Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 44

Thread: Improbable but entertaining scenario....

  1. #1
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763

    Improbable but entertaining scenario....

    I was discussing this with Freedom1man and AC back last october during the october OC meet up, but we never really came up with an answer, maybe someone here has an idea

    OK lets say you're OCing and minding your own business in peace park in Blaine WA which literally sits on the border with canada, it's like this open sports type field, and there's this ditch that marks the border and on the otherside of the ditch is a residential neighborhood in BC. so you're on the Washington side OCing lawfully and lets say an angry or drunk canadian shows up with a gun, and starts shooting across the border, at you. so you hit the deck draw your firearm and return fire. well lets change it a little, lets say he points a gun at you and before he fires you draw and fire. who's juristiction is this and what's likely to happen?

    See the trees in this photo? notice the houses on the other side of the trees, the houses are in Canada and the trees in WA
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 10-30-2012 at 02:19 PM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769
    Simple answer....international incident...SHTF you go to jail pending investigation.

  3. #3
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Is there video evidence to prove that you were drawn down on, resulting in your likely justifiable response to a lethal threat with lethal force?
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  4. #4
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Is there video evidence to prove that you were drawn down on, resulting in your likely justifiable response to a lethal threat with lethal force?
    lets assume... no.

    since it's my hypothetical scenario I'll say the evidence is this, it was early morning. one hysterical witness on the canadian side, we'll say canadian with a loaded rifle (meaning you reasonably believed you would be shot in the back while running since a rifle can fire at a long distance and you got 50 yards of open field with no cover.

    so one witness, loaded rifle, your shots, dead body are the evidence.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  5. #5
    Regular Member skyisfalling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    birch bay , washington
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    I was discussing this with Freedom1man and AC back last october during the october OC meet up, but we never really came up with an answer, maybe someone here has an idea

    OK lets say you're OCing and minding your own business in peace park in Blaine WA which literally sits on the border with canada, it's like this open sports type field, and there's this ditch that marks the border and on the otherside of the ditch is a residential neighborhood in BC. so you're on the Washington side OCing lawfully and lets say an angry or drunk canadian shows up with a gun, and starts shooting across the border, at you. so you hit the deck draw your firearm and return fire. well lets change it a little, lets say he points a gun at you and before he fires you draw and fire. who's juristiction is this and what's likely to happen?

    See the trees in this photo? notice the houses on the other side of the trees, the houses are in Canada and the trees in WA
    Trees are no longer there.
    DHS are on a major deforestation campaign.
    Last edited by skyisfalling; 10-30-2012 at 04:36 PM. Reason: derogatory slur not needed

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    You took a pistol to a rifle fight (most Canadians do not have pistols), you are most likely dead so you will not care about jurisdiction, prosecution etc.
    Last edited by Jeff Hayes; 10-30-2012 at 03:38 PM.

  7. #7
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    You took a pistol to a rifle fight, you are most likely dead so you will not care about jurisdiction, prosecution etc.
    I can fill pages of people holding rifles who've lost rifle fights to guys with pistols if you want to play that game...
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 08-25-2013 at 09:16 PM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  8. #8
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    But how will that factor in to the legal side if you fire a bullet in self defense across an international border?
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Bill Jordan tells the very entertaining story of a cross-border shooting in his book No Second Place Winners. Jordan was a fast-draw demonstrator and member of the Border Patrol back in the day, say 1940's - 60's.


    Mexico. Rio Grande. The Border Patrol would stake-out in shrubs near where smugglers tended to cross.

    There was a certain etiquette to these encounters. Unspoken rules of the game. The BP would announce themselves and declare the arrest. The smugglers would run or not according to chances. Although both sides were armed, shots were never exchanged. The smuggler group even had armed guards separate from the carriers.

    Then one night, during an encounter, somebody broke the rules--by firing a shot.

    The smugglers were indignant at this breach of etiquette, and, assuming the BP had fired first, returned fire, running back across the river.

    A gun fight ensued. Across the river. BP on one side, Mexicans on the other. Nobody was hitting anything. The fight went on for hours. As you read the account, it quickly becomes apparent that it wasn't really a fight. Nobody seemed to be actually hitting anything. They were just shooting for the fun of it.

    In fact, locals from both sides of the river, hearing the shots, came to join in. It went on so long, that BP had to make multiple trips to headquarters for more ammo. Jordan makes it sound like there were forty or fifty people shooting back and forth across the Rio Grande.

    In the morning, the BP supervisor called one of his men into his office for an explanation. The officer tried to explain in a serious way, making it sound like they had no choice and could not disengage. The supervisor saw through this, and commented, "You returned for ammunition four times."

    Last edited by Citizen; 10-30-2012 at 05:19 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  10. #10
    Regular Member acmariner99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Renton, Wa
    Posts
    662
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    I was discussing this with Freedom1man and AC back last october during the october OC meet up, but we never really came up with an answer, maybe someone here has an idea

    OK lets say you're OCing and minding your own business in peace park in Blaine WA which literally sits on the border with canada, it's like this open sports type field, and there's this ditch that marks the border and on the otherside of the ditch is a residential neighborhood in BC. so you're on the Washington side OCing lawfully and lets say an angry or drunk canadian shows up with a gun, and starts shooting across the border, at you. so you hit the deck draw your firearm and return fire. well lets change it a little, lets say he points a gun at you and before he fires you draw and fire. who's juristiction is this and what's likely to happen?
    It would seem that no one is seriously answering the question at hand. Honestly, I don't know what would happen. I would suspect that the Canadians would accuse you of violating their laws in some way since you would have killed one of their citizens on their soil and attempt an extradition (I don't think the Canadians would care where the shot originated from). However rifle vs. pistol at 50 yards or more -- I would be running zigzag all the way back to my car. (I think I would have a better chance of survival that way IMO - staying relatively static while engaging a rifleman with a handgun at range = you're gonna have a bad time)

    Then again, maybe the Canadians won't do anything -- publicly say that they are appalled, and privately say "maybe those US gun laws are worth something" and do nothing.

    But .. that is not to say I wouldn't build a range with the backstop against the border just to mess with em a little.
    Last edited by acmariner99; 10-30-2012 at 06:09 PM.

  11. #11
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Shoobee View Post
    Why would you consider hockey pucks as not a serious response?
    It is serious. I mean as Trigger Dr said I could be sent to jail.....

    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Getting back to the OP's outlandishly devilish (so he thinks) scenario -

    The tort takes place in Canada when the guy with the rifle points it at you (assault with a deadly weapon generally).

    What are the Canadian laws about the use of deadly force to repel deadly force?

    If the OP survives (or his heirs and assigns have documentation of the assault) charges are filed in Canada against the guy with the rifle - either for assault/attempted killing of the OP, or killing of the OP.

    Depending on the laws on the use of deadly force to counter deadly force, Canada does or does not seek extradition of the OP to face Canadian justice.

    Washington State, at the same time, may have a charge or two related to the OP discharging a firearm in a park. Documentation of the Canadian being charged by Canada for assault/attempted killing of the OP, or killing of the OP probably would constitute justification/excuse for the discharge if the Washington law does not already do so for self defense.

    To the OP - seriously, you need to work on dreaming up a scenario that might pose some challenge to figuring out jurisdiction. Of course, it may have helped that I used to need to know where and how 35 different police departments, plus the security services of every embassy/consulate had, assumed, and exerted jurisdiction in DC.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Orono, ME
    Posts
    467

    Re: Improbable but entertaining scenario....

    Quote Originally Posted by Shoobee View Post
    Why would you consider hockey pucks as not a serious response?
    Sounds plausible to me.

    Sent from my SCH-R720 using Tapatalk 2

  14. #14
    Activist Member golddigger14s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lacey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,991
    Can't happen, the Canadians had all their handguns taken away.
    "The beauty of the Second Amenment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson
    "Evil often triumphs, but never conquers." Joseph Roux
    http://nwfood.shelfreliance.com

  15. #15
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by golddigger14s View Post
    Can't happen, the Canadians had all their handguns taken away.
    wrong canadians can in fact possess handguns, generally most canadian citizens can only possess restricted handguns (a barrel of 4.1 inches or longer) where as prohibited handguns cannot be possessed except by licenses (which are rarely issued) these have lengths under 4 inches. I know of a man from British Columbia who comes to GSSF shooting meets, he fires glock 17 in the shoots.

    also CPLs (known as ATC-authorization to carry) CAN be issued, but very rarely are.

    Canada isn't totally like UK or Australia, but you wouldn't like it either.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  16. #16
    Regular Member NavyMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastside, Washington, USA
    Posts
    196
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    well lets change it a little, lets say he points a gun at you and before he fires you draw and fire. who's juristiction is this and what's likely to happen?
    This type of scenario came up in my naval training, albeit with a slightly more plausible situation: Armed guard on board ship returns fire against a terrorist, while alongside in a foreign port, where the assailant is on the dockside. In this case we retained jurisdiction over our guard and any subsequent investigation/trial. Any extradition attempt would fail regardless of any treaty with the host nation.

    If our guard stepped ashore and returned fire, then the host nation had jurisdiction. If he shot from the gangway, he was in legal limbo. In these cases he'd need to get his butt back on board before he could be arrested, and then the host nation would need to apply for extradition.
    cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas habebunt

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510
    Heck, let's spice it up some more, by moving it to Derby Line, Vermont.

    You're enjoying a nice day, and stop in at the Haskell Free Library to admire the architecture. Behind you, an argument breaks out. While trying to avoid the unpleasantries, you accidentally step on a toe that belongs to someone who is part of the fight.

    You find yourself punched, knocked across the room, kersplat on your backside, except now you're in Canada and the other guy is coming at you with a knife, while you draw the pistol that you were legally carrying in America just seconds earlier.

    Now what, legal beagles?

    Last edited by KBCraig; 10-30-2012 at 11:53 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Heck, let's spice it up some more, by moving it to Derby Line, Vermont.

    You're enjoying a nice day, and stop in at the Haskell Free Library to admire the architecture. Behind you, an argument breaks out. While trying to avoid the unpleasantries, you accidentally step on a toe that belongs to someone who is part of the fight.

    You find yourself punched, knocked across the room, kersplat on your backside, except now you're in Canada and the other guy is coming at you with a knife, while you draw the pistol that you were legally carrying in America just seconds earlier.

    Now what, legal beagles?

    Flee to mexico

    I suppose you're now in possession of a prohibited weapon without government approval in Canada, good news, Canadian law allows for self defense of yourself from deadly attack (Canada Criminal Code, Title 3.1 section 34) bad news, Canadian crown prosecutors are not above charging someone for "careless use of a firearm" for self defense. now here comes the fun part, the part where our treaty with Canada states in Article 8 that
    The determination that extradition should or should not be granted shall be made in accordance with the law of the requested State and the person whose extradition is sought shall have the right to use all remedies and recourses provided by such law.
    Now US Law establishes a procedure for extradition. which means the secretary of state makes the final determination.

    So if you shoot, in canada, at a canadian national, I'd first make it back to the United States side of the building and inform local police. you will likely be arrested and held in Vermont. the Canucks will likely file for extradition in accordance with the treaty. now you'll first have a court hearing to determine if you are extradictable. how do they determine this? glad you asked because the US Department of Justice has the accepted criteria here on their website! look at this

    Offense Charged: The crime with which the fugitive has been charged or of which he or she has been convicted. Some extradition treaties limit extradition to offenses specified in the treaty. The more recent treaties allow extradition in any case where the conduct is criminal and punishable as a felony in both countries. In either event, OIA must know the offense to determine whether an individual is extraditable.
    Since possession of a pistol in public is not a felony in the part of the United States you were in, that may save you from that charge, so you may only be extradicted for the aggravated assault/homicide, now you only have to work on defending yourself from the charge relating to the use of force itself, which should be much easier then gun charges... but it's canada so be careful...
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Oh, the library-knife scenario is too easy. That Canadian national extradited you to Canada in violation of treaties when he knocked you across the border. Then, he launched a violent attack from a neighboring country, using US territory as a staging area. And, since he knocked you across the border, he is in violation of Canada's firearms importation laws. Probably a tax violation, too.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Oh, the library-knife scenario is too easy. That Canadian national extradited smuggled you into Canada in violation of treaties Canadian immigration laws when he knocked you across the border. Then, he launched a violent attack from a neighboring country international terrorist attack, using US territory as a staging area. And, since he knocked you across the border, he is in violation of Canada's firearms importation laws. Probably a tax violation, too.
    FIFY.

    And here I always thought you kept an eye on the details.


    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  21. #21
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Who knew! Canada has immigration laws? Now that the NHL is likely a no show for 2012-2013 cross border incidents may become for prevalent.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  22. #22
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    OK lets say you're OCing and minding your own business in peace park in Blaine WA which literally sits on the border with canada, it's like this open sports type field, and there's this ditch that marks the border and on the otherside of the ditch is a residential neighborhood in BC. so you're on the Washington side OCing lawfully and lets say an angry or drunk canadian shows up with a gun, and starts shooting across the border, at you. so you hit the deck draw your firearm and return fire. well lets change it a little, lets say he points a gun at you and before he fires you draw and fire. who's juristiction is this and what's likely to happen?
    There's one aspect of that that nobody has touched on yet. It's illegal under U.S. law for a private citizen to go fight in someone else's war without U.S. government approval, or to start their own war without Congressional permission. There's also the Geneva Conventions to consider, particularly the parts about illegal combatants.

    Depending on how such a cross-border altercation is handled by the federal governments on both sides, it might be legal to simply shoot the participants the moment they are apprehended. No need for a trial, since they were caught in the act out of uniform.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shoobee View Post
    But ultimately the long gun will defeat the handgun at any range beyond 50 yards.
    Depends on the handgun, depends on the rifle. With the right handgun or the wrong rifle, you might get different results at that range.



  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667
    It's amazing that you all get the obvious question so wrong.

    You are under the jurisdiction of the blue helmet UN storm troopers, your trial will be at the international criminal court, The Hague.

    That is all.
    Live Free or Die!

  24. #24
    Regular Member Cremator75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Beaverton, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    393

    Re: Improbable but entertaining scenario....

    What sucks for the people that live in that neighborhood is they have to go through a border crossing to take their kids to the playground. It's just sitting there taunting them. Major inconvenience.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510
    LOL, good responses on the Canadian scenario. The U.S. doesn't have a good history there, though. Just ask Marc Emery.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cremator75 View Post
    What sucks for the people that live in that neighborhood is they have to go through a border crossing to take their kids to the playground. It's just sitting there taunting them. Major inconvenience.
    That's the reality of life along the border. Both borders, northern and southern.

    Sadly, the immigration furor ignores the fact that people living in such areas now have to deal with their own version of an iron curtain, when historically and culturally crossing the street from Stanstead to Derby Line, or Blaine to White Rock, or Juarez to El Paso was no different than crossing the street from Texarkana Texas to Texarkana Arkansas.

    There's no good reason why it should be different today.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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