It Starts With a Punch

[armyman_83]

Hey armyman: As you can see from the replies, there are other forum members who are not "wacko". Certainly would be appreciated if you did not degrade yourself by having to resort to such terms. You have taken my words and instead of appreciating their tone, you have made them sound like all I am doing is counting "punches". If you consider one punch an imminent threat to your life or great bodily injury, have at it--kill the aggressor. If in the course of this "one punch" it appears evident that this aggressor has a lot more in mind and I truly feel a "presumption that my life is threatened", I will act accordingly. You mention that in Alabama assault is cause. Do you have the definition of assault? My understanding of assault, albeit "simple assault", is when you place your hands on someone. Following thru--if I poke you in the chest or just push you, you will kill me and Alabama will back you up. I think, based on other replies that fall on your side and my side that there is a gray area and it is up to you to FULLY appreciate when you TRULY feel threatened--this is a responsibility you have when you are CC and to "knee jerk" with an answer that says you will kill at the drop of a dime is, IMO, not responsible.

I didn't call anyone a wacko, I will agree, however, that I believe some opinions on here are self destructive. If I took from your post the wrong message, then forgive me. It just seemed to be in favor of the aggressor.

It really is a situational case. But one that warrents, I feel, much talk.

As to Alabama Assult. See the above post I made.
(here is the Code of Alabama section concerning Assult among other crimes against a person Code Of Alabama )

As to a poke....I think everyone agrees that doesn't seem like a viable form of assult (in the second or first degree at least). I am talking about a full blown punch, attack, and assult. Most fights I believe don't end with one guy punching the other, unless he is lucky enough to knock you out. I am pretty sure anyone foolish enough to throw one punch will follow through with more. The question is, does one punch and intent to do more warrent shooting? I say it does. The guy may only want to rough me up, but that is unacceptable.

[JJFlash]

A guy got punched here recently, fell, hit his head on the curb and died. One punch.

Another guy took one punch, got knocked down, and the boots came out. He died. One punch.

No way do I take ANY punches if I can avoid it, however I have to avoid it.

[Rabbitcreekok]

Armyman, I would like you to read a book called "In the Gravest Extreme" by Massad Ayoob. He addresses this question and responds much better than I can.

I will say that if you had acted in the way you state in your scenario in Dallas when I was an officer there and I responded to your call, you would go directly to jail. Now that is not Alabama, but the Alabama law concerning assault says the force must be deadly and one punch is not usually considered deadly force.

The fact that you have asked this question of this forum and perhaps of others that may know you would be used in court by the prosecuting attorney to show that you are a depraved killer vigilante type of person just looking for someone to kill. I am sure you are not that type of person, but the prosecutor will certainly try to convince the jury that you are.

Always remember that you can still be tried in court and certainly would be, in your scenario, without a doubt. He would also call all the other diners to have them give their versions of the incident, and they most likely would say the aggressor was rude and obnoxious, but did not really have to die for just taking a punch at some crazed, gun happy killer.

The PA would also point out that the other diners were already up and ready to step in in your defense and take the guy down when you pulled your gun and put two rounds smack dab in his heart. After all, this took place in a public restaurant and the owner had already called 911 for help to calm down the drunk, when you put the two rounds in his heart. Of course they were all afraid for their lives, what with your shooter blazing away at the drunk. They all thought you would miss and hit them.

Then there is your mental condition for the rest of your life, having to live with taking a life. Folks that don't know say they would have no problem, but they don't know. Believe me, you would have a problem.

Then there is always Bubba and the problem with you being Bubba's ***** after your conviction and incarceration. But, hey, the wife and kids can come and see you pretty often, if the prison is not too far away.

Do you really want to risk all that over an incident where, yes, you might not have had a duty to retreat and you reminded the dude that you might use deadly force on him and then did so, which of course will be used against you when the many witnesses testify about what you did and said.

I certainly don't plan to do so and when I conduct my Self Defense Act Training classes, I will teach my students not to do so. When we have a carry permit, we are held to a different standard. We are not law enforcement. I was law enforcement once, but I am not now and I have to act differently now. As a LEO, I was obligated to move toward conflict but as a person with a concealed carry permit, I am obligated to move away from conflict.

I can use deadly force to protect myself and my family from someone using deadly force, which is usually defined as "Force likely or intended to cause death or serious bodily harm. "

These are just my opinions and are in no way intended to denigrate you or your opinions. I would just hate to see someone have to live through a life changing event without hearing both sides of the argument.

[kelcarry]

Hey Y'all: When we write out threads and replies, words do not always translate into the gray area of a punch and what the circumstances are that led to the punch or follow the punch, and therein lies the problem with, I would hope, most of us on this thread. Hopefully we are really arguing about the "gray area" and not the "one punch and I kill you" scenario. I am as guilty as others in this regard and apologize to those who have found it necessary to reply. My main point is that all our daily lives involve, hopefully, the gray areas of interpersonal confrontations, where options exist that do not entail our firearms; it behooves all of us, as our responsibility to having a license to CC, to try to make all gray areas non-issues. I would hope and pray that I and all of us never are put in the black and white areas where anyone can easily appreciate the fact that we have an obligation to ourselves and those around us to use our CC permission to intervene. Yes, one punch can be deadly but it still leaves room, albeit very little room, before the choice is made to kill someone.

[Cocked _and_Locked]

I am not saying that you are started any argument. I said ...

What you said was what I quoted you saying:

What about the simple argument that turns into a punch?

To which I replied:

This begs the question: What were you arguing about in the first place?

It doesn't matter who starts it. It takes two to finish it.

Are you trying to say that is not what you said?

A guy got punched here recently, fell, hit his head on the curb and died. One punch.

Another guy took one punch, got knocked down, and the boots came out. He died. One punch.

People that engage in this type of activity where they attract punches and kicks tend to get hurt. That should come as no surprise to anybody. I find it disturbing to think that people carrying guns with that mindest of fear leads them to often wonder when and if they will be getting the better of some aggressor by the use of deadly force. I sometimes wonder if that option, however illegal and unreasonable it might be, encourages their proclivity to engage in and attract this type of attention.

[kelcarry]

Thank you C&L for your last reply. You answered replies with what I consider to be the type of responsibility that every CC must have if he or she is going to be walking around with the potential to kill someone with a firearm. I do not know where all of you live but from some of the replies on this forum I sometimes get the feeling you either live in the middle of Bagdhad or in Tombstone. I am 69 years old and spent most of those years in NY/NJ--hardly the Garden of Eden. I have never had a punch thrown at me once I turned old enough to CC, and have never been in a place where the potential for same has ever been obvious. As C&L said--it takes "two to tango" and witnesses may very well find that you are the bad tango partner even if you did not throw that first punch but certainly invited it. The idea that someone is going to come up to you and just hammer the heck out of you for no reasom is absurd. As was said at the Plaxico Burris trial, if you find it necessary to carry a firearm into an establishment that has all the earmarks of a "seedy" place, perhaps you should never have gone there in the first place. This is all about your sense of responsibility and the due diligence you must exercise when you choose to carry a firearm. An argument that "I should be able to go whereever and whenever I want and do whatever I want" when you are CC is ludicrous and irresponsible; if the injured or dead person has a good lawyer, this behaviour will come out and, if presented properly, will cause you a potential civil or even criminal penalty. You have to learn to walk away and keep walking and keep yelling as you get more witnesses to your actions. Another thread talks about actions you should take if your wife is insulted--again, I understand and would like nothing better than to beat the guy to a pulp, but if I am CC, I swallow hard and get the hell out of there--I do not raise the issue to the point that I get punched and then proclaim the assault as I kill the guy.

[Jay]

One thing that I haven't seen mentioned here is "disparity of force". I'm 70% disabled, and I'm not capable of a fist fight, and I can't outrun you, but I can, and will shoot you, if the situation calls for it.

Explaining the deadly force decision: "self defense in a nutshell." - part 10 - Lethal Force - Column | Shooting Industry | Find Articles at BNET
Disparity of force is the situation that authorizes the law-abiding citizen to shoot what appears to be an unarmed man. In this concept, the law recognizes that the power of the attacker to kill or cripple with "body weapons," fists or feet, may be so great vis-a-vis the defender's stature and ability that this disparity of physical force becomes the aggressor's deadly weapon.

If the attacker is a black belt or a professional fighter and is known as such at the time, he possesses disparity of force. So does an unarmed male violently attacking an unarmed female. So does a gang, and as few as two unarmed assailants can give grounds for justifiable homicide if they attack ferociously enough. However, once all but one have been turned back or neutralized, the sole survivor is no longer a member of a gang and may no longer be shot -- at least, not for that reason.

A sound and healthy person viciously attacking a cripple, or a strong young man attacking a weak old person, also create disparity of force.

[fudo]

Well said, Jay!
c&l - kelcarry - 'It doesn't take two to tango'
'The idea that someone is going to come up to you and just hammer the heck out of you for no reasom is absurd.' This statement is short-sighted and erroneous. I have seen a number of people who were physically assaulted for fun, gang initiations, etc. just because they looked like an easy target. This happens every day. If it doesn't happen in your neighborhood, wonderful, I'm happy for you. That is reality for some of us.
I'm a disabled person, and I cannot take a "poke to the chest." for medical reasons. I have not been in a fight in 35 years and am unlikely to start one now. but I will protect myself and family as best as I can.

[JJFlash]

People that engage in this type of activity where they attract punches and kicks tend to get hurt. That should come as no surprise to anybody. I find it disturbing to think that people carrying guns with that mindest of fear leads them to often wonder when and if they will be getting the better of some aggressor by the use of deadly force. I sometimes wonder if that option, however illegal and unreasonable it might be, encourages their proclivity to engage in and attract this type of attention.

Since you quoted me, I'll ask this: what the hell are you talking about here?

I'm making the simple point that I will NOT permit anyone to punch me. You can treat a "punch" as a schoolyard lark, if you like, I treat it as potentially deadly force. As for "engaging in this type of activity where they attract punches and kicks", I've had seemingly-demented people screaming in my face over a parking spot, for cryin' out loud. If you think I stand there googly-eyed just waiting for them to jack me, think again.

I'm not discussing escalation on my part (typically, I don't play that game) or what happened to put me in that situation. I'm just saying that, IMO, a punch can be disabling or deadly and it won't happen to me. What is there to argue about that? It's just the way I feel about it and you certainly feel free to take all the punches you want.

[Ranger984]

I have to say this is a very interesting question and there have been alot of replies that I do not agree with as well as some that I do agree with , That being said I don't feel that I can honestly give an answer at this time. I think one has to encounter the situation onesself to actually understand the situation and make the decision.