This is a discussion on Poll: When do you feel lethal force is justified? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I voted burglary. It is the closest thing to violent home invasion, and if it's MY house, the criminal runs the risk of becoming my ...
Disrespectful glance, speech or behavior.
Highly insulting, lewd or disgusting behavior.
Furtive movement.
Theft, low-cost.
Theft, high-cost.
Burglary, including B&E to get there.
Threatening speech or behavior.
Assault and battery against someone else.
Assault and battery against you.
Robbery against someone else.
Robbery against you.
Rape.
Attempted Murder.
Murder.
Array
I voted burglary. It is the closest thing to violent home invasion, and if it's MY house, the criminal runs the risk of becoming my new doormat. Anyone violating the sanctity of my home is directly or indirectly threatening the well being and safety of myself and my family.
-Joe
Quando omni flunkus, moritati.
Virginia Citizens Defense League
Rustburg, VA Volunteer Rescue Squad
Array
So, if someone approached you at an ATM, pointed a gun at you, and demanded your money, since that's not an attempted murder against you ("just" a robbery) you don't feel that lethal force is justified there? Wow.Originally Posted by BlackBear
Just how far away is a robbery with a weapon from becoming an attempted murder? And you're gonna waste response time by pulling out a baton, rather than going for a gun (all assuming it's possible--I'm not operating within the "you'll never beat a drawn weapon" axiom)? Then when the guy's intention to murder you does become clear, you have to now draw a second, escalated weapon?
No, thanks.
Array
the order of these may not be what others think.
maybe change this poll to a multiple select option?
Array
The way robbery, rape, carjacking, etc. works is that the presented alternative to providing the assailant with what they want is a violent act. There is no need to verify the VCA's intent, as he/she has already presented you with your choice - comply or suffer the consequences. The perceived threat of violence from such a choice justifies the use of lethal force IMHO.So, if someone approached you at an ATM, pointed a gun at you, and demanded your money, since that's not an attempted murder against you ("just" a robbery) you don't feel that lethal force is justified there? Wow.
Just how far away is a robbery with a weapon from becoming an attempted murder? And you're gonna waste response time by pulling out a baton, rather than going for a gun (all assuming it's possible--I'm not operating within the "you'll never beat a drawn weapon" axiom)? Then when the guy's intention to murder you does become clear, you have to now draw a second, escalated weapon?
No, thanks.
By the way, "Judicious Use Of Deadly Force" is a great watch - and you get to see Massad Ayoob milk a single cup of coffee for all it's worth!
-Joe
Quando omni flunkus, moritati.
Virginia Citizens Defense League
Rustburg, VA Volunteer Rescue Squad
Array
See, as I understand the question, you're asking us to say where along this continuum (from top being "lesser" to bottom being "graver") lies our point of being willing to use deadly physical force.Disrespectful glance, speech or behavior.
Highly insulting, lewd or disgusting behavior.
Furtive movement.
Theft, low-cost.
Theft, high-cost.
Burglary, including B&E to get there.
Threatening speech or behavior.
Assault and battery against someone else.
Assault and battery against you.
Robbery against someone else.
Robbery against you.
Rape.
Attempted Murder.
Murder.
I have a problem with the way this continuum is laid out. Note where I bolded text. Are you really putting burglarly/B&E as a "lesser" threat than "threatening speech or behavior"? I've been treated to "threatening speech or behavior" before and not gone near to drawing my gun, because it simply wasn't warranted. But you can bet yourthat if I were witness to a B&E that I'd be arming myself and assuming that the BG is armed, and he will have precious little margin before he makes me shoot him (as in, if he doesn't get down on the ground at my first shout--and he'll be lucky to get the shout if he does).
Assault and battery can take many forms, and certainly a lot of those forms do not justify deadly physical force. Yet you have them further down your continuum than burglary, which is often an armed crime.
These are examples of why I did not make a poll selection. I don't feel that the continuum is as clear-cut in real life as it is laid out here, and I don't feel that some of your choices belong where they are placed along that continuum.
Array
Joe,The way robbery, rape, carjacking, etc. works is that the presented alternative to providing the assailant with what they want is a violent act. There is no need to verify the VCA's intent, as he/she has already presented you with your choice - comply or suffer the consequences. The perceived threat of violence from such a choice justifies the use of lethal force IMHO.
By the way, "Judicious Use Of Deadly Force" is a great watch - and you get to see Massad Ayoob milk a single cup of coffee for all it's worth!
That's why I would indeed respond with DPF if robbed, because I agree with you. I was challenging the poster on the notion that robbery is not "past the threshold".
Array
Well, that's what I suggested with my first post, but was booed.
I just don't see these things as lying along a continuum, but evidently the original poster does. That's ok. I'm not gonna fight about it, but I did want to get some thought inspired.
Array
I can't...no won't vote on this one for a number of reasons. One being the wording of the poll. Is this a legal or personal moral opinion based poll?
I know my views are quite different from most here. My moral convictions are quite contrary from LEGAL opinions, as evidenced by the many threads I've responded to in this regards, and therefore I have to be careful by NOT acting on my personal moral convictions and instead acting within the realm of the law in whatever state I may be in. I fear someday these words may come to haunt me considering the direction our country seems to be heading as of late.
-The Mist (2007)"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."
Array
Just remember to be sure you have no alternative, and your in fear for yours or someone else life, or your trying to stop a robbery in progress.
But before you draw your sidearm remember, unless you’re an LEO you don’t have any insurance or attorney’s backing you up. And even if you’re in the right, you will spend over $3000 on attorney fees.
Array
I've got to agree. I have not voted because I don't see a clear delineation here. I could answer more accurately if it were multiple choice.
I go along with Texas law, that under some circumstances, use of deadly force in defense of property is justified. I don't have a moral issue with the concept. It would all depend on the situation as I saw it at the time.
Cheers,
Rod
"We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded!" Dick Winters
Array
I have to say, I like the concept of the duel, therefore:
"highly insulting, lewd or disgusting behavior."
Society is more civilized when improper behavior is stirctly, definitively, curtailed. I didn't see a continuim of behavior in the list, either, and the question was when we individually felt LF justified, so...
Array
Hahaha, good point. I never really stopped to break down the elements of each crime, I just chose the answer for the threshold at which I would know that lethal force was justified. If someone's robbing me (doesn't matter how or with what type of weapon) you're damned straight I'm going to fight back. That being said, if someone's robbing me with a gun pointed at me, it's not a robbery. It doesn't matter in the least if they're there to kill me, or steal anything. At the point the gun's pointed at me, it's no longer "robbery" it's "attempted murder" because I am deathly afraid of looking down the barrel of a loaded gun. And of course, if I'm in fear of my life, it's a shoot.So, if someone approached you at an ATM, pointed a gun at you, and demanded your money, since that's not an attempted murder against you ("just" a robbery) you don't feel that lethal force is justified there? Wow.
Just how far away is a robbery with a weapon from becoming an attempted murder? And you're gonna waste response time by pulling out a baton, rather than going for a gun (all assuming it's possible--I'm not operating within the "you'll never beat a drawn weapon" axiom)? Then when the guy's intention to murder you does become clear, you have to now draw a second, escalated weapon?
No, thanks.
Again don't take my response as "this is the threshold at which I would respond", it's only "this is the threshold at which I would be certain it was appropriate to respond with lethal force."
I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code
Semper Vigilans et Paratus
This poll needs to be cleaned up, it shows votes for things that are not even reasonable.
Remember this is a public access forum, all one has to do is register.
We must show responsibility.
Array
I viewed this poll more as an opportunity for fun than a serious poll (I chose 'disrespectful glance, speech, or behavior', hehe). If it were serious, it would be multiple choice. Even then it is still tricky, because 'assault and battery' against either yourself or in defense of another may not require you to use lethal force. It may be that many times only the threat of lethal force would be enough to deter an assailant. Likewise, I would threaten a burglar but I wouldn't necessarily shoot him unless I felt he was going to make a move on me or towards a loved one. Same thing with rape - I would definitely feel like shooting a rapist, but morally I don't think I could justify killing a rapist unless he was choking his victim or threatening them with a weapon.
And obviously I would not shoot someone for disrespect... I'm thinking that option was put on the poll solely for humor's sake. :-)
Array
I didn't vote. For me it is much easier to say when I do not feel lethal force is justified than when it is.
Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
