How would you have reacted to this??? - Page 5
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 59

Thread: How would you have reacted to this???

  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Ringo View Post

    Your earlier quotes: "I have to agree, anytime you shoot anyone in the back it will be considered murder."

    "And again, I say that if a person turns and walks away or is running away, my life is not in danger. No need for further explanation."

    Then: "The situation you present is totally different than the situation I was referring too. Of course I would shoot the BG in the back under those conditions, anyone would."
    All most of the comments tried to do was warn against the use of absolute statements in making a proclamation as to right or wrong. This is what you amply demonstrated in your own statements.

    Simply, the armed individual has to make a judgement call as to whether there will be continuing danger to themselves and others (even if you are only going to protect yourself, others feel a different level of responsibility and obligation) and determine whether this is a true disengagement/ending of the event.

    For those who would like a much more clear scenario of facing the decision of shooting someone in the back and the moral dilemna that may place you in, read up on the Tacoma Mall shooting about 5 years ago. An armed citizen, lawfully CC'ing was in position to take out the shooter armed with a semi-auto, SKS clone and a handgun who was positioned with his back to the citizen while actively shooting shoppers in the mall.

    The citizen, hesitated to shoot and instead yelled to the shooter to drop his weapon. The shooter then turned and shot the citizen 5 times.

    Particularly poignant in the story was the citizen's later comment that when he looked into the shooter's eyes he realized he couldn't shoot him despite the training and having beleived he was mentally prepared.

    Incidentally, a second armed civilian in the mall positioned his family for safety (in a store inventory room) and was moving back to the scene when the police arrived and subsequently apprehended the shooter after a hostage standoff. The shooter wounded 6 and took 4 hostages before being arrested.

    The citizen who was shot survived and was hopeful of eventually being able to walk again last I heard.
    Reality, DEAL with IT!

  2.   
  3. Quote Originally Posted by ecocks View Post
    All most of the comments tried to do was warn against the use of absolute statements in making a proclamation as to right or wrong. This is what you amply demonstrated in your own statements.

    Simply, the armed individual has to make a judgement call as to whether there will be continuing danger to themselves and others (even if you are only going to protect yourself, others feel a different level of responsibility and obligation) and determine whether this is a true disengagement/ending of the event.

    For those who would like a much more clear scenario of facing the decision of shooting someone in the back and the moral dilemna that may place you in, read up on the Tacoma Mall shooting about 5 years ago. An armed citizen, lawfully CC'ing was in position to take out the shooter armed with a semi-auto, SKS clone and a handgun who was positioned with his back to the citizen while actively shooting shoppers in the mall.

    The citizen, hesitated to shoot and instead yelled to the shooter to drop his weapon. The shooter then turned and shot the citizen 5 times.

    Particularly poignant in the story was the citizen's later comment that when he looked into the shooter's eyes he realized he couldn't shoot him despite the training and having beleived he was mentally prepared.

    Incidentally, a second armed civilian in the mall positioned his family for safety (in a store inventory room) and was moving back to the scene when the police arrived and subsequently apprehended the shooter after a hostage standoff. The shooter wounded 6 and took 4 hostages before being arrested.

    The citizen who was shot survived and was hopeful of eventually being able to walk again last I heard.
    First, this is a totally different scenario than we were discussing where the car jacking had ended with the BG fleeing with his back to you.

    As far as the Tacoma Mall shooting, if you carry ccw, you should have already resolved whether you would shoot a person with your gun BEFORE you carry it. Shooting a person in the very act of a deadly felony especially multiple kills of innocent, unarmed people, I don't believe you would have any requirement to tell that sort of person to drop his gun even with his back to you. But still, even in this situation, you shoot to stop. If he dies once he is stopped, that is his risk that he incurred when he opened fire on the unarmed people in the mall. Outflanking an attacker is the best tactic to end a firefight like that. But once again, you have now entered a completely different scenario.

    One last issue, the quickest way to stop a gunmen putting others at risk is a midbrain shot. If they are already aiming at another victim, that would be the best way to neutralize and stop the gunmen and keep involuntary muscle contractions from squeezing off one more round that could kill another person they are aiming at already. So to stop quickly, shoot to the midbrain which has a very high likelihood of killing him instantly as well. If you have that situation with that shot, take it as your first aimed and hidden shot from that sort of mass murderer. Unfortunately, most malls are gun free zones so having the opportunity to protect yourself in this situation is lessened in the first place.

    Lastly, if you haven't seen the entire confrontation from start to finish, you may have a hard time identifying who is the BG from the good guy. You don't want to shoot an undercover cop who happened to be in the mall when the shooting started or another ccw carrier trying to intervene himself. In that situation, take a defensive position and protect your own area and family and others who are unarmed and exit the situation if you have an avenue of escape. If you don't know exactly what is going on, go into a defensive mode only. I do agree that there may be situations where going into an offensive mode such as in a multiple victim murder spree is your best defense, but hopefully that is never a situation any of us will be in.

  4. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    MA, Away from the liberal loonies...
    Posts
    2,658
    Clint Eastwood as Will Munny in "Unforgiven"
    "It's a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have. "

    I hope that by the grace of God, it never happens to me, or anyone else for that matter, but I know the reality of it. Someone will have to make the decision. It's part of the "free will" package provided by God...

    Peace...
    You can give peace a chance alright..

    I'll seek cover in case it goes badly..

  5. Quote Originally Posted by 2beararms View Post
    Your quote says you may use deadly force to PREVENT a forcible felony which is what you are doing if he is about to carjack a second car (which is when in this discusion I said you would be justified in shooting him in the back)

    Here is the actual Florida law:

    776.012 Use of force in defense of person.--A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

    (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
    (2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

    776.08 Forcible felony.--"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.
    Dear 2beararms, you do have the authority to use deadly force in that situation. But let's take it one step further. You shoot the man in the back as he "goes to another carjacking." Whether he lives or dies, you have removed your self defense case since you were no longer in danger, he is fleeing from you. Now you MUST prove he was going to commit the second crime. What is your evidence? Can you read his mind? If you shoot a man pointing a gun at another person you will with high probability cause the gun in his hand discharge just from the muzzle blast going off from your gun even if you don't hit him. Now you could be sued by the victim of this accidental discharge if they are hit saying he was pointing the gun at me but I don't think he was going to shoot. Now back to you, the jury will ask you if he shot you with the gun that he pointed at you, your own answer is NO. Your defense now is to prove him guilty of the second crime. Wow, with an experienced criminal defense attorney pointing you as a Charles Bronson vigilante. Now you have civil liability from the person you were trying to protect if they sue with they will. If the man is dead a few feet from your car with a bullet in his back, what is your evidence now that he was about to commit another crime instead of the obvious physical evidence that he was fleeing from your crime? If you shoot a man that is no longer placing you in jeopardy, then it is your burden of proof that he was not about to go and commit a crime, but WAS committing another crime at that very moment. Once again, what is your evidence to prove you were justified?

    If you haven't heard of how difficult it is for an LEO to defend a "justifiable" shooting as an LEO, especially when someone is shot in the back, then just multiple that by 1000 times for a ccw. The DA's in many areas love to go after the vulnerable LEO to make a name for themselves in the community. What about a ccw holder? If you think it is wise to shoot someone in the back, go ahead if you wish to incur all of the aftermath that will absolutely ensue. All I see is great troubles for you and your family doing that. It is not something that I would do myself unless he is already pointing a weapon at another victim, but then my thoughts are, can I shoot with a cns hit to stop him instantly? How many are skilled marksman to be able to instantly drop him in his tracks without involuntary movements firing the gun in his hand as he falls dead. The only way to do this is a midbrain shot which is about a one to two inch target at more than 10 feet in this scenario. It takes an average 1.5 seconds to clear leather in a draw, he is now more than 20 feet from your car. Can you make that kind of shot under a stress reaction where your hands are shaking from the adrenalin pumping through your brain and heart? Once again, even looking at your scenario of a second crime as he is fleeing from you, it really brings up dicey circumstances. If he is running toward another car, are you going to shoot toward him running toward another victim who is now also in your line of fire?

    We as CCW are NOT LEO's and the law states that clearly. You will have enough on your hands shooting someone to their face and prevent criminal and civil liability after the fact. You shoot someone in the back, you are at great risk of losing the Ability, Opportunity and Jeopardy triad. If you shoot someone in the back, due to involuntary movements, you may get someone else shot with the BG's gun in the process which you are liable for even if you don't have any criminal charges against you. Their best witness that the BG may have pointed but never intended to shoot is YOU.

    I could go on, but if anyone thinks you have a free ride to shoot someone in the back with THIS scenario, then I don't believe you have considered all of the ramifications. If you escape with your life, your duty is to be a good witness. Going further than that in THIS scenario opens up many cans of worms.

  6. #45
    The scenario had much less to do with it than the use of absolute statements which allowed for no qualifications or considerations as to action.

    It's always interesting to me how many people want to start in with how difficult it will be proving your case in a court of law. I am far more interested with making my decision in the moment as best I can consistent with my (and others) survival.

    Be that as it may, it's clear that the situation will vary as to particulars and, most importantly, the judgment/perceptions of the individual based upon their training and personality.

    To answer the OP as best I can, given the sketchy situation outlined, I "might" shoot the guy as he exited the car but it would be totally dependent on whether I considered he was truly disengaging and whether I felt I or any others were in immediate danger. The [possibly faulty] assumption many seem to be making is that exiting the car unequivocally means he completely disengaged and was in full, OBVIOUS retreat. The rejoinder even to that though is, "obvious to who, exactly?"

    Further, I would expect that even if he was truly disengaging and retreating that I would be drawing my firearm to the ready position as soon as possible, preparatory to dealing with whatever happened next, regardless of whether I went ahead and fired or not. Bailing out of the car is a potential action based upon the layout, others present and perception of additional danger.
    Reality, DEAL with IT!

  7. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Real World
    Posts
    7,967
    Quote Originally Posted by ecocks View Post
    All most of the comments tried to do was warn against the use of absolute statements in making a proclamation as to right or wrong. This is what you amply demonstrated in your own statements.
    It's an ABSOLUTE that I wouldn't shoot the BG in the back as he was exiting my car.

    It's an ABSOLUTE that I wouldn't shoot the BG in the back if he hijacked another car.

    It's an ABSOLUTE that I would shoot the BG "anywhere" I could if he turned away from me and pointed his gun
    at a family member. (different scenario than above)

    It is an ABSOLUTE that I consider it "murder" to shoot anyone in the back walking or running away from any scenario where no threat of danger or death is present or in question.

    Those are "my" ABSOLUTES pertaining to those individual situations and what is right and wrong. Another ABSOLUTE is that I don't need a warning from you against any ABSOLUTE statements proclaiming what I believe is right or wrong. You have "your own" ABSOLUTES to worry about.
    AMERICA'S EPITAPH
    Since They Did Not See Fit To Acknowledge God, He Gave Them Up To A Depraved Mind, To Do What Should Not Be Done

  8. Quote Originally Posted by Ringo View Post
    It's an ABSOLUTE that I wouldn't shoot the BG in the back as he was exiting my car.

    It's an ABSOLUTE that I wouldn't shoot the BG in the back if he hijacked another car.

    It's an ABSOLUTE that I would shoot the BG "anywhere" I could if he turned away from me and pointed his gun
    at a family member. (different scenario than above)

    It is an ABSOLUTE that I consider it "murder" to shoot anyone in the back walking or running away from any scenario where no threat of danger or death is present or in question.

    Those are "my" ABSOLUTES pertaining to those individual situations and what is right and wrong. Another ABSOLUTE is that I don't need a warning from you against any ABSOLUTE statements proclaiming what I believe is right or wrong. You have "your own" ABSOLUTES to worry about.
    We had a drill in my Idaho CCW class, shoot, don't shoot all on which way the target was going away from you or towards you. This was a live fire drill. Why would the instructor who is an expert nationally have this in his ccw class? Because a fleeing suspect does not any longer present a threat to you. Any one who does not ABSOLUTELY consider shoot no shoot actions ahead of time probably should not carry a gun for self defense. The difference between shoot and no shoot was only a second each way. That is how fast it changes from self defense to murder in many cases. Not sure why this has become such a hotly contested issue. All of the training and reading I have done presents this very clearly. Self defense is a very limited area and anything that does not have all elements needed for self defense at the very moment you fire is not defensible.

  9. #48
    Great, glad you're ABSOLUTELY comfortable with your decision process. Best of luck in your future.
    Reality, DEAL with IT!

  10. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Ringo View Post
    I have to agree, anytime you shoot anyone in the back it will be considered murder. If your house is being robbed and you catch the BG, and the BG turns and runs away, and you shoot him in the back while running away, it is murder. No one is considered a threat to you if they are running away or leaving the scene. I doubt very much that you will find a jury that will determine that your life was in danger under those circumstances. My vote on that option is an absolute NO also.
    I wonder if you a policeman or jury would take into account that you shot him AFTER you slapped him with your hand, and while he had his head and shoulders turned away because of the hit, I drew my gun and fired very quickly. he had turned to pick up his gun that was knocked out of his hand during the slap. He was going to shoot me, and I feared for my life.

    BTW, THX for the compliment on my ride. Still miss my Road King though.

  11. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Real World
    Posts
    7,967
    Quote Originally Posted by GOV5 View Post
    I wonder if you a policeman or jury would take into account that you shot him AFTER you slapped him with your hand, and while he had his head and shoulders turned away because of the hit, I drew my gun and fired very quickly. he had turned to pick up his gun that was knocked out of his hand during the slap. He was going to shoot me, and I feared for my life.

    BTW, THX for the compliment on my ride. Still miss my Road King though.
    I believe that your actions under those circumstances would be considered justified. If I we're on the jury they would be. BTW, I apologize for my sarcasm, something my wife has to remind me of ever too often. The bike I really miss is the one I would really love to have, (maybe someday) the Rocker C.
    AMERICA'S EPITAPH
    Since They Did Not See Fit To Acknowledge God, He Gave Them Up To A Depraved Mind, To Do What Should Not Be Done

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast