the dangers of intervention

This is a discussion on the dangers of intervention within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I'm new to the forum, so I don't know if this has ever appeared here before or not. Nevertheless, the article below is worth reading: ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30

Thread: the dangers of intervention

  1. #1
    Member Array seawolf1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    156

    the dangers of intervention

    I'm new to the forum, so I don't know if this has ever appeared here before or not. Nevertheless, the article below is worth reading:

    Commentary by Evan Marshall

    -Seawolf
    "Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid." - John Wayne
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    IDPA Member & RSO, KSRA Life Member, NRA Life Member, NRA Firearms Instructor & RSO, KS CCH Instructor (www.thekasdg.com)

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array rottkeeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    3,194
    Good read, just skimmed it for now but will come back to it.
    For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the son of man be. Mathew 24:27

    NRA Member

  4. #3
    1943 - 2009
    Array Captain Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    10,371
    Just FYI, this has been posted before, but it's over a year old, so we'll leave this thread open.

    http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulle...good-read.html


    When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
    And the women come out to cut up what remains,
    Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
    And go to your God like a soldier.

    Rudyard Kipling


    Terry

  5. #4
    Senior Member Array highvoltage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    1,121
    Hmm, after reading this I get the impression that he wishes we all leave our guns at home.

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,918
    Quote Originally Posted by highvoltage View Post
    Hmm, after reading this I get the impression that he wishes we all leave our guns at home.
    I've read it many times, as well as other posts.

    It's just a message intended to remind everyone that we are responsible for our actions, oftentimes, even when they are based on good intentions but that turn out to be wrong. Everything is not as it seems, you can be 100% sure that someone is trying to kill you or someone with you, but when you walk into a situation where someone appears to be trying to kill someone else, you could be completely wrong. And even if you are not wrong, there could be expensive and time consuming consequences.
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  7. #6
    Senior Member Array HK Dan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    774
    I'm with you Matiki. I didn't get anything negative out of that read, just a firm, stern dose of reality. If you kill another human being you are guilty of homocide. You killed him. It's upon you to prove that it was justifable. That is the operating assumption that everyone from the arriving police to the DA will make, and the Grand Jury will decide.

    If that article bothered you, don't take "Judicious Use of Force" with Mr. Ayoob. In it he gave example after example of JUST what Matiki is talking about. People who are perfectly justified in taking the life of the person who attacked them (or were completely innocent of ANY crime in one suicide case) and still went to jail. What do you think the odds of remaining free would be for a guy involved in a mistaken identity shooting? How about a fleeing felon shooting? What about a shooting where the felon has broken off the attack? You are now the attacker. If you shoot him in the back it's 2nd degree murder and if you chase him first it's 1st degree murder.

    "The dangers of intervention"--good title. My advice is to read it again with the thought "This man may keep me out of prison" in mind. It'll read differently.

    Dan
    "What does Marcellus Wallace LOOK like?"

  8. #7
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,540

    Again, we need to avoid rushing in where Angels fear to tread. Remember the most endangered species is good guys and gals.
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array packinnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    4,229
    Quote Originally Posted by HK Dan View Post
    I'm with you Matiki. I didn't get anything negative out of that read, just a firm, stern dose of reality. If you kill another human being you are guilty of homocide. You killed him. It's upon you to prove that it was justifable. That is the operating assumption that everyone from the arriving police to the DA will make, and the Grand Jury will decide.

    If that article bothered you, don't take "Judicious Use of Force" with Mr. Ayoob. In it he gave example after example of JUST what Matiki is talking about. People who are perfectly justified in taking the life of the person who attacked them (or were completely innocent of ANY crime in one suicide case) and still went to jail. What do you think the odds of remaining free would be for a guy involved in a mistaken identity shooting? How about a fleeing felon shooting? What about a shooting where the felon has broken off the attack? You are now the attacker. If you shoot him in the back it's 2nd degree murder and if you chase him first it's 1st degree murder.

    "The dangers of intervention"--good title. My advice is to read it again with the thought "This man may keep me out of prison" in mind. It'll read differently.

    Dan
    And therein lies one of the major problems with our judicial system today. NO ONE from the top down follows the rules. It's supposed to be innocent UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY and not the other way around.

    If you kill a man..or woman for you darn PC hippie buggers, a homicide occurred, but that doesn't mean you are guilty of anything at all.

    I still say enough of this nonsense. We need to wipe the slate and start over fresh. Then again that's just my normally pissy self ranting away again. There was a time when I was a total optimist. REALLY, I was...then I realized the odds were stacked against me and no one else but me followed the rules.
    "My God David, We're a Civilized society."

    "Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the **** out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
    -The Mist (2007)

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,918
    Now hang on it sounds worse than it is Packinnova.

    I share your sentiment, but here's how it works.

    Your plea of self defense requires that you admit you killed them. That is homicide. Homicide is a crime - unless it's self defense, or certain other rare circumstances.

    You are still innocent until proven guilty - but now the prosecutor and your defense will focus on why you killed them. There is no debate as to the fact that you did.
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,768
    Quote Originally Posted by HK Dan View Post
    I'm with you Matiki. I didn't get anything negative out of that read, just a firm, stern dose of reality. If you kill another human being you are guilty of homocide. You killed him. It's upon you to prove that it was justifable. That is the operating assumption that everyone from the arriving police to the DA will make, and the Grand Jury will decide.

    If that article bothered you, don't take "Judicious Use of Force" with Mr. Ayoob. In it he gave example after example of JUST what Matiki is talking about. People who are perfectly justified in taking the life of the person who attacked them (or were completely innocent of ANY crime in one suicide case) and still went to jail. What do you think the odds of remaining free would be for a guy involved in a mistaken identity shooting? How about a fleeing felon shooting? What about a shooting where the felon has broken off the attack? You are now the attacker. If you shoot him in the back it's 2nd degree murder and if you chase him first it's 1st degree murder.

    "The dangers of intervention"--good title. My advice is to read it again with the thought "This man may keep me out of prison" in mind. It'll read differently.

    Dan

    I think it really boils down to where you live and the attitudes of your local community. If I lived in CA, IL, MA or some other places I would probably hesitate before shooting someone who broke into my home and was holding a deadly weapon.

    However since I live in a smaller town in Texas, I don't really have to hesitate much at all for someone that is threatening me, my family or even my property in some instances.

    As far as what Ayoob, or any other instructor for that matter may be advising. Does anyone think that they will take anything but the most conservative stance on when to use force when teaching a class and taking hundreds or thousands of dollars from students who may at some time be able to use their instruction as a defense if involved in a shooting. Ya think they might just be opening themselves up to a law suit if they were to teach their classes and use for instance Joe Horn as an example of a good self defense situation and justifiable shoot. No they are going to do everything they can to cover their own behinds when charging for a class or writing an article that involves the use of deadly force.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array packinnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    4,229
    Quote Originally Posted by matiki View Post
    Now hang on it sounds worse than it is Packinnova.

    I share your sentiment, but here's how it works.

    Your plea of self defense requires that you admit you killed them. That is homicide. Homicide is a crime - unless it's self defense, or certain other rare circumstances.

    You are still innocent until proven guilty - but now the prosecutor and your defense will focus on why you killed them. There is no debate as to the fact that you did.
    Homicide has a VERY specific definition...and is not in and of itself a crime. And admitting you killed someone does not make it a crime and does not make you guilty. Prosecutors and judges can twist the words and facts all they want, but it doesn't change the truth. All it does is foul up the system more.
    "My God David, We're a Civilized society."

    "Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the **** out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
    -The Mist (2007)

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,918
    Quote Originally Posted by matiki
    Now hang on it sounds worse than it is Packinnova.

    I share your sentiment, but here's how it works.

    Your plea of self defense requires that you admit you killed them. That is homicide. Homicide is a crime - unless it's self defense, or certain other rare circumstances.

    You are still innocent until proven guilty - but now the prosecutor and your defense will focus on why you killed them. There is no debate as to the fact that you did.
    Quote Originally Posted by packinnova View Post
    Homicide has a VERY specific definition...and is not in and of itself a crime. And admitting you killed someone does not make it a crime and does not make you guilty. Prosecutors and judges can twist the words and facts all they want, but it doesn't change the truth. All it does is foul up the system more.
    Just as I said. The only thing that changes is that you admit you did it. You are still innocent of the crime of homicide if the prosecutor cannot defeat your claim of self defense.

    Homicide is the killing of a human being. Homicide is not always criminal.
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  14. #13
    Senior Member Array highvoltage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    1,121
    Quote Originally Posted by matiki View Post
    ...Homicide is the killing of a human being. Homicide is not always criminal.
    Precisely:

    From Homicide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Homicide (Latin homicidium, homo human being + caedere to cut, kill) refers to the act of killing another human being.[1] It can also describe a person who has committed such an act, though this use is rare in modern English. Homicide is not always an illegal act.
    and further down the page:

    Criminal homicide:

    Criminal homicide, a malum in se crime, occurs when a person purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently causes the death of another. Murder and manslaughter are both examples of criminal homicide. Every legal system contains some form of prohibition or regulation of criminal homicide.

    Non-criminal homicide:

    Homicides do not always involve a crime. Sometimes the law allows homicide by allowing certain defenses to criminal charges. One of the most recognized is self defense, which provides that a person is entitled to commit homicide to protect his or her own life from a deadly attack.

  15. #14
    Member Array packin45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    In limbo
    Posts
    388
    Back in 2003, when MN first became a "shall issue" state, I very nearly got my permit. I was listening to a radio talk show one night, and the topic was the new carry permit law, and the assumption that all permit holders were going to be shooting each other at the slightest provocation, OK Corral style.

    A local police chief called in, and offered a few words of warning that I never forgot. He said "before you clear leather, you better have decided you have nothing left to lose, because you will lose everything if you pull the trigger". Those words made me rethink the idea of carrying a gun, and I actually didn't get my permit for another four years; I just thought the responsibility of carrying a gun was too much for me.

    I've read stories on this forum about permit holders chasing purse snatchers across parking lots, confronting the cable guy at gunpoint (while in the buff, no less), drawing down on a magazine salesman, and even fantasizing about preventing a theft of their beloved pickup truck by blasting the thief through the back window as he attempted to drive off. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.

    I think the commentary linked to by the OP has it exactly right; it seems that some of us have forgotten (or haven't yet realized) what a tremendous responsibility carrying a firearm actually is, in so many different ways. We'd all do well to keep the words of Evan Marshall in mind each morning, as we holster up.

    My gun doesn't come out until there's nothing left to lose.
    G17, G26

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil...

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array Yoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    2,782
    Affirmative defense; and your attorney should get some testimony/evidence in to the grand jury, they are the conscience of the community and more likely to no-bill in a shooting. If the grand jury true bills it then the SA will likely press on to try and find you guilty. Also, if you are being held in jail you will get released much sooner if the grand jury no-bills.
    Yoda, I am, yes.

Page 1 of 2 12 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. The Dangers of the .22 calibre short...
    By ErikGr7 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: July 27th, 2010, 08:26 PM
  2. Craigslist Dangers - Part Deux
    By Tally XD in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: May 6th, 2010, 10:54 AM
  3. Wife understands dangers of society..
    By tkruf in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: March 20th, 2010, 08:18 AM
  4. Dangers of task fixation
    By mercop in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 2nd, 2008, 06:49 PM
  5. Dangers of fox hunting!!
    By archer51 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: February 19th, 2008, 08:25 AM

Search tags for this page

content

Click on a term to search for related topics.