Lesson from Iraq: a bullet from a 12-yr old will kill you as much as a bullet from a 30-yr old...
If a 12 yr old wants to carry a gun in the adult world and create mayhem, they will be treated accordingly. Yes, the aftermath will be messy, but when push comes to shove, I choose ME and MINE.
I've alway gone on the premise and trained that if it's me or them, it's them. Them can be anybody, any age.
I don't know how I'd feel afterwards, probably angry, initially, at the thought that I was forced into that situation by some kid, then who knows.
I worked the streets for many years, and the 12-15 yr olds were as potentially deadly as anyone on the streets in Boston in the inner city projects or more "disadvantaged" areas I had to ply the trade in. They wouldn't hesitate to cap your arse in a heartbeat. There'd be no hesitation due to age, none at all.
I agree with Sixto. To assume that they had anything other than a gun is foolish and not based on any known facts. If 1 of 6 attackers reaches for his pocket , he's a dead man and if the other 5 move towards me I'll add them to the pile.
I stay in Masslon Ohio and its nice area but the same thing happens there. You are never completely safe from thugs. If the thugs had shot the victim what then? The cops would have recovered the victims property only if he survived the holdup and was able to identify the thugs This holdup could have ended in a tragedy.
One boy asked the victim for change for a dollar. When the victim said that he didn't have any money, another boy pulled out a gun
If 1 of 6 attackers reaches for his pocket , he's a dead man
Remembering the three rules to be met for use of lethal force on another? the Means, Motive, and Opportunity? Reaching into his pocket, he had not threatened the victim yet, and the weapon had not been observed or alluded to prior to it's being presented.
Two of the three rules to be met for SD had not been met untill the gun was presented and the threat made at that time. If 1 of 6 attackers reaches for his pocket , he's a dead man could be a very bad attitude to have.
Someone asks you for change for a dollar and reaches into his pocket, he could have easily been pulling that dollar bill out to request the same again as easily as he pulled the gun.
Wouldn't that be considered "jumping the gun" because he reaches into his pocket? Just a little?:rofl:
Sorry Sixto, Sixbravo is the one who said "I think it was probably and airsoft gun" I wasn't clear about who I was debating there. I was agreeing with you. As for the comments by AzQkr, six teenage thugs surrounding me and not leaving after I told them I didn't have any money is a legitamate threat. The fact that they had me outnumbered 6 to 1 is all that's needed for me to be able to defend myself EVEN if they didn't have a gun. May I shouldn't shoot him when he sticks his hand into his pocket but I will draw and tell him not to pull it out and be ready to shoot him as soon as he pulls it out if I see anything threatening in it. I have no obligation to let him draw , let alone to give him a chance to shoot first.
" About 8:30 p.m. Monday, a 21-year-old Akron man told police that five kids had robbed him at gunpoint.
He was walking on East Exchange Street near Sumner Street when five juveniles on bicycles surrounded him.
How to you get to "six teenage thugs surrounding me" from the above? Thats not what was reported. As it turned out, they likely were thugs, but you have moved past the report and placed what happened [ hindsight ] into this:
six teenage thugs surrounding me and not leaving after I told them I didn't have any money is a legitamate threat.
They might be a legitimate threat, and they might not be. What it is not is a lethal threat until they have demonstrated the means, motive and opportunity criteria, and you had better not draw down on anyone who hasn't presented the three critria for SD which are means, motive and opportunity.
You perception that 6 kids who don't leave "immediately" because you tell them you have no change is not a lethal threat. The kid or his friends didn't threaten violence if the request was not met prior to the other kid drawing the gun.
You got me, 5 thugs not 6. I'm sure I over simplified my response. Anytime 5 punks on bicycles surround me I'm on flaming orange alert. That is a defensive situation. I would not give them anything and walk out of the circle immediately. If they made a move to keep me surrounded then that IS a threat. Have you seen the size of some 16 yr olds? Even if they were just average size, they could beat you to death with their hands alone. (Unless you're Chuck Norris, who would get them all with 1 round house kick). Several actual cases of this exist. You are legal to draw if you think there is a legitamate of bodily harm, they don't need weapons. Where I live, we don't have to try to run if in a threatening situation.
I wasn't trying to get you, really.
Anytime 5 punks on bicycles surround me I'm on flaming orange alert.
As it should be sir.
If they made a move to keep me surrounded then that IS a threat.
Have you seen the size of some 16 yr olds?
Yes, I've worked inner city projects for some very long years where lots of them surrounded me when I entered the area or into the buildings.
Even if they were just average size, they could beat you to death with their hands alone.
Yes they could indeed.
You are legal to draw if you think there is a legitamate of bodily harm, they don't need weapons.
You'll need to articulate your reasonable suspicion that they posed a legitimate threat by meeting at least one the three criteria for use of deadly force in that scenario [ if one or more threatened you with physical harm, that would constitute use of force due to the disparity of numbers in this instance ]. Use of force, even drawing the firearm is "use of force".
Disparity of force by being outnumbered [ as in this case ] or the persons physical strength/size is a legitimate criteria for use of lethal force even when no weapon has been introduced. It also requires their having met criteria for that use of force such as verabal threats, etc.