


    More Sharing ServicesShare |
    5-2-606. Use of physical force in defense of a person.

    (a) (1) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person to defend himself or herself or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and the person may use a degree of force that he or she reasonably believes to be necessary.

    (2) However, the person may not use deadly physical force except as provided in 5-2-607.

    (b) A person is not justified in using physical force upon another person if:

    (1) With purpose to cause physical injury or death to the other person, the person provokes the use of unlawful physical force by the other person;

    (2) (A) The person is the initial aggressor.

    (B) However, the initial aggressor's use of physical force upon another person is justifiable if:

    (i) The initial aggressor in good faith withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his or her purpose to withdraw from the encounter; and

    (ii) The other person continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful physical force; or

    (3) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by agreement not authorized by law.
    Disclaimer: These codes may not be the most recent version. Arkansas may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.

    Also I apologize for not stating this before. My answer to the baseline question is yes I would intervene.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  15. #14
    VIP Member
    Array RoadRunner71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    6,349
    My usual response to any hypothetical, generic question like this would be an unequivocal YES/NO/MAYBE.

    The fight-after-the-fight is something that absolutely must be considered. You are responsible for the well being of your family. That includes their FINANCIAL well being. Is this hypothetical stranger worth the potential danger to the financial well being of my family? That isn't even taking in to consideration the possiblity that I may FAIL and be injured/killed myself.

    Another issue is TIME. How quickly can you ascertain who the BG actually is? In that time, has my window of opportunity passed? Is lethal force the only option? Has the window passed? Can I actually make an effective shot that will solve the problem? Has the window passed? You get the picture.

    Of course, this leaves out the question of, who is this person to me? Am I responsible for every hump who gets in over his head in a display of machismo? Then again, if I don't stand up to the barbarian hordes, who will?

    So....

    IF I can determine who the BG is. IF I can actually act in an effective way. IF the window of opportunity has not passed. No, I'm not going to stand still and let some one get killed.
    "Mind own business"
    "Always cut cards"

  16. #15
    Member Array Naufragia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Black Hills, South Dakota
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by RoadRunner71 View Post
    IF I can determine who the BG is. IF I can actually act in an effective way. IF the window of opportunity has not passed. No, I'm not going to stand still and let some one get killed.
    This encapsulates my thoughts on the subject perfectly.
    rottkeeper likes this.

Page 1 of 8 12345 ... 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
  •  

Search tags for this page

arkansas right to use deadly force
,
can you use deadly force to protect a child
,

can you use deadly force to protect others

,
can you use deadly force to protect your children from their father
,
ccw use of deadly force
,
describe a time when you intervened in a situation on behalf of a friend
,
hypothetical situations for the use of deadly force
,
in oregon can a person who ccw use deadly force to protect a stranger
,

wa state deadly force laws

,
washington state use of lethal force
,

when can you use deadly force in arkansas

,
would you intervene stranger
Click on a term to search for related topics.