Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
41,412 Posts
A threat to life is a threat to life . . . no material weapon required. How many people have been beaten to death by fist or foot alone?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
I think it's an excellent example of why knowing your local laws is so important and how the law and morality can differ. . Back when I first did my CCW class the laws were a little more strict on my state. My instructors advice at the time was something like: "unless that other person being attacked is your immediate family or has your last name, call 911 and be a good witness". As is said so often, you are NOT the police.

Morally, the guy did great, probably saved this woman's life. Legally could be a murky question depending on the local laws. So knowing what the law says and then thinking about scenarios like this one * before your faced with it * can be of great help.

Since my class the state has passed castle doctrine, then more recently relaxed the standards under which it applies, but I find myself mentally falling back to my original training, of being a good citizen by calling 911 and assisting the police with being a witness.

Again, morally, the guy did great and stopped a brutal attack. I'm no lawyer, and I wish I could talk to one and run various scenarios past him/her (for free cause that's expensive!!)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
346 Posts
The male attacker was kicking a woman in the face and head. He probably would have killed her if not stopped.

I can't imagine any jury expecting the CCer to go into hand-to-hand combat with this attacker, or faulting him for intervening in order to save the woman's life. If criminal charges were pursued against the CCer who saved the woman's life, I would expect the kind of public outcry that gets laws changed and gets people fired.

Of course, this is coming from the deep south, where there is still an overwhelming consensus on who the criminal is in this kind of scenario. I'd hate to live in a place where such things have become perverted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
It's sad that this is now the world we live in. A good upstanding citizen (such as myself) has a fear in my head that I could go to jail for saving someone's life. We truly let our kids down didn't we :(

Imagine if things had been slightly different, for example: maybe the woman had pulled a knife or gun o. The guy to rob him, and our fearless CCW pulls up and only see's the man kick the woman. All the sudden he's pointing a gun at a victim. Yea it's far fetched, but stranger things have happened. 10 years ago I would never have believed that the Feds would jail a man because his AR malfunctioned.

Another good source for how the innocent are convicted is to watch the YouTube videos about "Never talk to the police". A law professor and a detective talk to a law class and outline some very interesting hypotheticals.

So getting back to reality, I had something of a similar thing. I was in my parents driveway when I hear a woman scream and yelling. Look up the street and there is a guy and a woman on an SUV and they apparently are fighting. Immediately I think he's attacking her and I start running that way. The guy gets out of the car and starts walking away. The woman flips me the "bird" and speeds off tearing up the tires. They had a huge fight. I thought the man was the aggressor from my point of view and it turns out the wife was. He came over and called the police from my cell because she was drunk. Fortunately the police caught her a few blocks away.

Things are sometimes exactly what they seem and sometimes are nothing like what they seem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,377 Posts
In my state the law clearly states I can use my firearm to stop a felony in progress. Assault qualifies. The person in this article showed greater restraint than I might have. If I had my gun on a "woman beater" I would find it hard not to put a few rounds center mass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
414 Posts
Imagine if things had been slightly different, for example: maybe the woman had pulled a knife or gun o. The guy to rob him, and our fearless CCW pulls up and only see's the man kick the woman. All the sudden he's pointing a gun at a victim.
My CCW instructor gave a very similar example... "You're walking down the street, look down an alley and see a guy standing over another guy with a gun, what do you do?" You call 911 because you have no idea what the situation is... was the guy having a gun pointed at him a victim or was he a robber who had his gun taken away from him? You may end up helping the wrong guy... and endangering yourself in the process.

It does make you wonder and think twice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hobo_Hunter

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
Here's a thought (depending on the neighborhood), it might have been tactically unsound as well.

Imagine for a moment, maybe this guys a banger and beating one of his "ho's". Maybe all his buddies just got done cleaning their Mac-10's, Tec-9's, and AK's in the house behind him...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,276 Posts
A threat to life is a threat to life . . . no material weapon required. How many people have been beaten to death by fist or foot alone?
More than have been killed with an AR... shocking, I know!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
24,512 Posts
In this case the carrier was extremely lucky. The BG followed directions, although hesitantly. Since the carrier was not carrying with one in the chamber the outcome could have been much different if the BG had of decided to challenge him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
659 Posts
I think it's an excellent example of why knowing your local laws is so important and how the law and morality can differ. . Back when I first did my CCW class the laws were a little more strict on my state. My instructors advice at the time was something like: "unless that other person being attacked is your immediate family or has your last name, call 911 and be a good witness". As is said so often, you are NOT the police.

Morally, the guy did great, probably saved this woman's life. Legally could be a murky question depending on the local laws. So knowing what the law says and then thinking about scenarios like this one * before your faced with it * can be of great help.

Since my class the state has passed castle doctrine, then more recently relaxed the standards under which it applies, but I find myself mentally falling back to my original training, of being a good citizen by calling 911 and assisting the police with being a witness.

Again, morally, the guy did great and stopped a brutal attack. I'm no lawyer, and I wish I could talk to one and run various scenarios past him/her (for free cause that's expensive!!)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
To me, it's a matter of character. I would probably feel better sitting in jail rather than thinking "I could have saved her" for the rest of my life. It would be a nice feather in the cap on judgement day when asked, "What did you do to love thy neighbor?"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
Another incident of a CCW against an unarmed BG. Tricky stuff. Would you really be able to shoot him point blank when he is unarmed?
Yes, indeed, if the deadly threat were legitimate and immediate. What possible difference does it make if the person trying/threatening to kill you doesn't happen to have a man-made tool in hand to assist in the dirty work? If the person's capable of making good on the attempt, is right there and fully able to begin (or has begun already), and you're only moments away from being at very real risk of loss of life ... damned right I'd defend mine. Sux to be him, to get his back up so badly yet to come so unprepared for resistance. Not my problem.

My only problem is to survive the encounter, hopefully with as little force as required to halt the violence. If that happens to occur the instant I move my hand to my weapon, wonderful! If not, not. That's the way these things can go.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,249 Posts
I think he did what was right and prudent for that scenario. Good samaritan laws were passed to protect people from prosecution when in good faith they were providing aid to others. The laws should also apply in cases of violence such as this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ccw9mm

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,441 Posts
It's sad that this is now the world we live in. A good upstanding citizen (such as myself) has a fear in my head that I could go to jail for saving someone's life. We truly let our kids down didn't we :(

Imagine if things had been slightly different, for example: maybe the woman had pulled a knife or gun o. The guy to rob him, and our fearless CCW pulls up and only see's the man kick the woman. All the sudden he's pointing a gun at a victim. Yea it's far fetched, but stranger things have happened. 10 years ago I would never have believed that the Feds would jail a man because his AR malfunctioned.
If the woman in this scenario was the initial agressor, at the point where he had her on the ground repeatedly kicking the snot out of her head and body, he no longer is the victim, he is the agressor and his actions are illegal, the good guy would have been justified in doing exactly what he did in the original scenario.

Our goal is to "Stop the Threat", not beat them to death afterwards. If someone breaks into your home and you get them to submit, you don't get to beat the crap out of them until the police get there, even if you might want to.

One final thought, on this scenario, and I am not second guessing the good guy in this article, but this is a perfect example of why having less than lethal means like pepper spray is a must in my view if you are going to carry lethal means. Getting him to comply and limiting his ability to come after you is much easier if they having trouble breathing and seeing you.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,046 Posts
Anytime you insert yourself into a third party encounter the waters get murky.

Using lethal force in a third party situation can really make a mess of things.

Using lethal force against an unarmed person, especially in a third party encounter is loaded with lots of landmines and can be insurmountable if the cards don't fall exactly on your side of the table.

And there are times where it is so obvious that shooting the person is the only solution, it's clear as day.

I'm glad in this case, it didn't come to point where the good guy (Mr. Blackmore) had to shoot the bad guy.

One thing a person should consider when holding someone at gunpoint. Why would a person continue to advance on a man holding a gun on them and ordering them to stop?

Could it be that the guy doesn't believe the person would actually shoot? Or could it also be that the person believes they can disarm the person holding the gun, and use the gun against them?

You likely will have no idea whether that attacker has been in prison or not. And that won't likely be admissible at trial unless you knew beforehand that the guy had been in prison. But if the person has been to prison, it's a good assumption that he possibly trained with other convicts how to disarmed a person who appears to be lacking in resolve and confidence.

Since a rational and logical person would likely never advance on a person holding them at gunpoint (for obvious reasons)... then a person who does continue to advance on someone most likely believes they have the skills needed to overcome your defense, and harm you.

Now if you or your lawyer fails to bring these kinds of points up at trial, (should you be charged for shooting an unarmed person), I can assure you, the prosecutor won't bring it up for you.

I think in the end, it's best to avoid shooting anyone if at all possible.

I'm glad things turned out well for Mr. Blackmore in this incident.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,436 Posts
Had this happened in NC:

  1. The BG was committing an assault with intend to to serious bodily damage...a Class A1 Misdemeanor.
  2. When the BG started approaching the Good Guy he committed an "Intent to Commit an Assault" which is a "Simple Assault"...a Class 2 or 3 Misdemeanor (lesser).
  3. When the Good Guy drew his weapon, he committed an Assault with a Deadly Weapon...a Class A1 Misdemeanor.
  4. When the Good Guy said he would "...put you down..." while pointing the weapon at the BG, he committed an "Assault With Intent to Kill"...a Class E Felony.
  5. It's against the law, in NC, to use deadly force in a case of "Simple Assault".

Any situation like this is always one of those "it could go either way" scenarios. My point is that you need to know your State's laws and conduct yourself accordingly. Morality and Legality are oft times mutually exclusive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
Had this happened in NC:

  1. The BG was committing an assault with intend to to serious bodily damage...a Class A1 Misdemeanor.
  2. When the BG started approaching the Good Guy he committed an "Intent to Commit an Assault" which is a "Simple Assault"...a Class 2 or 3 Misdemeanor (lesser).
  3. When the Good Guy drew his weapon, he committed an Assault with a Deadly Weapon...a Class A1 Misdemeanor.
  4. When the Good Guy said he would "...put you down..." while pointing the weapon at the BG, he committed an "Assault With Intent to Kill"...a Class E Felony.
  5. It's against the law, in NC, to use deadly force in a case of "Simple Assault".

Any situation like this is always one of those "it could go either way" scenarios. My point is that you need to know your State's laws and conduct yourself accordingly. Morality and Legality are oft times mutually exclusive.

As you say, state statutes vary quite a bit in terms of the legal standards to which its citizens are held.

Generally speaking, the standards tend to be (in most states' statutes I've seen): if a reasonable person believes that life/limb is at serious and legitimate immediate risk of loss, then the use of force up to and including deadly force is lawful. Dependent on the particular statutes, of course.

Strange, that NC would declare an assault in which it was reasonably believed threat of death was real and immediate, that it would be classed as a "simple" misdemeanor, when so many other states class legitimacy of belief of threat of death or severe bodily harm constituting far, far more than that.

Goes to show: know your state's specifics.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,046 Posts
Had this happened in NC:

  1. The BG was committing an assault with intend to to serious bodily damage...a Class A1 Misdemeanor.
  2. When the BG started approaching the Good Guy he committed an "Intent to Commit an Assault" which is a "Simple Assault"...a Class 2 or 3 Misdemeanor (lesser).
  3. When the Good Guy drew his weapon, he committed an Assault with a Deadly Weapon...a Class A1 Misdemeanor.
  4. When the Good Guy said he would "...put you down..." while pointing the weapon at the BG, he committed an "Assault With Intent to Kill"...a Class E Felony.
  5. It's against the law, in NC, to use deadly force in a case of "Simple Assault".

Any situation like this is always one of those "it could go either way" scenarios. My point is that you need to know your State's laws and conduct yourself accordingly. Morality and Legality are oft times mutually exclusive.
That is interesting. In every state of the union, lethal force is justified to defend against death; or serious bodily injury.

Also, in every state that I know of, once a person is down on the ground, and unable to absorb the blows and defend themself... being repeatedly kicked to the head and stomped (such as the case in this incident), it is no longer considered misdemeanor assault. The result could easily result in death or serious, crippling injury. In every jurisdiction I know of, that is felony assault.

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't live in North Carolina, but if that's the case in your state, I sure won't be visiting there anytime soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ep1953

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
That is interesting. In every state of the union, lethal force is justified to defend against death; or serious bodily injury.
Agree. Silly. And bloody dangerous, as it essentially says a citizen must withstand serious bodily injury before defending effectively against it. That makes about as much sense (to me) as an absolute, sacrosanct requirement to retreat/withdraw, as though failing to do so (and almost certainly taking a horrible pounding first) makes one the criminal. :frown:
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top