Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: wrong on so many levels

  1. #1
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,258

    wrong on so many levels

    i ran across this. it is just so wrong on so many levels i don't know where to start.

    was the woman crazy, and used her car as a deadly weapon?

    did she stop a dangerous person posing with a gun?

    what would have done if someone pointed a shotgun at you?

    did he point the air soft at her? curious minds want to know

    http://gunssavelives.net/blog/video-...#comment-39157
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  2. #2
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by papa bear View Post
    i ran across this. it is just so wrong on so many levels i don't know where to start.

    was the woman crazy, and used her car as a deadly weapon?

    did she stop a dangerous person posing with a gun?

    what would have done if someone pointed a shotgun at you?

    did he point the air soft at her? curious minds want to know

    http://gunssavelives.net/blog/video-...#comment-39157
    According to the testimony and the investigation, I don't see where she did anything wrong, and she most likely prevented a 7-11 from being robbed.

    If someone had pointed a shotgun at me and the most expedient thing was to hit him with my car, I would have done the same thing ... and then I would have held him at gunpoint until the police arrived.

    She didn't know it was an Airsoft -- he had removed the orange tip and it looked exactly like a sawed-off shotgun. Should she have waited until she could have determined it was only a replica?

    What is it about her testimony and the resulting investigation that confirmed the correctness of her actions that you find "wrong on so many levels?"

    What would YOU have done in her situation?

  3. #3
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    A cop would shoot without hesitation and justifiable so. Why a different expectation for a citizen?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bothell
    Posts
    586
    From the article:

    He turned and pointed this at her, and she thought it was a real weapon and that she was about to be shot or that the kids were in danger, so she gunned her car and struck him.
    Airsoft guns are incredibly life-like and it's not uncommon for wanna-be thugs to use them for criminal purposes. Even if he was shot and killed, it'd still be a justifiable action. And as long as we're going with hypothesis, if the idiot actually fired an airsoft gun at the woman, then she gunned the car (or a DGU), then you could take issue. But she didn't, so you can't.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by papa bear View Post
    i ran across this. it is just so wrong on so many levels i don't know where to start.

    was the woman crazy, and used her car as a deadly weapon?
    No, and yes, she most certainly did.

    did she stop a dangerous person posing with a gun?
    Your use of the word "posing" changes the dynamics of both the scenario and of the assessment anyone would use in responding to your question. I will hope that by "posing" you meant displaying, pointing, brandishing, making a threatening gesture, or the like. If thast is the case, the answer to the obvious is an unquestionable "Yes." And I'll bet she intended to.

    what would have done if someone pointed a shotgun at you?
    Try to get out of the line of fire, and if they continued to point that thing in my general direction I would make every effort to make them stop threatening my life. While formal negotiations, facilitated by the use of a mediator, might be an option, I do not think that would be on my right there/right then short list of options to select from. Unless you consider the use of Mssrs. Smith's and Wesson's finer products to be a facilitator or mediator of some sort.

    did he point the air soft at her? curious minds want to know
    From line #12 of the article you cite: "“He turned and pointed this at her ...." Captain Obvious says the obvious answer is "Oh, yes he did."

    http://gunssavelives.net/blog/video-...#comment-39157[/QUOTE]

    The "wrong" I see was all committed by the guy with the airsoft.

    Searching Pa laws http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI.../htm/18/18.htm I do not see anything specifically addressing facsimilie weapons (except facsimilie weapons of mass destruction). That being the case it seems both the woman and the law must proceed based on what a reasonable and prudent person would perceive the situation to be - and with the orange/red tip removed it all comes down to "if it looks like a shotgun you get to treat it as if it is in fact a shotgun" - because, as everyone else has mentioned, she had no duty to inspect it to determine it's true properties, nor did she have a duty to retreat from a place where she had a lawful right to be.

    The comments about "protecting/defending the kids" is a false trail if not an actual red herring. That argument went out the window when airsoft guy pointed the thing in his hands that looked like a shotgun at the driver of the car. Defense of possibly innocent others changes to defense of self against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.

    437.5 grains of lead were reasonably presumed to exist and were pointed at her. If the shell were fired she could expect the lead (slug or shot) to travel towards her at 750 mph. (1100 feet per second) http://www.calculateme.com/Speed/Fee...lesperHour.htm

    I response she propelled 17,500,000 grains of automobile (2,500 lbs) http://www.asknumbers.com/PoundsToGrains.aspx at roughly 51.333333333333336 feet per second (35 mph) http://www.calculateme.com/Speed/Mil...tperSecond.htm

    That does not seem to be a significant disparity of force, which by the way has no place in considering the scenario and her response to having what she reasonably thought was a shotgun pointed at her.

    Some gun guru, when asked what they would do if someone pointed a gun at them, is reported to have said something along the lines of "I would shoot them as dead as I could make tem, as quickly as I could." We know that's not appropriate because all we are supposed to be trying to do is stop the threat. While being shot dead will most likely stop the tyhreat, there may be other ways of achieving that goal. Deciding on what alternatives might be viable might need to be done quickly enough to beat 750 mph!

    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

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Folks need to listen to the video again. At the time she mowed him down:

    The guy was not wearing a mask or hosiery

    The lady called 911 because he was just carrying...which is not illegal I presume

    The lady CLAIMS that he pointed a gun at her.

    The lady DID hit him with her car.

    The lady did follow him.

    The lady did talk to him, presumably because she thought he was a threat to 2 bikers, indicating that she knew the gun was not real (or that's what the argument will be).

    I could see no criminal charges being filed but she is going to be a world of hurt in civil court. Her insurance company will not defend her as it was a willing act.

    This kid will get some $$$ out of this woman (I figure 5-20K) as it would go to trial...and her lawyer will tell her the cost of doing so (40K-60K) and w/o insurance that would come out of her own pocket.

    See, you can be 100% right and still be wrong.

    Horrible? Maybe .. welcome to America !

  7. #7
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,258
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    According to the testimony and the investigation, I don't see where she did anything wrong, and she most likely prevented a 7-11 from being robbed.

    If someone had pointed a shotgun at me and the most expedient thing was to hit him with my car, I would have done the same thing ... and then I would have held him at gunpoint until the police arrived.

    She didn't know it was an Airsoft -- he had removed the orange tip and it looked exactly like a sawed-off shotgun. Should she have waited until she could have determined it was only a replica?

    What is it about her testimony and the resulting investigation that confirmed the correctness of her actions that you find "wrong on so many levels?"

    What would YOU have done in her situation?
    i would agree if he had pointed it at her then yes she would probably be justified.

    how ever how do we know that he pointed the gun at her, good chance of it, but do we only have her word for it?
    she did follow him, and she admitted that she was "deathly afraid of it". couldn't have been too afraid, she followed him.
    she also challenged him. when ever you are the instigate of an encounter then you lose some of your right to self defense.
    we only have the word of the police that he was on his way to rob a store. how do they know this, unless he told them. they said in the video that he was on his way to a 7-11, but was he going to rob them?
    could this just have been a Hopolophobe, that used her car as a deadly weapon?

    SKID, i used the word "posing", because of the way he was dressed. it could be possible that, in his mind he was being a BA.. probably thought too, that since he knew the gun was fake, that no one would "harm" him. stupid yes. i think NC law on GTTTOTP would apply more to this
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    What would I have done?

    I would have yelled: "hey kid, taking off that orange tip isn't too smart!"

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by papa bear View Post
    i would agree if he had pointed it at her then yes she would probably be justified.

    how ever how do we know that he pointed the gun at her, good chance of it, but do we only have her word for it?
    she did follow him, and she admitted that she was "deathly afraid of it". couldn't have been too afraid, she followed him.
    she also challenged him. when ever you are the instigate of an encounter then you lose some of your right to self defense.
    we only have the word of the police that he was on his way to rob a store. how do they know this, unless he told them. they said in the video that he was on his way to a 7-11, but was he going to rob them?
    could this just have been a Hopolophobe, that used her car as a deadly weapon?

    SKID, i used the word "posing", because of the way he was dressed. it could be possible that, in his mind he was being a BA.. probably thought too, that since he knew the gun was fake, that no one would "harm" him. stupid yes. i think NC law on GTTTOTP would apply more to this
    Yea, who is going to believe a woman who just ran over a guy with her car?

  10. #10
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Folks need to listen to the video again. At the time she mowed him down:

    The guy was not wearing a mask or hosiery

    The lady called 911 because he was just carrying...which is not illegal I presume

    The lady CLAIMS that he pointed a gun at her.

    The lady DID hit him with her car.

    The lady did follow him.

    The lady did talk to him, presumably because she thought he was a threat to 2 bikers, indicating that she knew the gun was not real (or that's what the argument will be).

    I could see no criminal charges being filed but she is going to be a world of hurt in civil court. Her insurance company will not defend her as it was a willing act.

    This kid will get some $$$ out of this woman (I figure 5-20K) as it would go to trial...and her lawyer will tell her the cost of doing so (40K-60K) and w/o insurance that would come out of her own pocket.

    See, you can be 100% right and still be wrong.

    Horrible? Maybe .. welcome to America !
    This happened in Pennsylvania and I don't know their law well enough (and don't have the inclination to do the research), but in some states (e.g., Florida) one is immune from civil prosecution when acting in self-defense. Her self defense response to having a shotgun aimed at her was to hit him with her car, assumedly the only "weapon" she had available to her. With no charges being placed against her, I'm thinking that any civil suit brought against her will be dismissed.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    This happened in Pennsylvania and I don't know their law well enough (and don't have the inclination to do the research), but in some states (e.g., Florida) one is immune from civil prosecution when acting in self-defense. Her self defense response to having a shotgun aimed at her was to hit him with her car, assumedly the only "weapon" she had available to her. With no charges being placed against her, I'm thinking that any civil suit brought against her will be dismissed.
    Criminal charges or lack of criminal charges are irrelevant in civil court for the most part.

    And acting in self-defense is an affirmative defense or special defense ~ needs to be proved, not just plead.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by papa bear View Post
    i ran across this. it is just so wrong on so many levels i don't know where to start.

    was the woman crazy, and used her car as a deadly weapon?

    did she stop a dangerous person posing with a gun?

    what would have done if someone pointed a shotgun at you?

    did he point the air soft at her? curious minds want to know

    http://gunssavelives.net/blog/video-...#comment-39157
    How is this wrong? Assuming the woman's story is accurate, she absolutely had the right to use deadly force, to wit her vehicle, in this case.

    Fwiw, airsofts look incredibly realistic and many do not come with an orange tip. FWiw, there have been cases, usually gangbangers, where they paint the tip of REAL guns orange, to give them extra safety from armed responders (cops or ordinary joes) who see the orange tip and hesitate.

    A ways back we had a concerned RP call in a handgun in a ditch on the side of the road. When we got there, turned out to be an airsoft. But it was so realistic, short of picking it up, it was almost impossible to tell that it was fake

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Criminal charges or lack of criminal charges are irrelevant in civil court for the most part.

    And acting in self-defense is an affirmative defense or special defense ~ needs to be proved, not just plead.
    Not in many states. In many states the defendant doesn't need to prove jack. The burden is on the state. In my state, the burden is to DISPROVE self defense. SD does not need to be proved. What needs to be proved is that it WAS NOT self defense and that burden rests with the state.

    Simply wrong on the law (in many states)

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by PALO View Post
    Not in many states. In many states the defendant doesn't need to prove jack. The burden is on the state. In my state, the burden is to DISPROVE self defense. SD does not need to be proved. What needs to be proved is that it WAS NOT self defense and that burden rests with the state.

    Simply wrong on the law (in many states)
    This is a civil case though ...

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    This is a civil case though ...
    Fair enuf. I missed that element of the discussion. Should have read back farther.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by PALO View Post
    Fair enuf. I missed that element of the discussion. Should have read back farther.
    that's OK ... even I miss things sometimes ... have a good evening

  17. #17
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,731
    We changed their identity to protect the innocent.

    George Zimmerman was played by a woman driving a car.

    Trayvon Martin was played by a man dressed in black.

  18. #18
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Criminal charges or lack of criminal charges are irrelevant in civil court for the most part.

    And acting in self-defense is an affirmative defense or special defense ~ needs to be proved, not just plead.
    Did you not follow the Zimmerman trial? The burden of proof was on the prosecution to prove that Zimmerman did NOT act in self defense. The defense team did NOT have to prove that he DID act in self defense. Zimmerman did not plead "self defense," he plead Not Guilty, and the prosecution could not convince the jury otherwise. Florida law specifically states, IIRC, that if one has been shown to have defended oneself against a crime, that person cannot be sued civilly.

    And, lest I be accused of "generalizing from a specific," I do realize that the legal situation can and does vary from state to state. My comment is posted simply to show that generalizations such as the one in bold above are overly broad and do not apply in every situation or state.

  19. #19
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    RSMo 563.016 and 563.074. Essentially, in Missouri, you may be sued in civil court even if your SD claim is proven to be justified and it shall be an absolute defense to criminal prosecution or civil liability. So, if there is no charges filed because the prosecutor finds that you were justified, or he could not possibly prove that you were not justified only make your civil case more difficult for the plaintiff. You state may be different. However, your state law must provide for that which Missouri's legislature provided for Missouri citizens.

  20. #20
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    RSMo 563.016 and 563.074. Essentially, in Missouri, you may be sued in civil court even if your SD claim is proven to be justified and it shall be an absolute defense to criminal prosecution or civil liability. So, if there is no charges filed because the prosecutor finds that you were justified, or he could not possibly prove that you were not justified only make your civil case more difficult for the plaintiff. You state may be different. However, your state law must provide for that which Missouri's legislature provided for Missouri citizens.
    Yes, and that was my point. We have 50 different sets of laws (for Obama, 57 plus 2 that he hadn't visited yet), and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Think of the individual states as "law laboratories" where different legal concepts are promulgated and tried, and since people have the right to choose where they live they can reside in whichever state that has the legal structure they like the best.

    Of course, that makes *our* situation more difficult since we have to map out all of the different firearms-specific laws when traveling through multiple states, and we have to be cognizant of the possible legal ramifications of our use of firearms.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Folks need to listen to the video again. At the time she mowed him down:

    The guy was not wearing a mask or hosiery

    The lady called 911 because he was just carrying...which is not illegal I presume
    She stated some concerns. There is no requirement that 9-1-1 be reserved only for the reporting of crimes in progress/completed.

    The lady CLAIMS that he pointed a gun at her.
    We have some witnesses that have not yet been heard from. So maybe it is not a simple she said/he said

    [quote}The lady DID hit him with her car.

    The lady did follow him.[/quote] Yeppers. No argument on those two. Why you bring them up is still a wonderment.

    The lady did talk to him, presumably because she thought he was a threat to 2 bikers, indicating that she knew the gun was not real (or that's what the argument will be).
    Yes, to the first part. It goes back to the 9-1-1 call that you seem to be suggesting above shuld not have been made until something actually did happen.

    Just how do you plan to support thjat statement that she knew the gun was not real? If she knew it was not real why would she have called 9-1-1? Why would she have followed him?

    I could see no criminal charges being filed but she is going to be a world of hurt in civil court. Her insurance company will not defend her as it was a willing act.
    If there are no criminal charges filed then most of your ravings are just that. There is always the chance of a civil suit - in fact I ought to sue you for intentional infliction of emotional trauma. Jut might, now that I think about it. Wonder how much farther that suit will get than the civil suit you suggest here.

    BTW, your insurance company will not defend you because your acts are also intentional. So what? Are you just reminding folks that insurance is the seeking of protection against the unexpected, not the consequenes of our deliberate acts?

    This kid will get some $$$ out of this woman (I figure 5-20K) as it would go to trial...and her lawyer will tell her the cost of doing so (40K-60K) and w/o insurance that would come out of her own pocket.
    Figures snatched out of thin air with even less authority than what my attorney has? Or do you know something he does not?

    See, you can be 100% right and still be wrong.
    Help me here. Where is it that you were right? It certainly was not 100% of the time.

    Horrible? Maybe .. welcome to America !
    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

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I guess we'll just wait and see ... wait and see. In litigious America, my guess is a suit is being drafted as we speak.

    Of course, it could be settled out of court too ... and we would never know.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    I guess we'll just wait and see ... wait and see. In litigious America, my guess is a suit is being drafted as we speak.

    Of course, it could be settled out of court too ... and we would never know.
    As mentioned above, just about anybody can sue just about anybody else over just about anything. What counts is what happens after the paperwork is filed.

    And it is not difficult to determine if a suit was settled as opposed to having been adjudicated. It's merely the details of the settlement that may be restricted from publication.

    All of that aside - I notice you are not answering the majority of the challenges posted to those assertions you made. Care to say why?

    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

  24. #24
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,258
    JAMES you might be confusing the criminal charges with the civil case. no criminal charges have been brought.

    but then in light of the Zimmerman/Martin case maybe there should be a trail to prove it was self defense

    sorry poor writing skills. i probably should have said to see if we can prove attempted homicide
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  25. #25
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Wrong on So Many Levels

    This post is about 25 levels down from the top. Whatever was in the OP, but was left mysterious by the thread title--was it wrong this many levels down?

    I don't wanta read a post in a thread with wrongness on a vague number of levels. Gimme a nice, solid, dependable level of wrongness so I can judge whether I want to read about it.
    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.

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
  •