"Causing" a lethal situation?

This is a discussion on "Causing" a lethal situation? within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; This is not, IMO, a "right" or "wrong issue." When we elect to carry a gun each of us has to make a personal decision ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 51

Thread: "Causing" a lethal situation?

  1. #31
    Ron
    Ron is offline
    Distinguished Member Array Ron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    West Linn, Oregon
    Posts
    1,628
    This is not, IMO, a "right" or "wrong issue." When we elect to carry a gun each of us has to make a personal decision concerning the circumstances under which we will elect to use deadly force. And each of us will, depending upon a bunch of different factors, draw our "Line in the sand" differently. No problem with that. As long as we fully understand the potential consequences of our decision and actions, I fully respect and have no quarrel with those who view this differently then I do.

    Ron
    "It does not do to leave a dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him."

    J. R. R. Tolkien

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Member Array mrhutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Marietta, GA
    Posts
    202
    criminals are crazy, but MOST will respect the fact that a gun is pointed at them and will take off once you have drawn. those who don't, need to be shot anwyay--they're dangerous.

  4. #33
    VIP Member Array deadeye72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Central Mississippi
    Posts
    4,283
    Quote Originally Posted by chuck brick View Post
    There's more to the wallet than just $20. There's ID theft, your address, maybe pictures of your wife/kids (and the address) - for most people, your life is in the wallet. I would absolutely shoot someone for trying to take my wallet/car keys/$20. I'm not the one that suddenly decided that their life was worth 20 bucks, they are. I'm just playing their game, by their rules, and if they lose they should have played a different game. If I do give them what they want, they may well see this as weakness on my part/dominance victory on theirs. Then there's no telling how far that could escalate, depending on the mood of the perpetrator.
    Sorry to sound so harsh, but I'm quite serious. I didn't make the decision to carry so I could financially support criminals; I carry because I believe they should be stopped, and although I hope never to have to "rehab" a POS neither will I choose to enhance their carreers.

    Stay safe,

    Chuck Brick.
    I was not saying I would give them anything more than lead poisoning. I would toss my wallet to the side of them to buy me enough time to draw and eliminate the threat. They ain't leaving with nothing.
    Glock 27
    BENELLI NOVA

  5. #34
    Member Array chuck brick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    331
    Quote Originally Posted by deadeye72 View Post
    I was not saying I would give them anything more than lead poisoning. I would toss my wallet to the side of them to buy me enough time to draw and eliminate the threat. They ain't leaving with nothing.
    Didn't mis-understand you on that. Just had to blow off my mouth with my take on the situation. Many, however, apparently will do almost anything to avoid using the gun. For them that's fine; each person has to live with their own decisions, just as I have to live with mine. The next-to-last thing I want to happen is to use mine, too, but I certainly will - to avoid the last thing I want to happen.
    (I will NOT be a willing -or easy - victim, Period: The last thing I want.)

    Stay safe,

    Chuck Brick.
    Why do I use 230 gr. for my .45acp?
    Because I can't find a source of 250 gr!
    http://chucksrantings.blogspot.com/

  6. #35
    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 C9H13NO3 View Post
    I've heard people say it's wrong to use lethal force to defend property. I would agree that most property is not worth taking a life over. But I also feel it is impossible to defend property with lethal force unless the person you are defending it against currently has your property in their position.

    If someone demands your wallet, you can give it to them and end the situation, or say no. Saying no might escalate the situation, possibly to the point of having to defend your life. But then you are no longer defending your property, but your life.

    I'm just kind of confused as to what constitutes defense of property vs. defense of life. If I make it so whoever wants my stuff has to get through me first, I'm still not going to use lethal force until my life is threatened. They have to threaten my life to get to my possessions.

    Are people who say defense of property is wrong saying we should just hand over anything a potentially violent criminal demands? I'm just a little confused.
    Your question is incorrectly phrased.

    Defense of property is quite different from responding to a robbery.

    Robbery is the taking of property by the use or threatened use of force. Robbery is a violent crime that is somewhat related to property; responding to robbery by using force is not defense of property, it defense of self.

    Defense of property is more properly characterized as a shop owner seeing someone grab a laptop and try to leave his store with it.

    It may be a $3,000 laptop, but the law will put a limit on the amount of force someone may use to protect property only.

    If the criminal attempt or uses force to facilitate his crime, we have gone from larceny to robbery.

    Once we have gone to robbery, you are no longer defending your Toshiba, but yourself.

    That it all started when someone attempted to steal your laptop and you responded with the force allowed for defense of property, but the criminal attacked you, and you defended yourself...

    Well. That's his problem.

  7. #36
    Senior Member Array dcb188's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mid-Cape Cod, Mass.
    Posts
    861
    We can use just the amount of force necessary to protect ourselves. Anything over that exceeds the self-defense boundaries. If someone unarmed comes up to us and demands a wallet, we cannot use deadly force, if someone with a knife comes up and a reasonable person would think he or she is about to be attacked with the knife, we can then pull out the gun. But even then, it varies from state to state. Common law self defense stays the same but states are different. The question is what do I have to do to stop this attack? Keeping in mind that by exceeding the force of your attacker, you become the aggressor. Whatever it takes, though.

  8. #37
    Ron
    Ron is offline
    Distinguished Member Array Ron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    West Linn, Oregon
    Posts
    1,628
    Quote Originally Posted by dcb188 View Post
    Keeping in mind that by exceeding the force of your attacker, you become the aggressor.
    What does that mean? If my attacker has a club and I use my gun, have I then exceeded the force of my attacker aad have I then become the aggressor? I don't think so, provided that I was reasonably in fear of my life or of suffering serious physical injury.
    "It does not do to leave a dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him."

    J. R. R. Tolkien

  9. #38
    Senior Member Array dcb188's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mid-Cape Cod, Mass.
    Posts
    861
    If he has a club and you have a gun, then no one would argue that you should not use it or be clubbed to death. The gun is the necessary force to counteract the club. It is in other situations where the gun is way over the force necessary, but not the club situation.

  10. #39
    Senior Member Array dcb188's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mid-Cape Cod, Mass.
    Posts
    861
    In my opinion, attacked with a knife or club or baseball bat? Deadly force is the necessary force to repel the attacker. Even if you have no gun and someone comes at you unarmed and you pick up the club, then you become the aggressor because you went over the limit of reasonable force necessary to repel your attacker. He has nothing and you beat him with a club. This is all common law and is mostly the same in all states. Mostly common sense, too. Whatever the attacker does, you can use whatever force necessary, necessary, to repel his attack. Only when you go beyond that do you end up becoming the aggressor and it is because you went overboard and used unnecessary force to repel an attack. So it is pretty straightforward. The attacker does not need to have a gun in order for you to use your own gun. Any deadly force on his part is enough......another thing is jumping in to help other people. You end up being held responsible if you end up jumping in on the wrong side of the controversy, because it looked like one thing to you but it was another. E.g. a plainclothes cop chases a man and you think the cop is the perpetrator, and you use force to stop him, even deadly force, you jumped in on the wrong side because you are attacking the wrong party. Tough to know what to do in some situations without the background you need. But if you see someone being knifed or beaten to death, you pretty much know whose side to jump in on, and coming to the aid of a third party is legal also. Just have to make sure the party is on the right side.

  11. #40
    Senior Member Array dcb188's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mid-Cape Cod, Mass.
    Posts
    861
    And in the club situation you have not exceeded the force of the attacker but have done what is necessary to repel his attack, even though a gun is more lethal than a club. He had the club and you had the gun. You are not required to go find a club instead of using your gun. Although in some states I bet they would love to have that law. In a few states you must even retreat instead of using deadly force, and even IN YOUR OWN HOUSE. In some states if you hear an intruder at the front door, you are to leave your own house and exit via the back door instead of getting into a confrontation. Unbelievable but true. Thank goodness those states are in the minority. They never heard of the expression that a man's home is his castle, I guess.

  12. #41
    Distinguished Member Array morintp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    1,233
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerbouchard View Post
    You bring up some interesting points so before some of the more BG friendly people answer, I'll give mine.

    I am not giving away my wallet, the same as I am not giving away my wedding ring, or watch, or car. If a guy asks me nicely for my wallet I will tell him no. If he escalates it, then he is escalating it. In no state are you required to be a willing participant in a crime. You can resist. The level of resistance will vary by state.

    You are not at fault because you refused to be a victim, but you cannot initiate the use or threat of force, at least in California. If he uses a threat of deadly force to accomplish his crime, then the rules change, and I would never bring up a wallet to the police unless directly asked.

    My response "He had a knife/bat/gun/whatever, I was scared for my life. I am a little shaken up right now, and would like to have an attorney present for any further questioning."

    Now, a short summary of other responses you will get.

    I hate this response as those criminal type people typically don't like witnesses, and if you give in, you will appear weak, and therefore the BG could follow up and attack you right there to solidify his feeling of superiority, or he could just take your address off your D.L. and know he has a willing victim at a later date.
    I also hate this response because the people who say it act like me and the BG entered into a mutually agreeable contract. If I give him my wallet, he won't hurt me. 1. It's not mutually agreeable. 2. He's trying to mug me, why should I trust that he will follow up with his end of the bargain.


    This just irritates me. I am not a willing victim, even if it is a $5 wallet. This also leads to the appearance of weakness which can draw an attack.


    I agree you should be aware of your surroundings, but muggers typically don't wear signs around their necks. There are many things you can do to minimize the chance of this occurring to you. Paying attention to what's going on helps a lot.
    If you look like you are alert, you are less likely to be targeted. BG's in jail have said this many times.
    If you can avoid walking alone, that's always a great idea.
    If you can avoid leaving an area after closing time, or late at night, that could help.
    If you can avoid getting gas after hours, that could help.
    If you avoid outside ATM's that could help.

    As a matter of fact, if you never leave your house, install large fences, buy several Dobermans/Pitbulls/Rotty's, hire a security team, and live in a glass bubble, you are statistically very unlikely to get mugged.

    For the rest of us, we'll go on about our normal lives, and if we are called upon to protect our life, our liberty, or our property, we WILL fight back.

    The streets don't belong to the thugs and the low-lifes, and a mugger is an occupation just like any other. Certain aspects of the job can be hazardous to your health. Picking me or many others on this forum as a target, and not recognizing that I will not be a victim soon enough, could be downright dangerous...
    +1,000,000

    And the part about the wedding ring is so true. I can't even get mine off after all these years of never removing it. They'd have to cut off my finger for it. Then it goes back to personal protection. But I'm sure the Brady bunch would say "It's only a finger, it isn't like your life was in danger."

  13. #42
    Senior Member Array dcb188's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mid-Cape Cod, Mass.
    Posts
    861
    I agree with you. Most victims in these situations just happen to cross the BG's path at the wrong time, or right time from his view, and I am not about to become his spur of the moment victim if I can help it. We should not adjust our lives to revolve around them or what they might do. They attack us, they take a big chance and end up the way justice dictates. That is their problem.

  14. #43
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,249
    dcb188: Thankfully, very few places, indeed, legally demand that innocents approach their own defense in a stair-step ladder manner, simply ratcheting up the level to be just over that dished out by the attacker. But then, perhaps things are different in Massachusetts.

    Oregon is fairly straightforward. It allows any person to use the amount of force that person deems reasonable and necessary to repel either an attack OR an impending violent attack or felony. Oregon essentially requires initiation and malintent to be part of the equation in order for the victim to be considered the aggressor. Pretty sane and rational, that.

    Don't forget one thing: a single punch, kick or strike from a violent attacker that knows what he's doing can kill, even if the resulting unconscious fall to the concrete doesn't.
    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.

  15. #44
    Senior Member Array dcb188's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mid-Cape Cod, Mass.
    Posts
    861
    I agree. And if the attacker happens to know you have a gun, then what? Should he be allowed to take it away from you just because he has not used deadly force (yet)? That is a tough one, also. And it is the same here and most everywhere re impending attack, I left that out. I have another scenario I often wondered about and never asked my police friends in the court where I go nearly every day. Will start a new thread and get some feedback from you folks.

  16. #45
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,249
    Quote Originally Posted by dcb188 View Post
    And if the attacker happens to know you have a gun, then what? Should he be allowed to take it away from you just because he has not used deadly force (yet)? That is a tough one, also.
    Tough? For the felon about to get shot, it is, I'll grant you that much. It's highly probable that the very next act a felon will do after violently obtaining your firearm is to attempt your murder. If that doesn't satisfy the legal requirement of an "impending" attack, I don't know what does. I will never allow such a situation, if I'm still breathing. That's reasonable and prudent, given the alternative, and completely justifiable in any (Oregon) court.

    My condolences to folks to live in places that continues to villify upstanding citizens and their reasonable refusal to be violently victimized.
    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.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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. He called it, "taking control of the situation"
    By bsrman36 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: July 15th, 2010, 11:14 PM
  2. Someone claimed "Unarmed = non lethal"... how true is this claim?
    By CR2008 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: May 24th, 2008, 10:36 PM
  3. Good came out of a potentially "BAD" situation...
    By TireFryer in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: September 16th, 2006, 08:42 AM
  4. "It Happened to Me (real life situation)."
    By Janq in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: May 29th, 2006, 11:33 PM
  5. A True Texas Tale: "Bad Guy" "One", "Old Man" "Zero"
    By Rock and Glock in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: March 17th, 2006, 08:50 AM

Search tags for this page

acldn you cannot initiate the altercation

Click on a term to search for related topics.